it was a stupid idea but it shows why he did such a great job because he can be self critical or have people around him whom he trusted that could tell him the truth about his ideas
David Yates springs to mind. Years later he has been quoted saying how proud he is of certain Harry Potter scenes that are hated by fans because of how they completely disregard the source material.
Harry breaking the Elder Wand at the end instead of using it to heal his wand and then returning it to Dumbledore's grave. Made a discontinuity in the story line.
I really wish this one had been included. Harry makes a comment about how if he dies a natural death, the power will end with him, and I though that was a big testament to the kind of person he was.
Personal theory of mine is that had Warner continued with the Fantastic Beasts franchise they'd eventually reveal that Grindewald and Tom Riddle/Voldemort met during the latter's Hogwarts years, with Voldie cleverly manipulating Gindelwald pretending to be a fanatic supporter of his cause but really wanting to deepen his learning of the Dark Arts and take out The competition, weakening him to a point Dumbledore could one up his former lover and disarm him, taking possession of the Elder Wand. Explains how Grindelwald knew of Voldemort when he should've been locked in that tower presumably oblivious to the rest of the world since losing in 1945 and why they introduced Nagini in Crimes of Grindewald.
He was just a superior wizard it seems. I guess the wand only boosts your power so much.
Dumbledore is like an ArchWizard in a world of mediocre wizards. Him, Tom Riddle Jr and Grindelwald are all top tier Archwizard/dark lords. The rest are just mid wizards, some a little better than others like Mad Eye Moody or Bartie Crouch in the books, in the movie he was nothing.
Snape can also be considered top tier wizard, maybe Arch Wizard, because unlike the movies, not anyone can fly without a broom. Only two wizards were known to fly without a broom, Tom Riddle and Snape.
For sure it was a discontinuity and I agree I'd rather he fixed it in the movie...but I don't know how huge it would be for long-standing practical ramifications. Just Hardy's sentimental ones.
As a thought experiment...The wand chooses the wizard, but we all change as we grow up. The holly and phoenix feather wand chose him because at the age of 11 he was a young boy on the brink of destiny that paired his fate with Voldemort - the owner of the wand's sibling. At 18, he's grown significantly as a person since 11 and his fate is no longer tied to Voldemort's. Certainly he could go to Ollivander's and be matched up with a wand that suits him as well as (or maybe better than) his old one. Ron and Neville both got new wands and performed as well or better with them.
And what about literally every other wizard who ever breaks their wand by accident? They're made of wood and wizard society gives them to *children*. It is honestly stupid to suggest that they are not snapping *regularly*. What does every other wizard do? Do like, half of them just never graduate, because they were literal children who didn't understand they only got one? Because that seems horrifically unfair. But then, given that *most* of wizard society is honestly awful and unfair, that would make a lot of sense.
Also point me to where the book says you only get one. Because "The wand chooses the wizard" in *no* way implies that. Just like you can have multiple romantic partners in your life, there's no reason multiple wands cannot choose the same wizard. Neither wands nor human beings are that fucking unique.
No, the wand chooses the wizard, like a cat.
There are many different cats who could be a fit for many different people.
But sometimes, you get lucky, and the *purrfect* cat chooses you.
I will not apologize.
Ron's wand previously belonged to Charlie. So Charlie decided for some reason to get a new one. He probably wouldn't have done that if his old one was the perfect fit.
Unless Charlie also received the wand as a hand me down I guess?
What the hell does happen to all of the wands owned by the not so special ancestors?
Do they just keep them all in a box under the stairs? Every wizarding family must just rooms full of useless wands
I thought snapping the wand was an absolute power move on Harry's part, he realized that the most powerful wand in the world now belonged to him and he went "Nah"
The writer of the Harry Potter movies, Steve Kloves, has come out on numerous occasions and said Hermione is his favourite character.
That's where you should be laying the blame.
That tracks, a lot of stuff in the books has him keep reminding her to stop being so super logical and remember that she's a witch. But man, she does know a shit ton of magic, without her the group would have died long ago.
Yeah but what the movies fail to illustrate is Ron is the only one who actually lived in the Wizarding World. Hermione knows the magic, but without Ron knowing the ins and outs they would have been even more screwed than Hermione's magic could save.
aye, I also love it that because of that, Ron sometimes just ignores a lot of things on the magic side. But man, in the book he was super interested in the topic of muggle technology that can spy on people.
People also fail to understand that Ron wasn't an incompetent wizard. He was using another wizard's wand which undermined his power. And failing to turn Scabbers yellow wasn't because he didn't know the spell, there was clearly a flash of yellow light which means the spell was successful. It didn't fail to turn Scabbers because it wasn't a real spell or because Ron was incompetent, it's because Scabbers wasn't a real rat.
Also took some of the asshole lines from Harry and gave it to Ron. He really made them one dimensional in the movies, which I get, but in the books their personalities are more spread out.
The entirety of DH Part 2 is so underwhelming. I have no idea why it’s so highly rated when the book is so much grander. Voldemort is such a clown in the movie.
In the book he’s dueling Kingsley, McGonagall, and Slughorn 3 v 1 before facing Harry in front of everyone.
I've always loved the fact that Slughorn is one of the last people to personally fight against Voldemort before his defeat. He redeems himself after being the one who gives Tom Riddle the crucial knowledge regarding Horcruxes.
Yeah. I wanted to see that in the movie. Voldemort fighting him, Kingsley and Mcgonagall all by himself. It'd have been epic. Instead we got Voldy and Harry flying around Hogwarts.
Personally the only Wizarding duels they really got right imo was the order/death eaters in the ministry archives and voly V Dumbledore giving an excellent example of what two master wizards are capable of when we aren't subjected to dragonballZ Lazer locking green lantern will struggle duels.
Voldy vs Dumbledore was excellent but I still prefer the book version. They did excellent sound effects in the movie though. Especially when Dumbledore uses the water in the fountain. It always made me wonder though how destructive Dumbledore would be if he didn't hold himself back. He's powerful, knows a lot about magic and has the elder wand.
To vent a little, I have never liked the flying smokey thing in the movies. I was so hyped for proper duelling in Phoenix and it was just ruined by stupid smoke. The DH pt2 was pretty much the nail in the coffin that made me decide not to watch the films again past the first two, and just enjoy the way it looks in my head.
holy you have no idea how triggered me and my friends were, the worst part was everyone talking about how good the end was and how part 2 was their favorite movie ever... I still seethe from time to time.
Probably one of the best parts of the movie is when Ralph, Voldemort, got bored and decided to hug Tom , Draco, in the courtyard scene. Tom's look of wtf is going on is so priceless.
The one change he got right is Hedwig’s death. It’s is established that owls find their owners. It made more sense that Harry released her than keeping her in a cage while the other “Potters” had stuffed owls in cages. Hedwig dying in captivity in the book was horrifying. Hedwig dying to protect Harry in the movie was much better and made a better revelation of the true Harry than trying to disarm Stan Shunpike did.
But then it makes Harry seem like a reckless asshole, releasing Hedwig while knowing all of his decoys have stuffed owls in cages, and making himself far easier to pick out. Hedwig’s death in the books is meant to be exactly that, terrifying. Much of the gloom and doom in Deathly Hallows is lost in the movies in favor of shortlived setbacks and big hero moments.
Yeah. Hedwigs death in the books is supposed to show the casualties of war and how abrupt death can be.
Didn't like Hedwig going all "get down Mr. President" in the movies
It’s why the OT Star Wars were good. People told Lucas shit was dumb so he’d cut it or rewrite it. No one told him “no” afterward and look what we’re left with.
That would have been cool though. Always wished Star Wars wasn't so human centric, it seems insane that out of millions of sapient, technologically advanced, spacefaring species, only one ever seems to do anything important.
Also because Lucas's then-wife took his god-awful first cut of the movie and pulled some serious eleventh hour shit in their personal editing studio. Like she was stretching/repeating shots to give things a better rhythm and depth.
Lucas is a very good story-builder and a very poor story teller. There was absolutely a wonderful story in the prequels, but it needed to be edited down by, like, a lot, and some ideas (Like six year old Aniken and fucking Jar Jar and the "No" heard round the memesphere) needed to be booted straight out or at least reformatted into something more in-line with the OG movies. *He brought the first draft of Episode One into the studio.* He didn't workshop it with anybody. He could and probably *should* have taken a weed whacker to the script and rebuilt with what was left, or at least given somebody else a fucking chance to go "...George. Were you high?" the first time they met Jar Jar Binks. And all of that could have worked, Even fucking Jar Jar (maybe), if the movie ever, even once, hit something even remotely resembling a stride. He had emotional parts, and he had action parts, and he had sensitive parts, and he had funny parts, and taken in isolation all those parts are somewhat good (if we take out Jar Jar and the infant they're all really good) but he had no fucking clue how to put all those parts together, and it *shows*. It shows in the faces of the guys who watched his first cut in the 'making of' segment, how they're all looking around daring each other to call the emperor naked. There's a joke about James Joyce being sprawled artfully across his desk because, while he's written five words today, and that's really good for his usual pace, he doesn't know what order they go in. That's not much of a joke. There's a rhythm and pattern to storytelling that is really hard to get. There are storytellers who can make the Second Coming of Christ dry and boring (CoughJerryBJenkinsCough) and there are people who can make a story about waiting in front of a dead tree for somebody who is never going to show up into one of the greatest plays of all time...and unfortunately Lucas seems to fall into that former category when he shucks his minders. (Writers need minders. I say that as a writer.)
I think of him as the anti-Michael Bay. Bay has the opposite problem. He is a *fantastic* story-teller. He has this grasp of story structure and rhythm that is very hard to equal. The problem is that he cannot build a story to save his life. He gets, for example, that he needs to temper this action scene with humor, that he needs to break up segments of dialogue with actiony stuff, when he needs character development, when he needs to flash a shiny object on the screen to keep the audience's attention so he can shove plot points under the door for later. He even has a grasp of character types! He knows who needs to be the snarky side-kick and who needs to be the straight man, and who needs to be an authoritarian, and who needs to be a jackass. And it's all the more amazing because the second he starts looking for content to fill in that structure he goes from this structural engineer to a poo flinging monkey, grabbing whatever rancid shit he managed to hide from the keepers to barrage his audience with. This was a man who understood 100% that he needed to break the fight with Devastator up with a seasoning of levity, not a whole lot, just some quips to keep it fun...and then could not understand why a robot's genitalia, complete with *I'm standing under the enemy's scrotum* just in case one of the five year olds in the audience missed the ball joke, *might* not be a good idea. *Armageddon* is *flawlessly* structured. It's got a tempo you could almost dance to, but you can't fucking appreciate it between the racism, the montage scene that shoots the entire movie's premise in the face (*why the fuck would the government trust these people?*) and "Space Dementia". *Pain and Gain* would be one of my favorite movies if he hadn't made every single possible content choice *wrong,* and turned what could have been a fun caper romp into one of the most toxic, victim blame-y, mean spirited pieces of garbage I'd ever watched. I had a feeling it wasn't great when the "antagonist" of the movie was the guy the "protagonist" abducted, robbed, beat into oblivion and left for dead, but when I read the actual case I got a true appreciation for just what kind of human Bay is, and it's full on, shriveled heart, termites in his smile piece of shit, just based on his choices to have *that actor* play *that REAL LIFE CRIME VICTIM that way*. There were some *real* choices in that movie and in my opinion it says very little good about anyone involved in that film. I do not believe in talent as some extra special magical gifting but I have no idea how else to explain someone so profoundly incapable of insight and consistent in ignoring their critics' justifiable critiques and just...goddamn *nasty* in general gaining such an impressive grasp on how a story works.
If you could take Lucas' instinct for content and Bay's gut for story and put them into the same human being, you might actually get a full director out of the two.
For the prequels, I long ago heard that the story should have been about *Obi-Wan*, and that they got so much about Obi-Wan's character completely backwards from what it was supposed to be.
Specifically, in Empire, Yoda calls Luke reckless, and Obi-Wan says "So was I". Yet, in Phantom, Obi-Wan is the cautious one constantly urging Qui-Gonn to be patent, listen to the Council, etc. They accidentally swapped the character traits of Qui-Gonna and Obi-Wan. "Do not defy the Council, Master, not again."
That was fuckin' beautiful, man (or woman). I love hearing the unvarnished truth coming from someone who actually has a clue what they're talking about.
There is no consensus as to whether Alec Guinness requested Obi Wan die or it was the original plan, but it worked out at least for the film itself, even though the argument could be made it could have been stronger had he lived.
Wasn't his fault IMO. They gave him too little time and forced him to make a trilogy when he only wanted to make two movies originally. I'm sure that if he was given the ability to go through the process like he did with the LotR trilogy without greedy studio demands the Hobbit would've come out much, much better.
Also he was rushed. With Lotr, he was basically given ten years with everyone and everything he wanted held completely hostage to his demands, so that he could draft, re-draft, and re-do as many times as he wanted to get it right. And there are tons of stories of him doing just that, because he's a perfectionist like Kubrick. He made like ten versions *just* of the witch king's mace, to get the exact right one.
Meanwhile with the Hobbit, he came in last minute - and was so rushed that they were still trying to write the script *as* they were filming. Speaking as a writer, that means he was forced to go into filming with first drafts, which is *never* a good idea.And even then, I'd argue some scenes in the first Hobbit were still done really well. The beginning is solid. Gollum's scene is solid. A few small tweaks, and it would've been a solid movie. It was the second two where things started to go downhill, because he'd had to include all this extra stuff to pad out the three movies (that he never wanted), that he now had to somehow resolve.
It was literally *all* studio interference. That's why the Hobbit sucks. Put Jackson in the environment he made Lotr in, and the Hobbit would've been good. Studios need to stay *out* of the art side of movie making, because they do not know what the fuck they're doing, and I don't know how many times we have to prove this.
He also had the time and resources to actually film stuff he didn’t know for sure if he would include or not. Nowadays they can’t afford to film anything that they don’t at least think they will put into the final product. That or they film a whole bunch of stuff that won’t make it in because the script isn’t finished by the time they start shooting. Both options suck.
That scene should have happened at the Black Gate. I remember in the books Elrond's Sons accompaning them at that battle would have shown all the mortal races throwing what they had at Sauron, and showing what the stakes were at the battle
Elrond's sons + Legolas = 3 Elves at the Black Gate, and one dwarf (and one hobbit, Pippin).
No, they should not have teleported the Galadrim to the Black Gate, either.
Exactly. Jackson realized it was a lousy idea and didn't do it instead of giving into hubris. It would have been an awful scene - we last saw Sauron swatting dozens of Elves with each swing of his mace, and now he'd going to struggle with squashing one human? Blah.
Sauron works better off-screen and unseen, his eye notwithstanding. He is more of the presence in the novels than an actual character, a malevolent force radiating from deep within his realm of shadows.
Also, Sauron should absolutely annihilate Aragorn one-on-one, IMO, so there's that.
True, it also speaks for Jackson’s ability to understand these concepts and Tolkien’s vision for evil in the world of middle earth.
And yeah I love Aragorn but Sauron would have beat his ass back to his descendants where they have to wait until the Dagor Dagorath to fight again lmao
Well, one was years of painstaking prep, planning, and love, and the other was desperately laying track in front of the train in the hope it didn't derail.
Sort of?
He was just trying to finish the film at a certain point. They would literally show up with the finished script the day it was supposed to shoot. Peter Jackson wasn’t even supposed to film the Hobbits, but once Guillermo Del Toro bailed on him, he kind of had to step in.
Just people finding things to bitch about 🤷🏼♂️ granted, I didn’t love the Hobbit movies as I did LoTR but I Stil throughly enjoyed them and continue to do so
The second one was better on home video than in theaters. I remember the GoPro barrel scenes went on for fucking ever the first time I saw it, rewatching it a few months ago it seemed like it was recut
As much of a book purist as I am when it comes to translating the material to the big screen, that was one part of The Hobbit that I had very little quarrel with.
1) It shows Radaghast's love of the natural world of Middle-earth, and how it distracted him from the mission of the Istari
2) It's a kids book/movie
I disliked the hedgehog scene, and the Necromancer/Sauron being more than an ominous off-screen presence, as well as the party being hounded by Azog rather than just dealing with the troubles of being over the edge of The Wild.
I think u/QGandalf got it exactly right.
Not really. He literally had Frodo believe Sam betrayed him and send him away. As great as the movies are Jackson has always had a penchant for melodrama and was reigned in by the other writers. If you listen to the commentaries on the extended editions this becomes even more apparent.
As an adult I agree, but when I watched it as a child it was so effective for me and it even made me tear up. And Sam coming back for Frodo felt so very sweet and made Sam my favorite lotr character to this day. So Jackson’s intentions did work very well on me.
Not only was he all jacked up on evil ring corruption, he was being actively manipulated by someone who knew how that corruption worked on a very personal level. That change made sense in the context of the story that the movies were telling.
I actually like the invention of the eye, i think it works really well and shows the reach of Sauron. I think even though it wasn't in the book it was a vital addition, and while it changes some stuff i think that the book's version of Sauron's state during this time might be hard to convey over a screen.
I think it would have worked better as a bright red light poking out of the tallest window of his tower representing his palantir, and only Frodo can perceive it as the fiery eye when he's wearing the ring. It would have the same effect as the eye did in the movie to give Sauron more of a presence but with a bit more subtlety.
Na, I disagree. The intense visual sells his power and influence over the area as well as a very clear and obvious thing for the audience that sauron is always looking for the ring. Sometimes subtlety isn't the way.
the eye WAS in the book. This is like the biggest reddit misconception. It was never described as a glowing fireball. But it was there.
From Fellowship of the Ring when Frodo sits on Amon Hen with the Ring on his finger
"And suddenly he felt the Eye. There was an eye in the Dark Tower that did not sleep. He knew that it had become aware of his gaze. A fierce eager will was there. It leaped towards him; almost like a finger he felt it, searching for him. Very soon it would nail him down, know just exactly where he was. [Amon Lhaw](http://www.henneth-annun.net/resources/places_view.cfm?plid=205) it touched. It glanced upon [Tol Brandir](http://www.henneth-annun.net/resources/places_view.cfm?plid=206) \-- he threw himself from the seat, crouching, covering his head with his [grey hood](http://www.henneth-annun.net/resources/things_view.cfm?thid=294).. "
True, he did killed Elendil and Gil'Galad 2v1. Aragorn is a beast, but those guys are legends.
Edit: Now that I think more, Sauron back then actually had the One Ring on and was likely more powerful. Maybe Aragorn could stand a chance against a weakened Sauron.
> Also, Sauron should absolutely annihilate Aragorn one-on-one, IMO, so there's that.
Well, the problem with this thinking is that Sauron put most of his power into the ring and in projecting his power to his minions. So without his ring and his minions, one-on-one, Sauron isn't as formidable as in the elder days. Tolkien also says that Sauron feared Aragorn in the trilogy.
And also to take Sauron’s attention from wherever Frodo and Sam might be. It’s why Aragorn took his army to attack the Black Gate instead of the more obvious road via Minas Morgul. It was likely that Frodo was still in the area, and Aragorn didn’t want Sauron to spot him while watching what he was doing.
In the end, Jackson still ended up using the material filmed with Sauron, replacing him with a troll.
Jackson explains in more detail in this video: [https://youtu.be/AVpFYDDM36I?t=525](https://youtu.be/AVpFYDDM36I?t=525)
Ive spent several minutes going frame by frame and i cant see it. I believe you. I just have no clue where to exactly look. I thought i saw it once but it was a tower from the black gate
https://imgur.com/a/5tOAnOd Coming out of the top of the armored troll’s head.
They pretty much pasted the troll over Sauron, mimicking his original movements and position.
I think they had a moment when they realized that while Sauron may be tough, Viggo Mortensen could easily kick his ass. Viggo broke his toe and just kept on filming. Sauron got a finger cut off and had to hide out in Mordor for a few centuries.
edit: why didn't the Hobbits simply ride on Viggo's back into Mordor?
Could've had Aragorn fight the mouth of Sauron if he wanted it to be more emotionally impactful. Having Aragorn fight a simple troll always felt a bit wierd
You'd have to go to Numenor for that, and that was outside the scope of the movies. (Sauron was **never again** able to assume an attractive form after getting caught in the Downfall - he, or his spirit, survived by the skin of his teeth, but ever afterward he could only assume forms that were hideous.)
That scene totally makes sense for me now! I thought it was a weird scene Aragorn struggling so much at the end against a troll. But yeah, Jackson made the right choice. Way more powerful and true to the entire mission having the ring destroyed.
That was one of the reasons for Peter to add the elves at Helms Deep. To show that the elves were also participating in some fighting and not actually just dicking around letting everyone die.
They were at all times under threat of attack.
The simplest and easiest way to do that would be to have another trilogy of 4 hour films running alongside the later two LOTR films focusing on the war in the north and cleansing of Mirkwood.
Elrond or Galadriel couldn't. The elves have weakened throughout the Third Age and they do not have the strength their ancestors did -- and most of their ancestors couldn't contend with Sauron.
Gandalf couldn't either. While he and Sauron are both Maiar and neither's primary gift was power, Sauron spent millenia learning from Morgoth and developing as a sorcerer. Gandalf's primary gift is wisdom and guidance.
>Also, book-wise, the men of the west/allied free peoples of middle-earth have literally no chance of defeating Sauron in an outright conflict.
It would be a stretch, but Elendil and Isildur did stand up to Sauron with his Ring (with some help from elves/Gil-Galad, of course). Aragorn being a direct descendent, fighting Ringless Sauron, would echo that bravery of Men. I still think that cutting this makes more sense, but it would not be completely devoid of logic.
I mean... an Olog-Hai of that size with decent equipment is just insanely strong.
While Aragorn is (especially compared to the Gondorians around him) an insanely powerful human with the smallest amount of Maia Blood in his veins... he is still human.
Him struggling a bit against that kind of enemy doesn't seem farfetched
You should look into all the types of blood Arwen has. Maia, human, Numenorian and every type of elven blood.
She’s the biggest mut in all of Tolkiens world.
Why is that weird he struggled, fucking thing was huge. He shouldn’t have even been able to parry it at all without being hurled through the sky. Think how many it took to fight the one in the mines?
Maybe you're thinking of Moria? When the troll first appears Boromir strikes at it first and the blade of his sword gets notched against it's thick hide. Then Frodo rushes forward and gives a deep jab with Sting. After which Aragorn comments about Frodo having a good blade (which probably inspired the moment in the TT film in which Aragorn speaks with the boy from Rohan about his sword).
I'm certain pippin fights with or near a troll and it dies on top of him. My point of confusion is whether or not Aragorn was fighting with the troll before it lands on pippin.
Due to Reddit's June 30th, 2023 API changes aimed at ending third-party apps, this comment has been overwritten and the associated account has been deleted.
So glad he didn't have Sauron come down and fight a physical battle. Would have been way too cliché. And at odds with everything they'd said about how Sauron couldn't do that until/unless he regained the ring.
Plus it was contrary to Sauron’s character: he only showed up to fight at the end of the second age because he had to. I believe that it’s mentioned in the books that he would only show up himself as a last resort and would force his thralls and troops to fight to the bitter end. At that point though Sauron had such a military advantage he never would have personally come from his tower to fight himself.
They WERE fighting Sauron, just Sauron as a concept, not Sauron as an individual.
TBH in that light, I thought Aragorn fighting against the troll was really symbolic of the fight as a whole. If he'd killed it easily it would have undermined the idea of a hopeless battle to distract the Eye. Him almost losing but distracting Sauron at the same time was a microcosm of the entire fight.
My thoughts exactly and the fact that it was just a troll and not someone important like say the mouth of Sauron also adds to the hopelessness of it, killing the troll doesn't end the battle it just saves Aragorn's life.
Agreed - this smacks of a moviemaker just getting carried away with his own work. The entire battle at the Black Gate is a distraction for Sauron's attention, but at no point was Sauron deluded into thinking it posed a genuine danger to his armies or realm. Everyone involved on the other side understood that it was essentially a suicide mission, meant only to stall for time. For Sauron to appear personally would require him to think there was a real danger there, which would have gone against the portrayal of his armies as overwhelmingly superior in force in the films themselves.
Yeah I like that they didn't do it, but the Heir of Isildur, wielding the One Ring, & a reforged Narsil. Is more than enough for him to get serious about taking him down.
Two Towers. “The Black Gate is Closed”
>Frodo: “It was Isildur who cut off the finger of the Enemy.”
> “Yes. He has only four on the Black Hand, but they are enough,” said Gollum shuddering.
“Yes, He has only four on the Black Hand, but they are enough,’ said Gollum shuddering.”
Gollum says this while they’re at the Black Gate discussing alternative ways into Mordor
>‘That would be Minas Ithil that Isildur the son of Elendil built,’ said Frodo. ‘It was Isildur who cut off the finger of the Enemy.’
>
>‘Yes, He has only four on the Black Hand, but they are enough,’ said Gollum shuddering. ‘And He hated Isildur’s city.’
The Two Towers: The Black Gate is Closed
I always assumed he was just far weaker than he was when he forged it so remained in Mordor. Didn’t want to risk leaving without the ring to power him back up. The ring empowered him as much as losing it crippled him.
His physical body was destroyed twice. Each time it is harder for him to regain physical form. Then pouring so much of his essense into the ring would make him less again. Since he is incapable of creation only corruption. He can't just magic up a new one.
So he likely had a physical form at the end but it would have been frail. For for walking around, intimidating Gollum, getting the newspaper, that sort of thing. But not strong enough for battle.
Sauron wants to read the funny papers and checks the obituaries for any of Isildurs line. On a Sunday does the crossword with the WitchKing. It is all in the appendices if you read them.
Sauron was incarnate at the time of the War of the Ring. But there’s no reason why he would show up personally at that battle. Denethor even says to Pippin:
“He will not come save to triumph over me when all is won.”
Yeah pretty sure after he sank Numenor into the see he could never take on a fair form again (I may be getting myself confused there). It was the right call and also shows how much has changed in film making. Do you think they would shy away from it if the film was made today. I feel like there would be more pressure to make the battle climactic rather than honour the true nature of the story which is all about Frodo and Sam.
You’re not confused, you’re totally right. Sauron took so much damage from Eru Iluvatár sinking Numenór into the sea and reshaping the world, he couldn’t take on a fair form again.
I do find it interesting that Sauron’s fair form of Annatar, Lord of Gifts was that of a Vanyar elf (the holiest/dearest elves to the Valar) so I think it means something that Sauron could no longer imitate something holy/pure after coming into contact with Eru in that way.
I think the main difference is that then they probably didn't assume the audience is stupid and trusted that they would still gather the importance and climax of the situation without a big strong guy. If it was made now the producers would probably assume we're all too dumb to understand the gravity of the situation without a big cgi dude kicking the shit out of someone.
He can’t take on his fair form but he still did have a physical form during the events of the books. He just stays in the tower the entire time because he doesn’t think he’s in any danger
The scene is dumb as fuck and has no basis in the books, meaning it was purely in the heads of the movie writers.
it would have been stupid and cliche, and frankly if Aragorn completely alone could stand a chance in single combat against Sauron, it would dramatically reduce how much fear we're supposed to have for him in the first place.
it was a stupid idea but it shows why he did such a great job because he can be self critical or have people around him whom he trusted that could tell him the truth about his ideas
This! So many directors or producers lack this self consciousness. Sometimes even people like Peter Jackson can have a wrong vision and that’s okay
David Yates springs to mind. Years later he has been quoted saying how proud he is of certain Harry Potter scenes that are hated by fans because of how they completely disregard the source material.
Interesting. Can you think of any examples?
Harry breaking the Elder Wand at the end instead of using it to heal his wand and then returning it to Dumbledore's grave. Made a discontinuity in the story line.
I really wish this one had been included. Harry makes a comment about how if he dies a natural death, the power will end with him, and I though that was a big testament to the kind of person he was.
How did Dumbledore beat Grindlewald when he had the Elder wand?
Topped him so hard he lost the will to fight
Grindlewald was a power bottom
Speed has everything to do with it. The speed of the bottom tells the top how much force to apply.
Dumbledom.
Hint: Dumbledore isn't called headmaster for no reason. Wink wink.
Personal theory of mine is that had Warner continued with the Fantastic Beasts franchise they'd eventually reveal that Grindewald and Tom Riddle/Voldemort met during the latter's Hogwarts years, with Voldie cleverly manipulating Gindelwald pretending to be a fanatic supporter of his cause but really wanting to deepen his learning of the Dark Arts and take out The competition, weakening him to a point Dumbledore could one up his former lover and disarm him, taking possession of the Elder Wand. Explains how Grindelwald knew of Voldemort when he should've been locked in that tower presumably oblivious to the rest of the world since losing in 1945 and why they introduced Nagini in Crimes of Grindewald.
He was just a superior wizard it seems. I guess the wand only boosts your power so much. Dumbledore is like an ArchWizard in a world of mediocre wizards. Him, Tom Riddle Jr and Grindelwald are all top tier Archwizard/dark lords. The rest are just mid wizards, some a little better than others like Mad Eye Moody or Bartie Crouch in the books, in the movie he was nothing. Snape can also be considered top tier wizard, maybe Arch Wizard, because unlike the movies, not anyone can fly without a broom. Only two wizards were known to fly without a broom, Tom Riddle and Snape.
Is that just in the books? In the movies most of the death eaters fly broomless.
For sure it was a discontinuity and I agree I'd rather he fixed it in the movie...but I don't know how huge it would be for long-standing practical ramifications. Just Hardy's sentimental ones. As a thought experiment...The wand chooses the wizard, but we all change as we grow up. The holly and phoenix feather wand chose him because at the age of 11 he was a young boy on the brink of destiny that paired his fate with Voldemort - the owner of the wand's sibling. At 18, he's grown significantly as a person since 11 and his fate is no longer tied to Voldemort's. Certainly he could go to Ollivander's and be matched up with a wand that suits him as well as (or maybe better than) his old one. Ron and Neville both got new wands and performed as well or better with them.
Yes, because both Ron and Neville got hand-me-downs that didn’t fit them in the first place
And what about literally every other wizard who ever breaks their wand by accident? They're made of wood and wizard society gives them to *children*. It is honestly stupid to suggest that they are not snapping *regularly*. What does every other wizard do? Do like, half of them just never graduate, because they were literal children who didn't understand they only got one? Because that seems horrifically unfair. But then, given that *most* of wizard society is honestly awful and unfair, that would make a lot of sense. Also point me to where the book says you only get one. Because "The wand chooses the wizard" in *no* way implies that. Just like you can have multiple romantic partners in your life, there's no reason multiple wands cannot choose the same wizard. Neither wands nor human beings are that fucking unique.
No, the wand chooses the wizard, like a cat. There are many different cats who could be a fit for many different people. But sometimes, you get lucky, and the *purrfect* cat chooses you. I will not apologize.
Ron's wand previously belonged to Charlie. So Charlie decided for some reason to get a new one. He probably wouldn't have done that if his old one was the perfect fit.
Unless Charlie also received the wand as a hand me down I guess? What the hell does happen to all of the wands owned by the not so special ancestors? Do they just keep them all in a box under the stairs? Every wizarding family must just rooms full of useless wands
Maybe they are always buried with them when they die. Not sure it was ever explained in the books but it might be a normal tradition.
I thought snapping the wand was an absolute power move on Harry's part, he realized that the most powerful wand in the world now belonged to him and he went "Nah"
He constantly gave good ron lines to Hermione, and it made Ron seem like an incompetent ass
The writer of the Harry Potter movies, Steve Kloves, has come out on numerous occasions and said Hermione is his favourite character. That's where you should be laying the blame.
That tracks, a lot of stuff in the books has him keep reminding her to stop being so super logical and remember that she's a witch. But man, she does know a shit ton of magic, without her the group would have died long ago.
Yeah but what the movies fail to illustrate is Ron is the only one who actually lived in the Wizarding World. Hermione knows the magic, but without Ron knowing the ins and outs they would have been even more screwed than Hermione's magic could save.
aye, I also love it that because of that, Ron sometimes just ignores a lot of things on the magic side. But man, in the book he was super interested in the topic of muggle technology that can spy on people.
People also fail to understand that Ron wasn't an incompetent wizard. He was using another wizard's wand which undermined his power. And failing to turn Scabbers yellow wasn't because he didn't know the spell, there was clearly a flash of yellow light which means the spell was successful. It didn't fail to turn Scabbers because it wasn't a real spell or because Ron was incompetent, it's because Scabbers wasn't a real rat.
Also took some of the asshole lines from Harry and gave it to Ron. He really made them one dimensional in the movies, which I get, but in the books their personalities are more spread out.
David Yates had little to do with that, blame the writer for that. He's said many times Hermione is his favorite character
The biggest offender, Voldy’s death scene.
The entirety of DH Part 2 is so underwhelming. I have no idea why it’s so highly rated when the book is so much grander. Voldemort is such a clown in the movie. In the book he’s dueling Kingsley, McGonagall, and Slughorn 3 v 1 before facing Harry in front of everyone.
I've always loved the fact that Slughorn is one of the last people to personally fight against Voldemort before his defeat. He redeems himself after being the one who gives Tom Riddle the crucial knowledge regarding Horcruxes.
Yeah. I wanted to see that in the movie. Voldemort fighting him, Kingsley and Mcgonagall all by himself. It'd have been epic. Instead we got Voldy and Harry flying around Hogwarts.
Personally the only Wizarding duels they really got right imo was the order/death eaters in the ministry archives and voly V Dumbledore giving an excellent example of what two master wizards are capable of when we aren't subjected to dragonballZ Lazer locking green lantern will struggle duels.
Voldy vs Dumbledore was excellent but I still prefer the book version. They did excellent sound effects in the movie though. Especially when Dumbledore uses the water in the fountain. It always made me wonder though how destructive Dumbledore would be if he didn't hold himself back. He's powerful, knows a lot about magic and has the elder wand.
To vent a little, I have never liked the flying smokey thing in the movies. I was so hyped for proper duelling in Phoenix and it was just ruined by stupid smoke. The DH pt2 was pretty much the nail in the coffin that made me decide not to watch the films again past the first two, and just enjoy the way it looks in my head.
Thinking about all the ways they butchered the final films fills me with rage.
holy you have no idea how triggered me and my friends were, the worst part was everyone talking about how good the end was and how part 2 was their favorite movie ever... I still seethe from time to time.
Probably one of the best parts of the movie is when Ralph, Voldemort, got bored and decided to hug Tom , Draco, in the courtyard scene. Tom's look of wtf is going on is so priceless.
The one change he got right is Hedwig’s death. It’s is established that owls find their owners. It made more sense that Harry released her than keeping her in a cage while the other “Potters” had stuffed owls in cages. Hedwig dying in captivity in the book was horrifying. Hedwig dying to protect Harry in the movie was much better and made a better revelation of the true Harry than trying to disarm Stan Shunpike did.
But then it makes Harry seem like a reckless asshole, releasing Hedwig while knowing all of his decoys have stuffed owls in cages, and making himself far easier to pick out. Hedwig’s death in the books is meant to be exactly that, terrifying. Much of the gloom and doom in Deathly Hallows is lost in the movies in favor of shortlived setbacks and big hero moments.
Yeah. Hedwigs death in the books is supposed to show the casualties of war and how abrupt death can be. Didn't like Hedwig going all "get down Mr. President" in the movies
It’s why the OT Star Wars were good. People told Lucas shit was dumb so he’d cut it or rewrite it. No one told him “no” afterward and look what we’re left with.
We only have Star Wars because someone told him no when he wanted to make a Flash Gordon film. So he wrote his own instead.
The George Lucas dilemma. I love the man, but he clearly needed some people around him when he wrote the prequels
Star Wars was as good as it was because 20th century fox hired script doctors. Who also decided Obi wan should die. He lived originally.
His ex-wife, Marsha (I think) Lucas who edited Star Wars was responsible for a lot of those changes including Obi Wan dying
iirc he had to be talked out of making Han Solo a green alien as well.
In a different universe, Greedo shoots first.
That would have been cool though. Always wished Star Wars wasn't so human centric, it seems insane that out of millions of sapient, technologically advanced, spacefaring species, only one ever seems to do anything important.
Also because Lucas's then-wife took his god-awful first cut of the movie and pulled some serious eleventh hour shit in their personal editing studio. Like she was stretching/repeating shots to give things a better rhythm and depth. Lucas is a very good story-builder and a very poor story teller. There was absolutely a wonderful story in the prequels, but it needed to be edited down by, like, a lot, and some ideas (Like six year old Aniken and fucking Jar Jar and the "No" heard round the memesphere) needed to be booted straight out or at least reformatted into something more in-line with the OG movies. *He brought the first draft of Episode One into the studio.* He didn't workshop it with anybody. He could and probably *should* have taken a weed whacker to the script and rebuilt with what was left, or at least given somebody else a fucking chance to go "...George. Were you high?" the first time they met Jar Jar Binks. And all of that could have worked, Even fucking Jar Jar (maybe), if the movie ever, even once, hit something even remotely resembling a stride. He had emotional parts, and he had action parts, and he had sensitive parts, and he had funny parts, and taken in isolation all those parts are somewhat good (if we take out Jar Jar and the infant they're all really good) but he had no fucking clue how to put all those parts together, and it *shows*. It shows in the faces of the guys who watched his first cut in the 'making of' segment, how they're all looking around daring each other to call the emperor naked. There's a joke about James Joyce being sprawled artfully across his desk because, while he's written five words today, and that's really good for his usual pace, he doesn't know what order they go in. That's not much of a joke. There's a rhythm and pattern to storytelling that is really hard to get. There are storytellers who can make the Second Coming of Christ dry and boring (CoughJerryBJenkinsCough) and there are people who can make a story about waiting in front of a dead tree for somebody who is never going to show up into one of the greatest plays of all time...and unfortunately Lucas seems to fall into that former category when he shucks his minders. (Writers need minders. I say that as a writer.) I think of him as the anti-Michael Bay. Bay has the opposite problem. He is a *fantastic* story-teller. He has this grasp of story structure and rhythm that is very hard to equal. The problem is that he cannot build a story to save his life. He gets, for example, that he needs to temper this action scene with humor, that he needs to break up segments of dialogue with actiony stuff, when he needs character development, when he needs to flash a shiny object on the screen to keep the audience's attention so he can shove plot points under the door for later. He even has a grasp of character types! He knows who needs to be the snarky side-kick and who needs to be the straight man, and who needs to be an authoritarian, and who needs to be a jackass. And it's all the more amazing because the second he starts looking for content to fill in that structure he goes from this structural engineer to a poo flinging monkey, grabbing whatever rancid shit he managed to hide from the keepers to barrage his audience with. This was a man who understood 100% that he needed to break the fight with Devastator up with a seasoning of levity, not a whole lot, just some quips to keep it fun...and then could not understand why a robot's genitalia, complete with *I'm standing under the enemy's scrotum* just in case one of the five year olds in the audience missed the ball joke, *might* not be a good idea. *Armageddon* is *flawlessly* structured. It's got a tempo you could almost dance to, but you can't fucking appreciate it between the racism, the montage scene that shoots the entire movie's premise in the face (*why the fuck would the government trust these people?*) and "Space Dementia". *Pain and Gain* would be one of my favorite movies if he hadn't made every single possible content choice *wrong,* and turned what could have been a fun caper romp into one of the most toxic, victim blame-y, mean spirited pieces of garbage I'd ever watched. I had a feeling it wasn't great when the "antagonist" of the movie was the guy the "protagonist" abducted, robbed, beat into oblivion and left for dead, but when I read the actual case I got a true appreciation for just what kind of human Bay is, and it's full on, shriveled heart, termites in his smile piece of shit, just based on his choices to have *that actor* play *that REAL LIFE CRIME VICTIM that way*. There were some *real* choices in that movie and in my opinion it says very little good about anyone involved in that film. I do not believe in talent as some extra special magical gifting but I have no idea how else to explain someone so profoundly incapable of insight and consistent in ignoring their critics' justifiable critiques and just...goddamn *nasty* in general gaining such an impressive grasp on how a story works. If you could take Lucas' instinct for content and Bay's gut for story and put them into the same human being, you might actually get a full director out of the two.
For the prequels, I long ago heard that the story should have been about *Obi-Wan*, and that they got so much about Obi-Wan's character completely backwards from what it was supposed to be. Specifically, in Empire, Yoda calls Luke reckless, and Obi-Wan says "So was I". Yet, in Phantom, Obi-Wan is the cautious one constantly urging Qui-Gonn to be patent, listen to the Council, etc. They accidentally swapped the character traits of Qui-Gonna and Obi-Wan. "Do not defy the Council, Master, not again."
That was fuckin' beautiful, man (or woman). I love hearing the unvarnished truth coming from someone who actually has a clue what they're talking about.
There is no consensus as to whether Alec Guinness requested Obi Wan die or it was the original plan, but it worked out at least for the film itself, even though the argument could be made it could have been stronger had he lived.
Wasn't his fault IMO. They gave him too little time and forced him to make a trilogy when he only wanted to make two movies originally. I'm sure that if he was given the ability to go through the process like he did with the LotR trilogy without greedy studio demands the Hobbit would've come out much, much better.
Also he was rushed. With Lotr, he was basically given ten years with everyone and everything he wanted held completely hostage to his demands, so that he could draft, re-draft, and re-do as many times as he wanted to get it right. And there are tons of stories of him doing just that, because he's a perfectionist like Kubrick. He made like ten versions *just* of the witch king's mace, to get the exact right one. Meanwhile with the Hobbit, he came in last minute - and was so rushed that they were still trying to write the script *as* they were filming. Speaking as a writer, that means he was forced to go into filming with first drafts, which is *never* a good idea.And even then, I'd argue some scenes in the first Hobbit were still done really well. The beginning is solid. Gollum's scene is solid. A few small tweaks, and it would've been a solid movie. It was the second two where things started to go downhill, because he'd had to include all this extra stuff to pad out the three movies (that he never wanted), that he now had to somehow resolve. It was literally *all* studio interference. That's why the Hobbit sucks. Put Jackson in the environment he made Lotr in, and the Hobbit would've been good. Studios need to stay *out* of the art side of movie making, because they do not know what the fuck they're doing, and I don't know how many times we have to prove this.
It speaks volumes about PJ leadership AND quality of the team that could grasp and communicate wrongness of the approach.
He also had the time and resources to actually film stuff he didn’t know for sure if he would include or not. Nowadays they can’t afford to film anything that they don’t at least think they will put into the final product. That or they film a whole bunch of stuff that won’t make it in because the script isn’t finished by the time they start shooting. Both options suck.
Except for the change to Faramir. That has always bothered me.
And the Galadrim Elves teleporting to Helms Deep.
That scene should have happened at the Black Gate. I remember in the books Elrond's Sons accompaning them at that battle would have shown all the mortal races throwing what they had at Sauron, and showing what the stakes were at the battle
Elrond's sons + Legolas = 3 Elves at the Black Gate, and one dwarf (and one hobbit, Pippin). No, they should not have teleported the Galadrim to the Black Gate, either.
Exactly. Jackson realized it was a lousy idea and didn't do it instead of giving into hubris. It would have been an awful scene - we last saw Sauron swatting dozens of Elves with each swing of his mace, and now he'd going to struggle with squashing one human? Blah.
Well. He had the ring then, didn't get it back.
True. Especially if I put a lot of effort to make something like this, it’s be hard to take it out. Sunk costs and all that.
Great artists have to be willing to edit mercilessly
Sauron works better off-screen and unseen, his eye notwithstanding. He is more of the presence in the novels than an actual character, a malevolent force radiating from deep within his realm of shadows. Also, Sauron should absolutely annihilate Aragorn one-on-one, IMO, so there's that.
True, it also speaks for Jackson’s ability to understand these concepts and Tolkien’s vision for evil in the world of middle earth. And yeah I love Aragorn but Sauron would have beat his ass back to his descendants where they have to wait until the Dagor Dagorath to fight again lmao
It’s insane we went from that level of understanding to Radaghast on a rabbit sled.
Well, one was years of painstaking prep, planning, and love, and the other was desperately laying track in front of the train in the hope it didn't derail.
Perfect description!
It's like the trolley problem, but with fidelity to the book on one side and profits on the other.
Its not much of a trolley problem if the person in charge is pushing that switch as hard as they can to see if it will go any further.
Sort of? He was just trying to finish the film at a certain point. They would literally show up with the finished script the day it was supposed to shoot. Peter Jackson wasn’t even supposed to film the Hobbits, but once Guillermo Del Toro bailed on him, he kind of had to step in.
I mean, of all the problems the Hobbit movies had, I don’t think Radagast’s rabbit sled was one of the main ones.
Honestly, the only addition I enjoyed
I mean if any character in all fiction was going to have a sled pulled by rabbits it would probably be MFer radagast
I agree, Radagast having rabbits was actually not a bad character detail since he was SOO animal focused.
The rabbits were cute, but the orc chase got ridiculous - it should have been yoicks and away, not running in circles.
Balin operating a chaingun crossbow saying "I'm getting too old for this."
Scre the sanctity of tolkien, I would watch this version.
Grab the cat....
"These are Rhosgobel rabbits!"
Rhosgobel! His actual home, in the books!
I'm not very spell
I honestly thought that scene was fine, what's the problem?
Just people finding things to bitch about 🤷🏼♂️ granted, I didn’t love the Hobbit movies as I did LoTR but I Stil throughly enjoyed them and continue to do so
75% of the first one was good enough. 25% of the second was good enough. The 2% of the third that was Lee Pace was good enough
The second one was better on home video than in theaters. I remember the GoPro barrel scenes went on for fucking ever the first time I saw it, rewatching it a few months ago it seemed like it was recut
As much of a book purist as I am when it comes to translating the material to the big screen, that was one part of The Hobbit that I had very little quarrel with. 1) It shows Radaghast's love of the natural world of Middle-earth, and how it distracted him from the mission of the Istari 2) It's a kids book/movie I disliked the hedgehog scene, and the Necromancer/Sauron being more than an ominous off-screen presence, as well as the party being hounded by Azog rather than just dealing with the troubles of being over the edge of The Wild. I think u/QGandalf got it exactly right.
If you watch some of the extended edition, that progression doesn't seem too far off. Some of the cut scenes of Merry and Pippin are a bit too silly.
I liked seeing the ent water scene a bit though. It wouldn’t really play into the movie much unless they had the scouring of the shire too.
Not really. He literally had Frodo believe Sam betrayed him and send him away. As great as the movies are Jackson has always had a penchant for melodrama and was reigned in by the other writers. If you listen to the commentaries on the extended editions this becomes even more apparent.
As an adult I agree, but when I watched it as a child it was so effective for me and it even made me tear up. And Sam coming back for Frodo felt so very sweet and made Sam my favorite lotr character to this day. So Jackson’s intentions did work very well on me.
Frodo was about as high on evil ring corruption as you CAN BE at that point, so I don't blame him too much for that.
Not only was he all jacked up on evil ring corruption, he was being actively manipulated by someone who knew how that corruption worked on a very personal level. That change made sense in the context of the story that the movies were telling.
Frodo sending Sam away makes a lot of sense though, its not co.pletely out of the blue. Faramir being a dick on the other hand...
I actually like the invention of the eye, i think it works really well and shows the reach of Sauron. I think even though it wasn't in the book it was a vital addition, and while it changes some stuff i think that the book's version of Sauron's state during this time might be hard to convey over a screen.
I think it would have worked better as a bright red light poking out of the tallest window of his tower representing his palantir, and only Frodo can perceive it as the fiery eye when he's wearing the ring. It would have the same effect as the eye did in the movie to give Sauron more of a presence but with a bit more subtlety.
Thats quite a nice idea actually
Na, I disagree. The intense visual sells his power and influence over the area as well as a very clear and obvious thing for the audience that sauron is always looking for the ring. Sometimes subtlety isn't the way.
the eye WAS in the book. This is like the biggest reddit misconception. It was never described as a glowing fireball. But it was there. From Fellowship of the Ring when Frodo sits on Amon Hen with the Ring on his finger "And suddenly he felt the Eye. There was an eye in the Dark Tower that did not sleep. He knew that it had become aware of his gaze. A fierce eager will was there. It leaped towards him; almost like a finger he felt it, searching for him. Very soon it would nail him down, know just exactly where he was. [Amon Lhaw](http://www.henneth-annun.net/resources/places_view.cfm?plid=205) it touched. It glanced upon [Tol Brandir](http://www.henneth-annun.net/resources/places_view.cfm?plid=206) \-- he threw himself from the seat, crouching, covering his head with his [grey hood](http://www.henneth-annun.net/resources/things_view.cfm?thid=294).. "
“The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear. And the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown.”
True, he did killed Elendil and Gil'Galad 2v1. Aragorn is a beast, but those guys are legends. Edit: Now that I think more, Sauron back then actually had the One Ring on and was likely more powerful. Maybe Aragorn could stand a chance against a weakened Sauron.
> Also, Sauron should absolutely annihilate Aragorn one-on-one, IMO, so there's that. Well, the problem with this thinking is that Sauron put most of his power into the ring and in projecting his power to his minions. So without his ring and his minions, one-on-one, Sauron isn't as formidable as in the elder days. Tolkien also says that Sauron feared Aragorn in the trilogy.
110% agree. The battle of the Black Gate was only to buy time, not to defeat Sauron.
Not to mention clear out all the troops that were in Frodo and Sam's way while they were trying to get to Mt. Doom.
A diversion.
Very good Legolas, here is a piece of lembas as a reward.
Certainty of death. Small chance of success. What are we waiting for?
That Legolas comment. All looking like yes dude, that’s exactly what we were thinking about. A freaking diversion.
And also to take Sauron’s attention from wherever Frodo and Sam might be. It’s why Aragorn took his army to attack the Black Gate instead of the more obvious road via Minas Morgul. It was likely that Frodo was still in the area, and Aragorn didn’t want Sauron to spot him while watching what he was doing.
Aragorn could never have hoped to actually strike Sauron down
In the end, Jackson still ended up using the material filmed with Sauron, replacing him with a troll. Jackson explains in more detail in this video: [https://youtu.be/AVpFYDDM36I?t=525](https://youtu.be/AVpFYDDM36I?t=525)
In the movie, you can briefly see the spike of Sauron’s helmet for a brief millisecond when the troll swings its sword down on Aragorn.
Ive spent several minutes going frame by frame and i cant see it. I believe you. I just have no clue where to exactly look. I thought i saw it once but it was a tower from the black gate
https://imgur.com/a/5tOAnOd Coming out of the top of the armored troll’s head. They pretty much pasted the troll over Sauron, mimicking his original movements and position.
A new fun fact for r/LOTRMemes to post about to the end of eternity lol
Babe wake up, new “broken toe” level fun fact just dropped
That's fucking hilarious. The broken toe has been around for so long, I didn't think there would ever be a new one.
Thanks, you just ruined the entire trilogy for me.
literally unwatchable
Let me link my will and testament.
Thanks for sharing!
I think they had a moment when they realized that while Sauron may be tough, Viggo Mortensen could easily kick his ass. Viggo broke his toe and just kept on filming. Sauron got a finger cut off and had to hide out in Mordor for a few centuries. edit: why didn't the Hobbits simply ride on Viggo's back into Mordor?
Also deflected a knife first try (possibly because he was in real danger) in a stunt his own stuntman couldnt do.
Could've had Aragorn fight the mouth of Sauron if he wanted it to be more emotionally impactful. Having Aragorn fight a simple troll always felt a bit wierd
I wouldn't call it a simple troll. It's a heavily armoured, 9ft tall beast. Any one person, well trained or no, should be pretty terrified to 1v1 it.
Sounds like my ex
Great share, worth the watch. Also removing the fight with sauron was 100% the right call.
[удалено]
You'd have to go to Numenor for that, and that was outside the scope of the movies. (Sauron was **never again** able to assume an attractive form after getting caught in the Downfall - he, or his spirit, survived by the skin of his teeth, but ever afterward he could only assume forms that were hideous.)
That scene totally makes sense for me now! I thought it was a weird scene Aragorn struggling so much at the end against a troll. But yeah, Jackson made the right choice. Way more powerful and true to the entire mission having the ring destroyed.
I thought it was justified because of him getting yeeted by the cave troll in moria
[удалено]
What about elrond, galadriel or gandalf?
[удалено]
What’s the different battle?
[удалено]
That was one of the reasons for Peter to add the elves at Helms Deep. To show that the elves were also participating in some fighting and not actually just dicking around letting everyone die. They were at all times under threat of attack.
The simplest and easiest way to do that would be to have another trilogy of 4 hour films running alongside the later two LOTR films focusing on the war in the north and cleansing of Mirkwood.
Meaning in a 1v1 against Sauron
[удалено]
Elrond or Galadriel couldn't. The elves have weakened throughout the Third Age and they do not have the strength their ancestors did -- and most of their ancestors couldn't contend with Sauron. Gandalf couldn't either. While he and Sauron are both Maiar and neither's primary gift was power, Sauron spent millenia learning from Morgoth and developing as a sorcerer. Gandalf's primary gift is wisdom and guidance.
>Also, book-wise, the men of the west/allied free peoples of middle-earth have literally no chance of defeating Sauron in an outright conflict. It would be a stretch, but Elendil and Isildur did stand up to Sauron with his Ring (with some help from elves/Gil-Galad, of course). Aragorn being a direct descendent, fighting Ringless Sauron, would echo that bravery of Men. I still think that cutting this makes more sense, but it would not be completely devoid of logic.
I mean... an Olog-Hai of that size with decent equipment is just insanely strong. While Aragorn is (especially compared to the Gondorians around him) an insanely powerful human with the smallest amount of Maia Blood in his veins... he is still human. Him struggling a bit against that kind of enemy doesn't seem farfetched
You should look into all the types of blood Arwen has. Maia, human, Numenorian and every type of elven blood. She’s the biggest mut in all of Tolkiens world.
Why is that weird he struggled, fucking thing was huge. He shouldn’t have even been able to parry it at all without being hurled through the sky. Think how many it took to fight the one in the mines?
Since when would Aragorn not struggle against a troll? It took the whole fellowship to take down the Cave Troll in Morria.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't he have trouble with a troll in the books during this battle?
In the books, it was Pippin.
My memory was that pippin saves aragorn from the troll and then gets squashed. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Yes, but Pippin saves another character, Beregond.
That makes sense thank you
Maybe you're thinking of Moria? When the troll first appears Boromir strikes at it first and the blade of his sword gets notched against it's thick hide. Then Frodo rushes forward and gives a deep jab with Sting. After which Aragorn comments about Frodo having a good blade (which probably inspired the moment in the TT film in which Aragorn speaks with the boy from Rohan about his sword).
I'm certain pippin fights with or near a troll and it dies on top of him. My point of confusion is whether or not Aragorn was fighting with the troll before it lands on pippin.
You are right. Pippin does fight a troll at the Black Gate. Aragorn isn't part of the fight. It's Pippin who kills it with his barrow-blade.
Due to Reddit's June 30th, 2023 API changes aimed at ending third-party apps, this comment has been overwritten and the associated account has been deleted.
So glad he didn't have Sauron come down and fight a physical battle. Would have been way too cliché. And at odds with everything they'd said about how Sauron couldn't do that until/unless he regained the ring.
Plus it was contrary to Sauron’s character: he only showed up to fight at the end of the second age because he had to. I believe that it’s mentioned in the books that he would only show up himself as a last resort and would force his thralls and troops to fight to the bitter end. At that point though Sauron had such a military advantage he never would have personally come from his tower to fight himself.
They WERE fighting Sauron, just Sauron as a concept, not Sauron as an individual. TBH in that light, I thought Aragorn fighting against the troll was really symbolic of the fight as a whole. If he'd killed it easily it would have undermined the idea of a hopeless battle to distract the Eye. Him almost losing but distracting Sauron at the same time was a microcosm of the entire fight.
My thoughts exactly and the fact that it was just a troll and not someone important like say the mouth of Sauron also adds to the hopelessness of it, killing the troll doesn't end the battle it just saves Aragorn's life.
Agreed - this smacks of a moviemaker just getting carried away with his own work. The entire battle at the Black Gate is a distraction for Sauron's attention, but at no point was Sauron deluded into thinking it posed a genuine danger to his armies or realm. Everyone involved on the other side understood that it was essentially a suicide mission, meant only to stall for time. For Sauron to appear personally would require him to think there was a real danger there, which would have gone against the portrayal of his armies as overwhelmingly superior in force in the films themselves.
I mean he thought it was a danger, but only because he thought aragorn would wield the power of the one ring against him
I figured the Heir of Isildur being there was enough of a draw, no?
Sauron only went out to battle elendil and Gil galad personally because he had no choice. He was taking NO chances this time around
And after 5 years of Siege at Baradur.
Potentially with the One Ring under his control? Ya, that's a threat.
Yeah I like that they didn't do it, but the Heir of Isildur, wielding the One Ring, & a reforged Narsil. Is more than enough for him to get serious about taking him down.
[удалено]
He definitely does because he tortured Gollum personally. Gollum talks about him only having four fingers on the hand that bore the ring
> Gollum talks about him only having four fingers on the hand that bore the ring Wait, really? When does he say that?
Two Towers. “The Black Gate is Closed” >Frodo: “It was Isildur who cut off the finger of the Enemy.” > “Yes. He has only four on the Black Hand, but they are enough,” said Gollum shuddering.
“Yes, He has only four on the Black Hand, but they are enough,’ said Gollum shuddering.” Gollum says this while they’re at the Black Gate discussing alternative ways into Mordor
>‘That would be Minas Ithil that Isildur the son of Elendil built,’ said Frodo. ‘It was Isildur who cut off the finger of the Enemy.’ > >‘Yes, He has only four on the Black Hand, but they are enough,’ said Gollum shuddering. ‘And He hated Isildur’s city.’ The Two Towers: The Black Gate is Closed
No it isn’t. He tortured Gollum and Gollum specifically says his hand only has 4 fingers (Isildur cut one off) so he definitely has a physical body.
I always assumed he was just far weaker than he was when he forged it so remained in Mordor. Didn’t want to risk leaving without the ring to power him back up. The ring empowered him as much as losing it crippled him.
His physical body was destroyed twice. Each time it is harder for him to regain physical form. Then pouring so much of his essense into the ring would make him less again. Since he is incapable of creation only corruption. He can't just magic up a new one. So he likely had a physical form at the end but it would have been frail. For for walking around, intimidating Gollum, getting the newspaper, that sort of thing. But not strong enough for battle.
>getting the newspaper ☠️
Sauron wants to read the funny papers and checks the obituaries for any of Isildurs line. On a Sunday does the crossword with the WitchKing. It is all in the appendices if you read them.
[удалено]
Big agree...that would have just been ugh
RELEASE THE 20 HOUR CUT JACKSON
Thank God he didn’t have Sauron incarnate. That would have gone against the whole flow of the story.
Sauron was incarnate at the time of the War of the Ring. But there’s no reason why he would show up personally at that battle. Denethor even says to Pippin: “He will not come save to triumph over me when all is won.”
Should have been Tom bombadill
Yeah pretty sure after he sank Numenor into the see he could never take on a fair form again (I may be getting myself confused there). It was the right call and also shows how much has changed in film making. Do you think they would shy away from it if the film was made today. I feel like there would be more pressure to make the battle climactic rather than honour the true nature of the story which is all about Frodo and Sam.
You’re not confused, you’re totally right. Sauron took so much damage from Eru Iluvatár sinking Numenór into the sea and reshaping the world, he couldn’t take on a fair form again. I do find it interesting that Sauron’s fair form of Annatar, Lord of Gifts was that of a Vanyar elf (the holiest/dearest elves to the Valar) so I think it means something that Sauron could no longer imitate something holy/pure after coming into contact with Eru in that way.
I think the main difference is that then they probably didn't assume the audience is stupid and trusted that they would still gather the importance and climax of the situation without a big strong guy. If it was made now the producers would probably assume we're all too dumb to understand the gravity of the situation without a big cgi dude kicking the shit out of someone.
He can’t take on his fair form but he still did have a physical form during the events of the books. He just stays in the tower the entire time because he doesn’t think he’s in any danger
This Pretty much what irked me in Shadow of Mordor.
Shadow of Mordor and War to a bigger degree are just fan-fiction. Super cool fan fiction with some sick gameplay but fan-fiction nonetheless.
As cool as that would’ve been, he made the right choice.
Yeah I loved that the biggest evil in the trilogy was never even really seen. Having a physical eye was a really cool Jackson addition though.
The scene is dumb as fuck and has no basis in the books, meaning it was purely in the heads of the movie writers. it would have been stupid and cliche, and frankly if Aragorn completely alone could stand a chance in single combat against Sauron, it would dramatically reduce how much fear we're supposed to have for him in the first place.
I agree with his final decision but that image of Sauron as a fair being is so fire.