How so?

To me it just showed an unnecessary alteration in Gandalf's fundamental nature as depicted in the books.

Inzil, you might as well be replying to a spambot for all the stimulating conversation you can expect. :rolleyes:

Discussions with the bots can be entertaining. ;)

Anyway, I'm genuinely curious to know the reasoning behind sassyfriend's rationale.

On this topic, I'll have a discussion with a bot. ;)

Because when Gandalf and Pippin fall off Shadowfax the first time it seems to me that Gandalf is more worried for Pippin then the witch King at that moment. I could be wrong though.

Don't see how falling off a horse proves that you care for someone...

My own opinion about the scene: it is but one of all the countless deviations from the original. 'Nuff said.

Just curious dosen't Gandalf try to hide Pippin when they fall off?

Aiea, I really like your thoughts, but that means Gandalf was all the way wrong regarding his true mission since he resurrected. He was wrong, saying he was the most dangerous being in ME except Sauron, he was completely wrong asserting he was sent to ME as a steward and, finally assuming that dealing with WK was his job. And if there was no Gandalf but just light so why was he incarnated once again? As Alatar said several times those two minutes make PJ world look somewhat inconsistent.

In an attempt to save "the world" I would like to provide my own version of the event. Unlike the book, in the movie Gandalf the White exceeded the limitations imposed on him by Valar. He displayed too much power, repelling Nazgul; he intimidated Denethor and took over power in Gondor. So his staff was broken and he diminished. At the same time, he did it all due to occurring emergencies, so he was allowed to remain a councillor for Aragorn and welcomed back to the West in the end. May be this amendment can make it more consistent, but I doubt PJ and scriptwriters were going so far from the original story.

And Glorfindel was not a man but a High Elf, wasn't he. High Elves were able to withstand the fear of Nazgul. Even of nine of them together.

What is the fear of the Nazgul exactly i don't really understand that part at all

Well, it's just that. ;) The Nazgul made people shake in their shoes with horror and dread. Especially when they cried their cries. Even animals felt it.

Ok thank you for explaining that to me. I felt dumb having to ask but sometimes I just have to ask stupid questions. :(

What the books and movies failed to elaborate on is the reason for the extreme fear generated by the Nazgûl. They themselves were afraid of water, and as a consequence, hadn't bathed in over two thousand years. :eek:

The Elves could withstand them because the noses of the Eldar were for ornamentation only. :p

No one loved elves like T. Not even Gygax, later.

"Oh God! Not another ******* Elf!"

about the scene
 

I never noticed. Well, I haven't read the Return of the King yet.

Witch-King vs Gandalf
 

In my personal opinion and im a real Tolkien fan (read all books Hobbit, Sillmarillion, unfinished tales 1 and 2 Trilogy the children of Hurin and all the quenta sillmarillion and ive watched alll the movies from the fellowship to the hobbit an unexpected journey) and although i tend to strongly support canon although i like peter jacksons adaptayions they dont show all the facts and he has tweaked the story for effect i do really like the witch-king and the nazgul my favorite character being the Witch-King of Angmar ithink Gandalf could have put up a bit more of a fight(But not won of course;) )and the witch-king should have had a more spectacular entrance and really he could have killed gandalf off quickly and then flown off to King Theoden.Also this is my first post on the Forum and i hope i contributed.:D

I could not agree more. I think this was one of two scenes that I was really looking forward to from my interpretation on the book.

I feel that PJ really made Gandalf look weak in this scene, As noted in the original post i read it that they were both about to have an almighty battle and were squaring up to one another when the horn or Rohan was heard and then the Witch King flies off.

When Gandalf comes back as a White Wizard I thought that he would be more powerful, and an even match for the witch king. Unfortuantely he was portrayed a lot weaker than my interpretation of the character.

Gandalf uses more of his Power against the Balrog and in the 1st Hobbit film!!!!!!

Hello Isilmo, Welcome to the Downs! Good to hear that you like the Books and the Movies.

As you can see from the length of this thread, opinions differ, but that's what the forum's all about. :)

I'm confused by your post... You seem to be calling the events of the book lame. The whole rivalry between Gandalf and the Witchking is tension and no climax... It's kind of the point. It's the biggest ----- in the history of fiction, yes. But it also allows for wide speculation and interpretation; it allows discussions like this to happen :)

Okay, in the Extended version, the Witchking destroys Gandalf's staff. Later, he's seen with it intact. Explanation? It was definitely the same staff...

Maybe he got an extra one like whan you find a really good pir of shoes or when a small child gets ultra attached io a soft toy...

It had to reappear, to support the weight of Peter Jackson's ego. ;)

Precisely: PJ NEVER understood the fact that the Nazgul are ALL about fear. It's what they ARE. Clueless overage little boy. Watch his stupid children's films without knowing the book, one would never even get an inkling of it.

Clearly, Staves 'R Us.

Think that the Eagles run the deliveries.

How else can you explain Gandalf having a staff in Rivendell after leaving his behind at Orthanc?

Or does accio staff work in Middle Earth?

The Witch-king was probably more powerful than Gandalf. Sauron was becoming stronger and stronger and the Nazgul were fed by Sauron's power. At the beginning of the FotR Aragorn could drive them off with fire and at that time Sauron was weaker, however by the time of the battle of the Pelennor fields the witch king was considerably more powerful and I have no doubt that he could have beaten Gandalf as he was second to Sauron only.

Sorry to say this mate, but what the hell are you talking about?
Can you explain exactly how you come to the conclusion that the Witch-King is more powerful than Gandalf? or rather how is a mortal man that has been turned into a Wraith, stronger than Olorin the Maia sent by the Valar?

Burroughs and Mornorngûr, Welcome to the Downs! (and my favorite topic). :D

Burroughs - Why do you think Sauron was becoming more powerful as the movies proceeded?

Mornorngûr - Is there any indication in Peter Jackson's movies that Gandalf is really "Olorin the Maia sent by the Valar"?

Is there any indication that Peter Jackson's movies have any fealty toward the books? :p

I think the answer here is that in the published LOTR the Witch-king is not on the same level as Gandalf. Yes, he, along with the other Nazgûl, do borrow some of Sauron's power (at the cost of losing their own identities forever). However, Tolkien said in Letters # 246 that Gandalf had a real chance of defeating Sauron one-on-one in a contest to determine the master of the One, if Gandalf had claimed it. If Gandalf could stand up to Sauron himself, the WK had no hope.

On the other hand, as alatar notes, the casual movie-watcher to whom the books are unknown, sees Gandalf as only a "wizard", and the Witch-king as at least an equal. Gandalf is less, and he is more in PJ's world. The movie standards are very fluid, as far as character personalities and "powers" are represented, and you might as well say that Arwen could defeat the Nazgûl all by herself. ;)

Just saying, you can't hold someone accountable for what's in the Books when all he or she knows are the Movies.

My question is, 'Did Peter Jackson convincingly make the case that Gandalf was inferior to the Witch-King?' Seems that when the two met, it was the White Wizard that got powned...;)

And Arwen faced down the Nine! Makes you realize whey Sauron built that big wall. :D

Although, "There are few even in Rivendell that can ride openly against the Nine;" [FotR, p. 256] I doubt Arwen was one of these. :) However, in the movie she was the Glorfindel substitute.

Just imagine how chilling it could have been to see that moment when the Gates are sundered. There is a stillness, and then "In rode the Lord of the Nazgûl."

But no, the gate falls to let in marauding video-game trolls and the Witch-King swoops down on Gandalf from above (which apparently he could have done any time), gets out his 3rd Edition Player's Handbook, picks the "Blow up staff" spell and then flies away again.

One of the things I think is so effective in The Lord of the Rings is that we never really known who would triumph in these personal encounters of good vs evil because they so rarely happen. There is a greater anxiety, a sense of things hanging in the balance. The films are very reluctant to pursue this.

Speaking of the rarity of these encounters, let's take Melkor who was "the mightiest of the the dwellers in Eä" [Sil, p. 78] and yet he was clearly outclassed by Tulkas in their encounter just before he was imprisoned by the Valar. I believe, in an earlier blow by blow of the Powers, Tulkas is not even in the top bunch which included just 9 of the Valar, they were known as the Aratar, "the High Ones of Arda" [Sil, p. 23]

I think I can understand now what exactly irritates me in this scene. It is very much about the integrity of the whole story, but it is not even about measuring powers. That would be a 'sauronish' take on the events.

In the book this scene is (in my opinion) about conviction. At that moment Minas Tirith is de-facto lost, the stronghold is broken, its defenders ran away. Whether Gandalf is more powerful than the Witch King or not, he has no hope to keep Sauron's army out for long, it's too huge. And yet he is going to hold his ground. Why?

Because he believes that it makes sense against the odds. He believes, Eru had not sent him back in vain. He believes, Eru shall not allow his dignity to be crushed in the dust as it is now Eru's dignity as well. Gandalf is there because, having already died and resurrected, he knows why one needs to keep hope when there is no hope. And why power is not everything.

The movie, on the other hand, tells the story of how old power is going, and new power is coming. Lord Aragorn is here to replace the Dark Lord Sauron. Age of men begins and all other powers, dwarves, elves and even Ainur should fade and be gone from the shores of Middle Earth. That is very much how Sauron saw his own errand - with the amendment that it is not him but men of the West will rule from now on. Aragorn is shown as if he obtained and mastered the Ring and Gandalf is around just for his former services to the new King.

This is, actually, why Jackson completely misunderstood Gandalf's other best disciple, Faramir. Thanks to Gandalf's training, he is able to understand WHAT the Ring is, and this is why he's able to reject it very much like Galadriel.

And thus Gandalf-the-Seepish in the shadow of the old or the new King is not only a far cry from Gandalf-the-White with his vigorous Maia spirit, with his elven Ring that helps to keep spirit strong and with his special bound with Eru. The whole story becomes different: Tolkien tries to convince us that there is something more than power over other beings in the world, and that is the real Power; Peter Jackson tells us a tale about game of thrones and change of powers...

...this thread is still alive? :D

This is funny as ****, made me laugh so hard.