Aragorn's fall
 

I read a post on another message board that I found interesting and I had never looked at it this way.<P>They said that Aragorn laying in the water was like Isildur laying in the water. Aragorn was a better man so he got out of it while Isildur perished.<P>Whether it was intended that way or not is debatable but it does bring a different view other than saying "well that was pointless." It would be interesting to hear what PJ's intent was.

hmmm... i see the point of this person. That is very philisophical. I just have to say, I wasnt a huge fan of this scene, it strays <B>WAY</B>to far from the book.

No more than Arwen riding across the river and robbing me of my favorite sequence in the enire story where Frodo stands up to the Nazgul and the Nazgul keep saying "Comeback comeback, to Mordor we will take you!"<P>Aragorns scene didn't rob you of anything.

While the movie did stray from the book in a lot of areas, you have to admit, they did do a pretty good job(other than making WAY too big of a deal out of Arwen)

I didn't like Aragorns death either. It really did not seem to add anything to the movie, even with Arwen saving Frodo, Frodo had to get to Rivendell somehow, they just did it a different way. Aragorn "died" and then came back, didn't change like Gandalf did, just had freaky dreams. How does that help?

But it does not rob me. I really don't see how you can choose one scene that clearly takes away one of the most memorable moments in the entire book and say its alright but can be mad at something that was there for some drama, suspense and time for reflection.<p>[ January 03, 2003: Message edited by: GreyIstar ]

You know, I've heard some people (at my school) who say that Lotr (the book) would have been better with that scene. I was totally outraged, and i couldnt help putting my 2 cents in. Here follows our conversation:<P>Me: Umm excuse me...<BR>2 cheerleaders: What is it freak?<BR>Me: i couldnt help hearing your *intlligent* conversation, and wonder why you like this particular scene?<BR>2 cheerleaders: Well obviousley, the movie is awful except for all of that. *sigh* so romantic.<BR>Me: What if I told you that wasnt in the book?<BR>2 cheerleaders: So? that J.R.R freak is so out. Sensible people should read things like "A walk to remember"<P>Now tell me if these girls are dumb or what?

If the scene was intended as a comparison to Isildur then it si a brilliant scene regardless if it is in the book or not. If it wasn't intended that way then it is a brilliant mistake.

I don't see it. Isilder was shot in the back with two or three arrows. That's why he didn't get out of the water, he was killed!

Just like to point out that Isildur in the first film when he gets killed is seen floating down the river, nice trick seeing as he was in 80 or so pounts of Platemail armor. Sorry but he would sink faster then a rock in anything but a PJ movie.

I agree that the comparison is brilliant, and so is the concept, but Arwen is hardly mentioned at all, and the "love vision" Aragorn has i s just going a little to far. And anyone who says J.R.R Tolkien was a freak is very strange.

Of course Isildur isn't going to get out after being shot but Aragorn could just as eaily have died, its symbolism. Isildur fell to the ring and got killed for it. Aragorn didn't because as Arwen said "May the grace of the Valar protect you." <P>There are other forces at work in this world besides the will of evil.<P>I'm just pointing out there is more depth in that scene than one woudl first realize.

No, No NO! <P>It was Boromir's death that was supposed to give us creepy flashbacks of Isildur. Three black arrows in Isildur's back, three black arrows in Boromir's chest. There's your contrast, ladies and gentlemen!<P>The Aragorn scenes I thought were just to cash in on the suspense they created when everyone thought Gandalf was dead. What they didn't realise was that it becomes ridiculous. Movie 1: Gandalf dies and comes back. Movie 2: Aragorn does the same. Movie 3: Frodo does the same. Bah!

Alex Chamois--I agree. It's going to get old after a while. Also, Frodo nearly dies twice in FotR (the cave troll and the ringwraiths at Weathertop) But the symbolism, intended or not, was great. I hadn't thought of that before. Maybe it'll help me view this scene with an open mind next time.

If it was meant to be symbolism, then it was pretty nifty. But the problem is that very few people understood it. Myself, I just went "why are we wasting time here? The third movie is named after Aragorn. Even if I hadn't read the books, I'd know he doesn't die. Why didn't we cut this and have some more Merry and Pippin?"<P>But I do agree, GreyIstar, that the Arwen...catastrophe (for lack of a better word) did much more damage than Aragorn's river scene. (Though perhaps Viggo Mortensen would disagree, since he almost died filming that scene.) The floating scene didn't replace anything, where Arwen's scene detracted from possible development of Frodo's character, so instead of a strong, brave hobbit willing to face the circumstances we see him as more a "piece of luggage" than Merry felt, the only difference being that Frodo was a piece of luggage who happened to be carrying the Ring of Power.<P>Alex Chamois, I see your point. Frankly, if either was intended as a parallel to Isildur, then it just went straight over my head, and the heads of everybody that I've talked with, which really makes it meaningless. Symbolism is nothing if the audience doesn't get it.<P>~*~Orual~*~

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Symbolism is nothing if the audience doesn't get it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I'm not so sure about that. Good books are filled with symbolism that people may not notice unless they study the construction and craftmanship closely. Good films should be the same. But while most of us have had to analyse books, in school at least, analysing film is often left to those wishing to emulate them

I think the only scene in the movie I came close to serious dislike was this scene, because it came out of no where and wasn't really needed.

I was disappointed with -many- of the changes and add-ins made. The only reason that happened was to give Liv Tyler a part. They even did it strangely, I mean, why would the warg run off the cliff?

Same reason that horses fall over all the time when their riders get stuck with arrows?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Movie 1: Gandalf dies and comes back. Movie 2: Aragorn does the same. Movie 3: Frodo does the same. Bah! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Yeaa after a point it does become a little annoying - kinda like figure skating <P>I remember when Aragorn fell, I was thinking the WORST scenario to myself - "Ok, I read that a character dies in the film that doesn't die in the book. But ummm, how can there be a Return of the King without the uhhh.... KING?!?!?!? ***!!!"<P>So I was glad to see him back. Once again, Arwen shows her power to a man in need on the shores of death <P>Hee hee here's how it goes :<BR>"Ok we need an arbitrary filler scene!"<BR>"SOMEONE GET LIV!"

Hee hee here's how it goes :<BR>"Ok we need an arbitrary filler scene!"<BR>"SOMEONE GET LIV!"<P>Go, Pookabunny! WOOOOH!!<P>Anyway, down to business. I didn't get the point of that scene besides to make Viggo fans (notice I didn't say Aragorn) afraid he was going to die. But your point does intrest me. Though I do think that Boromir better parallels Isildur. But hey, at least the scene wasn't as bad as the dream sequence with Arwen strutting around in her see through dress. That was an image I did not need to see.<p>[ January 05, 2003: Message edited by: Cherie Centaur ]

If comparison with Isildur was the creators' intent, and noone on this big and literate board has perceived it so far, then the comparison is obviously a very poor reference.

Yeah, that dress was ugly and gross, A NEW RECORD! (for Arwen at least) I think that dream was totally uncalled for. What did it do besides gross me out?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> 2 cheerleaders: So? that J.R.R freak is so out. Sensible people should read things like "A walk to remember" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>So you're saying cheerleaders read? <P>I think Boromir's three arrows are more symbolic than Aragorn's fall... Aragorn's storyline at that point has nothing to do with the Ring, which is of course why Isildur died.

If u ask me, the only disappointing thing about FOTR was the absence of Tom Bombadil and in TTT was the Voice of Saruman stuff. But the first one is quite justifiable (Tom wasn't important keeping the story in mind) and maybe the second will be in ROTK.<BR>Though, i did want to see the shire episode too.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Aragorns scene didn't rob you of anything. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Yes it did. It robbed the movie (and therefore the audience) of 1. ten/fifteen minutes of valuable screen time that could've been better utilized elsewhere and 2. that feeling of elation that follows ideal coherence on screen.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>If comparison with Isildur was the creators' intent, and noone on this big and literate board has perceived it so far, then the comparison is obviously a very poor reference. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Fine if you want to play that way Saruman.<P>But I can tell yuo something else that is obvious, but I won't out of restraint.