Aragorn's reluctancy, was it totally wrong? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Boromir88 · 04-09-2005, 05:12 PM

Throughout the movie we see that Aragorn is unsure about returning to the throne. I actually thought anytime Minas Tirith was brought up Aragorn was just going to shout "NO!" But, do we see a sense of reluctancy in the books? I mean Aragorn had a chance to claim the throne when he served under Ecthelion (obviously there was something about him if Denethor started viewing the Palantir after his father's death fearing this "Thorongil." He doesn't claim it after Imrahil encoorage him to. And he only claims it after the war. Is this reluctancy, or just smart political tactics? We also see that Aragorn (at Amon Hen) actually didn't intend on going to Minas Tirith, unless Frodo decided to. Did he do this out of reluctancy, having second thoughts? Or to stick with Frodo until the end?

To tie this in with the movies, is Aragorn's unwillingness to go to Gondor totally bad? After all, it does add some suspense, will Aragorn go? Will he get there in time? Not to mention I think it puts more meaning to the oath Aragorn makes to Boromir...

Quote:

"Leave it! It is over the world of men will fall. All will come to darkness. My City to ruin."
"I do no know what strength is in my blood, but I swear to you, I will not let the White City fall, nor our people fail."

There we have one of them important oaths/oath-fulfilling/oath-breaking we commonly see in Tolkien, and I think a wonderful job with the script/directing. Aragorn's made an oath, will he go back on it? Will he not? Or does it just create more problems within the movie, because at some points Aragorn is dead set on Minas Tirith, then other times he just flat out doesn't want to go?

Gurthang · 04-15-2005, 07:13 PM

It seems to me that it was more a matter of priorities that kept him away from the city. In the movies, he did not believe that the Ring could go to Gondor and come out again, unless to the hands of Sauron. So he felt compelled to keep the One far from Minas Tirith. After he left Frodo, and the Ring, saving Merry and Pippin seemed to be a more urgent task. Hence, his reason for again steering away from the city.

Also, I'm not sure he thought the timing was right to claim the throne. If he did make a claim, there would undoubtedly be fighting between him and Denethor, since the Steward was disinclined to give up his rule. There would also be a question if anyone would support him at all. Either way, it would leave the city weaker right before an impending war.

One other point. He may have been thinking that he would not survive the War of the Ring. So any claim to the thone, whether successful or unsuccessful, would be very short lived.

dancing spawn of ungoliant · 04-18-2005, 02:05 AM

I agree with Gurthang on many things. I thought it was weird that Aragorn hesitated so much claming the throne. Surely he knew that it was his duty to become a king and on the basis of the books I had had this impression that it was something he had really been waiting for.

On the other hand it was wise to wait until Sauron was defeated. If a stranger appearing out of nowhere had strolled into Minas Tirith and appointed himself a king, he wouldn't probably had received as sincere approval from the residents of the city as he did after the battles. Had he taken the rule over Gondor earlier and the war against Mordor had come, it would have been easy to blame the new ruler.

Already in FotR it's clear that Aragorn is very devoted to the Fellowship and its common mission to help destroying the ring. If they can't get rid of the ring, there won't be a throne for Aragorn to claim. After Aragorn lets Frodo go alone (with Sam) it's just a tactical question, when to head for Minas Tirith. Insecureness about the timing, I think, is understandable. Reluctance, however, doesn't seem to fit that determined man with a fixed goal to become a king.

mormegil · 04-21-2005, 08:30 AM

I think the reluctancy that we see in the movie (which is definately not in the books) is for a "better" movie story. It allower Peter to incorporate Arwen more into the plot and give more depth to the Aragorn character that common movie goers want. ( I myself could have done without so much Arwen in the movie but that's a whole other thread to start). His reluctancy was a side plot that gave the story more than just the quest to destroy the ring. Again, I think Peter did this to make it into a movie story and not a book story. As far as translating the book to the movie I think he did great and that's why Aragorn seems reluctant in the movie but not so in the books.

alatar · 04-21-2005, 09:58 AM

Not sure that the reluctance of Aragorn worked well for me, but then again I had read the books many times before seeing the movie, and so knew that eventually Aragorn would take the throne - no matter what else PJ changed

.

To me the turning point for Aragorn is when he speaks with the little boy in Helm's Deep regarding the boy's sword. At this point I think that he realizes that it is up to him to not only physically enter the battle but also to take more of a leadership role, as it is no longer just about himself, Legolas and Gimli. Prior to the battle at Helm's Deep, Aragorn is consumed with trying to be the anti-Isildur, making up for his ancestor's folly.

From the movie we are to believe that Theoden would have failed against the Uruk Hai of Saruman, and if not for the assertion of Aragorn to 'ride out at dawn,' then they would have been doomed. After this, Aragorn is on a roll, leading the Army of the Dead then the Army of Free Folk.

Politically he would have gained the support of Eomer from saving Rohan, the support (even submission) of the Gondorians after saving Minas Tirith using the AotD, and the allegiance of Faramir, the Elves (due to kinship and they knowing his ancestory; plus they were leaving anyway), and the Hobbits. Who would be left to contest his ascension to the throne?

Tigerlily Gamgee · 04-24-2005, 06:55 PM

Well, he knew that he was the heir, but perhaps he wanted to prove to himself that he was worthy of such a position before just claming it. In the books he camps outside the city and won't even enter it until he is king, no? I think he needed to be portrayed as being more humble about the position rather than power thirsy for it. It may have made him a less likeable character had he rallied people behind him, ridden off to Gondor, and thrown Denethor off the thrown just because his destiny said it was so.

05-13-2005, 06:00 PM

I think I like the personality of the Aragorn in the movies better. To me, the reluctant ruler and hero are cooler than the one who thinks that they're ready and are too sure of themself. It makes for a more intricate character development than just, "okay, I'm the heir and I'm ready." So to me at least, the Aragorn in the movies is cooler and a tad more likeable.

-don't get me wrong, I like the Aragorn of the book too.

**The Saucepan Man** · 05-13-2005, 06:19 PM

It seems to me that there is a book-based justification for film Aragorn's reluctance. During the period following Gandalf's fall in Moria, when he has the leadership of the Fellowship thrust on himself, he frequently and increasingly questions his own abilities. This reaches a low point at Parth Galen, in particular with Boromir's death, when he seems in a state of utter despair and laments that all his decisions seem to have gone awry. Yet, with a firm objective (the liberation of Merry and Pippin) which requires him to use those of his abilities which he trusts the most, his tracking skills, he gains steadily in confidence, ultimately to the point where he proves himself a worthy King.

In the book, he has to prove himself both to himself and others. The films simply emphasised and stretched out this aspect of his development as a character. And I think that it works well in the context of the films.

Dûrbelethwen · 08-21-2005, 09:52 AM

Something I noticed last night when watching the Fellowship of the Ring on TNT: When the Fellowship was being formed when Aragorn joined up Gandalf winked at Elrond.

Elladan and Elrohir · 08-21-2005, 01:59 PM

Aragorn is obviously far weaker in the movies than in the books. In the books he has quiet confidence (to be distinguished from arrogance). His desire at every point is to go to Gondor (reference his passionate song in Book III Chapter II), but he must put other things above that desire. Ultimately, of course, his road leads him to Minas Tirith.

In the movies, on the other hand, Aragorn is unsure of himself. "You are Isildur's heir, not Isildur himself." This quote is significant. In the book it is spoken by Aragorn himself at the Council of Elrond when he is questioned by Boromir. In the movie Arwen says it as Aragorn looks at the shards of Narsil. The book Aragorn is in the end untarnished by the deeds of his ancestor, while the movie Aragorn feels that he is doomed to repeat them.

As a sidenote, Aragorn is only one of the many characters who are weakened in the movies. Frodo, Gandalf, Theoden, Denethor, Faramir, etc. are all weaker in the films than in the books.

04-15-2005, 07:13 PM	#2
Gurthang Sword of Spirit Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Oh, I'm around. Posts: 1,401	It seems to me that it was more a matter of priorities that kept him away from the city. In the movies, he did not believe that the Ring could go to Gondor and come out again, unless to the hands of Sauron. So he felt compelled to keep the One far from Minas Tirith. After he left Frodo, and the Ring, saving Merry and Pippin seemed to be a more urgent task. Hence, his reason for again steering away from the city. Also, I'm not sure he thought the timing was right to claim the throne. If he did make a claim, there would undoubtedly be fighting between him and Denethor, since the Steward was disinclined to give up his rule. There would also be a question if anyone would support him at all. Either way, it would leave the city weaker right before an impending war. One other point. He may have been thinking that he would not survive the War of the Ring. So any claim to the thone, whether successful or unsuccessful, would be very short lived. __________________ I'm on a Mission from God.

04-18-2005, 02:05 AM	#3
dancing spawn of ungoliant Mischievous Candle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: So near to Russia, so far from Japan, quite a long way from Cairo, lots of miles from Vietnam. Posts: 1,234	I agree with Gurthang on many things. I thought it was weird that Aragorn hesitated so much claming the throne. Surely he knew that it was his duty to become a king and on the basis of the books I had had this impression that it was something he had really been waiting for. On the other hand it was wise to wait until Sauron was defeated. If a stranger appearing out of nowhere had strolled into Minas Tirith and appointed himself a king, he wouldn't probably had received as sincere approval from the residents of the city as he did after the battles. Had he taken the rule over Gondor earlier and the war against Mordor had come, it would have been easy to blame the new ruler. Already in FotR it's clear that Aragorn is very devoted to the Fellowship and its common mission to help destroying the ring. If they can't get rid of the ring, there won't be a throne for Aragorn to claim. After Aragorn lets Frodo go alone (with Sam) it's just a tactical question, when to head for Minas Tirith. Insecureness about the timing, I think, is understandable. Reluctance, however, doesn't seem to fit that determined man with a fixed goal to become a king. __________________ Fenris Wolf

04-24-2005, 06:55 PM	#6
Tigerlily Gamgee Hostess of Spirits Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Meduseld Posts: 1,055	Well, he knew that he was the heir, but perhaps he wanted to prove to himself that he was worthy of such a position before just claming it. In the books he camps outside the city and won't even enter it until he is king, no? I think he needed to be portrayed as being more humble about the position rather than power thirsy for it. It may have made him a less likeable character had he rallied people behind him, ridden off to Gondor, and thrown Denethor off the thrown just because his destiny said it was so. __________________ ~ ExerciseJunky.com (Hobbits fitness of choice!)~ ~Lady of Rohan: An Eowyn Fansite ~ ~The NEW/OLD Barrow Downs Photo Page~

05-13-2005, 06:19 PM	#8
The Saucepan Man Corpus Cacophonous Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: A green and pleasant land Posts: 8,390	It seems to me that there is a book-based justification for film Aragorn's reluctance. During the period following Gandalf's fall in Moria, when he has the leadership of the Fellowship thrust on himself, he frequently and increasingly questions his own abilities. This reaches a low point at Parth Galen, in particular with Boromir's death, when he seems in a state of utter despair and laments that all his decisions seem to have gone awry. Yet, with a firm objective (the liberation of Merry and Pippin) which requires him to use those of his abilities which he trusts the most, his tracking skills, he gains steadily in confidence, ultimately to the point where he proves himself a worthy King. In the book, he has to prove himself both to himself and others. The films simply emphasised and stretched out this aspect of his development as a character. And I think that it works well in the context of the films. __________________ Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind!

08-21-2005, 01:59 PM	#10
Elladan and Elrohir Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Halls of Mandos Posts: 332	Aragorn is obviously far weaker in the movies than in the books. In the books he has quiet confidence (to be distinguished from arrogance). His desire at every point is to go to Gondor (reference his passionate song in Book III Chapter II), but he must put other things above that desire. Ultimately, of course, his road leads him to Minas Tirith. In the movies, on the other hand, Aragorn is unsure of himself. "You are Isildur's heir, not Isildur himself." This quote is significant. In the book it is spoken by Aragorn himself at the Council of Elrond when he is questioned by Boromir. In the movie Arwen says it as Aragorn looks at the shards of Narsil. The book Aragorn is in the end untarnished by the deeds of his ancestor, while the movie Aragorn feels that he is doomed to repeat them. As a sidenote, Aragorn is only one of the many characters who are weakened in the movies. Frodo, Gandalf, Theoden, Denethor, Faramir, etc. are all weaker in the films than in the books. __________________ "If you're referring to the incident with the dragon, I was barely involved. All I did was give your uncle a little nudge out of the door." THE HOBBIT - IT'S COMING

04-21-2005, 08:30 AM	#4
mormegil Maundering Mage Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 4,651	I think the reluctancy that we see in the movie (which is definately not in the books) is for a "better" movie story. It allower Peter to incorporate Arwen more into the plot and give more depth to the Aragorn character that common movie goers want. ( I myself could have done without so much Arwen in the movie but that's a whole other thread to start). His reluctancy was a side plot that gave the story more than just the quest to destroy the ring. Again, I think Peter did this to make it into a movie story and not a book story. As far as translating the book to the movie I think he did great and that's why Aragorn seems reluctant in the movie but not so in the books.

04-21-2005, 09:58 AM	#5
alatar Doubting Dwimmerlaik Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Heaven's basement Posts: 2,466	Not sure that the reluctance of Aragorn worked well for me, but then again I had read the books many times before seeing the movie, and so knew that eventually Aragorn would take the throne - no matter what else PJ changed . To me the turning point for Aragorn is when he speaks with the little boy in Helm's Deep regarding the boy's sword. At this point I think that he realizes that it is up to him to not only physically enter the battle but also to take more of a leadership role, as it is no longer just about himself, Legolas and Gimli. Prior to the battle at Helm's Deep, Aragorn is consumed with trying to be the anti-Isildur, making up for his ancestor's folly. From the movie we are to believe that Theoden would have failed against the Uruk Hai of Saruman, and if not for the assertion of Aragorn to 'ride out at dawn,' then they would have been doomed. After this, Aragorn is on a roll, leading the Army of the Dead then the Army of Free Folk. Politically he would have gained the support of Eomer from saving Rohan, the support (even submission) of the Gondorians after saving Minas Tirith using the AotD, and the allegiance of Faramir, the Elves (due to kinship and they knowing his ancestory; plus they were leaving anyway), and the Hobbits. Who would be left to contest his ascension to the throne?

05-13-2005, 06:00 PM	#7
Turin Turumbar Guest Posts: n/a	I think I like the personality of the Aragorn in the movies better. To me, the reluctant ruler and hero are cooler than the one who thinks that they're ready and are too sure of themself. It makes for a more intricate character development than just, "okay, I'm the heir and I'm ready." So to me at least, the Aragorn in the movies is cooler and a tad more likeable. -don't get me wrong, I like the Aragorn of the book too.

08-21-2005, 09:52 AM	#9
Dûrbelethwen Haunting Spirit Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 80	Something I noticed last night when watching the Fellowship of the Ring on TNT: When the Fellowship was being formed when Aragorn joined up Gandalf winked at Elrond.