Lack of respect displayed by Gimli

[Sauron the White]

Matthew..... look, lets be brutally honest here. You don't like me and have a real problem with me. Months ago, you told me to leave here and your animosity has only grown since then. Now its a full blown case of anger which shows in your nearly every post that has something to do with me.

Your comments were disrespectful to me, StW, and I will post whatever topics I please concerning my grudges with the films. Hair color is a big deal to me. Get over it. Alatar said it best - to each his own.

Quote chapter and verse and I can respond in kind. Vague generalities do not lay any foundation for your claim.

I do not speak for you. My mind does not work that way. But I can look at what you wrote and state what it means to me. That is what we all do.

You are grasping at straws. You post clearly was looking to poke some holes in Jacksons movies. Period. You did not like the treatment of Gilmi on Balins tomb or on the chair of the Steward. Both of those are things YOU SAW IN THE MOVIES.

Hair color. You tell me to get over it. Your individual obsession with your idols hair color borders on being a bad joke. Your complaining about it saying its suppose to be black (again with the books) while in the movies it was brown, makes 14 year old starstruck girls sound rational.

Here is your latest example of irrational postings:

How in the world are you going to continue to preach on how movies are movies and books are books? I understand that these are two very different medias, and the films have to be treated in a certain way - but the fact remains that Peter Jackson was basing his films on J.R.R. Tolkien's beloved books.

There are some things in the films that should not have been, for they are contrary to the books.

Peter Jackson, through Saul Zaentz and New Line, had to the right to any darn thing they pleased to do with those books. And when JRR Tolkien sold those rights to UA he knew it. He said as much in his letters when he said he was opting for money over art.

Peter Jackson has no obligation to put any one scene, any one character, any certain hair color in his movies based on anything that Tolkien wrote. No obligation of any kind. He had the right to do anything he wanted with those books.

He could use what he wanted to use.

He could cut what he wanted to cut.

He could change what he wanted to change.

He could add what he wanted to add.

And it was JRRTolkien himself who gave him that right. Nobody else.

Peter Jackson cannot change one page, one paragraph, one word, on item of punctuation in LOTR. He does not have that right.

And thats because movies are one thing while books are quite another.

JRRTolkien knew that.
Peter Jackson knows that.
I know that.
Its too bad that you claim to know that but it still seeps into your reasoning like polluted water fouling a clear stream.

You want to play nice. Fine, I can play nice. You want to take off the gloves and play rough. I can do that too. Believe me young man, you have not seen anything yet.

I prefer nice and civil. But be forewarned. Think about what you want to do with this direction.

[Gwathagor]

A gentle word turns away wrath, Sauron.

[Nogrod]

What's wrong with you people?

Some respect please even if you disagree...

PS. I just realised what is it in British parlance: manners, please.

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

What's wrong with you people?

Some respect please even if you disagree...

Ironic, considering the title of the thread.

[Sauron the White]

from Gwathagor

A gentle word turns away wrath, Sauron

Interesting that your observation is directed at only me. It seems to me that some here are intentionally attempting to provoke me. The calling names comes to mind.

Alatar writes

By the by, I'm glad that MatthewM has started this thread, as I overlooked another Jackson flaw (over five billions and counting) with the observation regarding Gimli and the Throne of Denethor II - one of over 26 Stewards to rule in the King's stead, and yet his seat is no better than a common stool. Oh, and hair colour? Forgot that one too. I figure that once I get the list to six billion, surely someone will then have the movies recalled. Until then I can only sit and scrawl...

And to think that it only took four years of time passing and probably 200 million viewers for anybody to notice it.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Interesting that your observation is directed at only me. It seems to me that some here are intentionally attempting to provoke me. The calling names comes to mind.

But isn't that what you want...attention? I've given up presenting arguments a while ago, as they seem to get ignored for more provocative ideas. And to think that you and I, StW, two older gentlemen, are posting in an internet forum where someone posted the words, "calling names." Now I know how John Rhys-Davies must feel.

And to think that it only took four years of time passing and probably 200 million viewers for anybody to notice it.

With a list as long as Jackson's flubs (and the subsequent requisite Book quote to be cited), I hope to be able to discuss some percentage of them before the sun burns out .

MatthewM, take the compliment when given: you're one in 200 million!

[Sauron the White]

Alatar... have you been appointed as head of the impartial and objective jury?

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by alatar

MatthewM, take the compliment when given: you're one in 200 million!

Indeed!

Glad to see the topic has gotten back on track. I do not have the time to read all the lengthy posts right now, but when I do I will be back!

[Meriadoc1961]

There was PLENTY of room for Gimli to have sat down elsewhere. It was not as if they were holding their meeting in a cramped room! And for Jackson to have had Gimli sitting in that chair at that time of mourning just further shows how he does not get Tolkien. The characters are everything. And Gimli sitting in that chair was out of the character that Tolkien had created. Gimli would not have done it.

Merry

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

What's wrong with you people?

Some respect please even if you disagree...

PS. I just realised what is it in British parlance: manners, please.

Hehe, good one Nogrod!

[Sauron the White]

I do regret if I offended anyone by getting angry. I did feel that I was being baited and probably went a bit far with the play fair or rough remarks. Here is to getting back on track... and on topic.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

For those who are not aware of it, Alatar is one of the moderators. He has both the right and the authority to step in if discussions become rancorous. After all, I can't be around 24/7, and as I'm the only active mod here at the moment, I very much appreciate the help given by other members of the moderating team.

I am tired of the aggressive tone several members have been taking in defending their views and the bad manners they have shown in attacking each other. I am also tired of being tactful and discreet, of writing PMs that seem to get ignored, since those involved don't change the way they post. From now on, anyone who offends in public will be named in public.

I will be back to this thread later when I have had time to check it out in detail.

People, our rules and the way we expect you to post here are very clear - if you can't adhere to them and aren't willing to adjust to the standard of politeness that we have, please leave and find another forum on which you can post anyway you like. In colloquial terms, shape up or ship out - or you will be banned, for short or long.

[Meriadoc1961]

I agree that whether or not Aragorn was present in the throne room of Gondo was irrelevant. Gimli was being disrespectful by sitting in the Steward's chair. Aragorn suffered his banner to be flown during the height of the Battle of the Pelennor when it appeared the Men of the West would fall, and did so to offer encouragemnt and to remind the people what they were fighting for, but he immediately had it furled following the victory before the gates. He would not even enter the city except in disguise as a Ranger from the North, and he only did so then because he was needed to heal the maimed, the sick and the wounded for "The hands of the King are the hands of a healer, and so shall the rightful heir be known."

Aragorn, Lord of Gondor in exile, would not deign to sleep within the city's walls, the city of which he was King, while the War of the Ring was still being fought and waged, and yet we are supposed to believe that it was perfectly acceptable for Gimli to sit in the seat of the Steward of Gondor, the seat of one who had just died, while his heir's life was still hanging in the balance? I do not believe so. It was totally disrespectful. It is just another mark of shame upon our own society that has become so decadent and disrespectful that the coarsest of language and conduct is viewed as acceptable, and decorum and good manners are scoffed at.

Remember, too, that Frodo himself felt uncouth because he and those from the Shire did not observe the Standing Silence before dining. Frodo was embarrassed. And yet these men of Faramir's company did this even while foraying in the wilderness of Ithilien away from the city. If that was expected of them under those harsh conditions, do any of us honestly believe that the men of Gondor, the Guards of the Citadel of Minas Tirith, would have done or said nothing while a dwarf just kicked back and smoked while seated in the very chair of their just deceased fallen leader?

When President Kennedy was assassinated in 1963 even the just sworn in President Johnson waited a few days before anyone was allowed to touch and remove the rocking chair of the nation's fallen leader, JFK, from the Oval Office. If we in the United States could show such honor to the dead, I see not why a nation that had existed for millenia, with its ancient, high origins and purpose, would do any less.

What Jackson did with Gimli is completely crass and tasteless.

Merry

[Bêthberry]

Well, I've been biding my time waiting for an opportune moment to return to the topic at hand and I do believe that our Moddess has provided that.

I don't have time to review the scene MatthewM mentions where Gimli sits on the Throne of Gondor. Perhaps those who are more versed with the film can do that and comment on the tone, atmosphere, seeming purpose of that action in the movie. I will simply comment on the general possibilities of meaning.

We all know that directors and producers are free as interpretors and sub-creators to create the movie they envision. The problem with PJ's vision is that he and his team of writers have claimed on more than one occasion that they thought they were being faithful to Tolkien's vision. This opens up the can of worms which we dead just love to see wiggle, although we do prefer to see them wriggle through our posts rather than us.

LotR makes very clear that Gondor is a city marked by the rituals and splendor of an interregnum. The chapter "Minas Tirith" in RotK clearly shows Denethor sitting on his simple stone chair below the opulent unused Throne. Appendix A also states that the Ruling Stewards never sat on the throne itself. This is part of Tolkien's appreciation of how monarchies develope symbols of power and authority. There's no happenstance between Arthur's sword in the stone and Aragorn's blade that was unbroken, just as there was nothing meaningless in Elizabeth I's use of symbols in the various famous portraits of her. The symbols represent the Office and not just the person. Parliaments have maces that are symbolic. "The Once and Future King" still has resonance in England--the current Prince of Wales includes the name "Arthur" in his string of names. Perhaps countries which do not have a history and tradition of monarchy produce people who are less familiar with this kind of symbolic meaning. Or perhaps modern culture just deems them effluent of the past and not important.

The fact remains that the Vacant Throne held a meaning in Gondor and in the Legendarium, a meaning which is not established in the movies. So, that difference itself leads to questions, which MatthewM has rightly raised here, although we need to be careful if the Throne in the movies has the same meaning as it has in the books.

Was PJ simply not interested in this aspect of Tolkien's Legendarium, the role and attitude towards monarchy--was he more interested in the blockbuster action thriller aspects? Did he understand why the Throne was unoccupied in LotR? Or was he aware of it but decided in a modern age of democracy to downplay the significance of monarchy? Did he think that having Gimli sit on the Throne was a way to demonstrate to a modern audience that change was here at hand? Was he trying to imply some sort of Constitutional Monarchy?

I don't think we can simply transfer Tolkien's meaning of the symbol, the Vacant Throne, to the movies (except to note that here is one clear example where PJ's vision of LotR does not coincide with the text). But we can ask what PJ might have meant by having the dwarf sit on the Throne. Really, I would love to have someone ask PJ and his writers about this.

And it doesn't matter that the movies came out years ago and no one asked this earlier. People make all kinds of new observations about books that were published centuries ago. This is part of the fun of reading/viewing/internet discussion boards. Human beings create an infinite variety of ways to count dancing angels.

EDIT: Sorry, cross posted with Merry.

Originally Posted by Meriadoc1961, post # 48

If that was expected of them under those harsh conditions, do any of us honestly believe that the men of Gondor, the Guards of the Citadel of Minas Tirith, would have done or said nothing while a dwarf just kicked back and smoked while seated in the very chair of their just deceased fallen leader?

Umm, the Throne was not the chair of their 'just deceased fallen leader' Denethor; it was the ancient Seat of the Kings, untouched by the ruling Stewards, who sat in a plain stone chair at the foot of the empty Throne. But your comment does show that the actions PJ puts Gimli through need to be understood in movie terms because PJ does not deal with the meaning Tolkien gives to the Vacant Throne.

[Meriadoc1961]

I would like to add another observation, especially to those who turn to Aragorn being in the room as somehow making it okay for Gimli to sit in the Steward's chair.

When Gandalf, Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli first came to Edoras they were forbidden from bringing any weapons into the presence of the King. Aragorn was loth to remove his sword, Anduril, because of its significance, and he told Hama that death would be the penalty for anyone who dared touch his sword. Aragorn would have been the first to keep Gimli out of that empty chair. But then again, had Jackson not tampered with the characters in the first place, then this would be a moot point: Gimli himself would NEVER have approached that chair, kicked back and lit up a pipe, if his character had not been tampered with!

Merry

[alatar]

Sorry to all for my less than informative and evidential posts last eve.

Anyway, now I do have some 'evidence' as to why I think that Gimli shouldn't have stood on the Tomb of Balin. I'll disregard the whole 'respect' thing as I don't know that much about movie Dwarven culture. Sure, Gimli spends a lot of time kneeling before the tomb, but then maybe all bets are off once the Dwarf's blood (if they have blood, which is another assumption) gets hot.

I'll be referring to the attached images. In 'Gimli,' we see the Dwarf atop the tomb. Aragorn and Legolas - archers - are in front, and Boromir stands out there as well with sword and shield. Gandalf and the hobbits stand off to the other side. Gimli2 shows this from the front - what the orcs will see when they enter the Chamber of Mazarbul. Gimli3 shows Gimli after the affray has gone on for a few minutes. The Dwarf is still atop the tomb. Aragorn has switched from bow to sword, and at this time everyone is engaged. Gimli has taken one or possibly two hacks at orcs, and now is dodging the troll's attack.

Okay, so for me, I would say that this 'come and get some' Dwarf would have been better positioned for battle directly in front of the tomb. You'll notice if you watch the scene that his 'count,' which becomes more important later, is slightly - if at all - above the individual hobbits. He could have been right behind Aragorn and Legolas, so that when they drop their bows he could add to the ground attack. But...

And now for the Seat of Denethor. In Gimli4, we can see the Dwarf happily planted on the black throne. Please look closely at his legs and his head in relationship to the throne. In Gimli5, we see that the Dwarf is so comfortable that he's lit up his pipe - hammer and tongs!

Now I will conjecture that all of this fuss about disrespect for the Seat of Denethor is for not. Why? Again, look at Gimli4. If that's a human-sized throne then I'll be a winged polar Balrog. So, my conclusion? The Army of the Dead stole the real throne and replaced it with the one we see. You also will note that the King's throne also is missing.

No wonder they were in a hurry to leave on the Pellenor Fields - had to get out of town before Aragorn discovered their prank. Aragorn cares not as he sees the obvious fakery. How else can you explain it?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by alatar

And now for the Seat of Denethor. In Gimli4, we can see the Dwarf happily planted on the black throne. Please look closely at his legs and his head in relationship to the throne. In Gimli5, we see that the Dwarf is so comfortable that he's lit up his pipe - hammer and tongs!

Now I will conjecture that all of this fuss about disrespect for the Seat of Denethor is for not. Why? Again, look at Gimli4. If that's a human-sized throne then I'll be a winged polar Balrog. So, my conclusion? The Army of the Dead stole the real throne and replaced it with the one we see. You also will note that the King's throne also is missing.

No wonder they were in a hurry to leave on the Pellenor Fields - had to get out of town before Aragorn discovered their prank. Aragorn cares not as he sees the obvious fakery. How else can you explain it?

Oh great Mod alatar, on whose altar... ...
You have gone back to review the flick, which I didn't have time for. Does Gimli in the movie simply sit on the Ruling Stewards' black stone chair and not on the Vacant Throne? So that PJ completely omitted Tolkien's little bit of monarchial symbolism?

Do Kiwis not have Elizabeth as their titular head of state?

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

You want to play nice. Fine, I can play nice. You want to take off the gloves and play rough. I can do that too. Believe me young man, you have not seen anything yet.

I prefer nice and civil. But be forewarned. Think about what you want to do with this direction.

Oh please...to think that testosterone can find its way through electronic pathways.

StW, you're a provocateur, short and sweet. I assume that the 'direction' above indicates that you will provide MatthewM and like diehard book fans with the 'Unified Theory of Tolkien,' like the physics Holy Grail of the Unified Theory of Gravity, would tie together the Books and the Movies in one sweeping theorem. Short of that, and the proofs that it would require, you then simply hold an opinion.

That's cool, but I wouldn't oversell it.

By the by, I'm glad that MatthewM has started this thread, as I overlooked another Jackson flaw (over five billions and counting) with the observation regarding Gimli and the Throne of Denethor II - one of over 26 Stewards to rule in the King's stead, and yet his seat is no better than a common stool. Oh, and hair colour? Forgot that one too. I figure that once I get the list to six billion, surely someone will then have the movies recalled. Until then I can only sit and scrawl...