Gandalf Vs. The Witch King

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Now -- strictly from the movie, mind you -- where does it say that the WiKi has been taking anabolic steroids and has become greater than a Maia

Strictly from the movie, what's a Maia?

particularly since 1) Aragorn merely shrugs them off with a burning brand, 2) they get drowned by an Elf-maid who sounds like she has some throat congestion (or has been taking male hormones), 3) is chased off by Gandalf while rescuing Faramir, 4) eventually dies to a shield-maiden and a weak stab to the leg by an injured Hobbit (with no explanation of the efficacy of the blade he wields).

But the Witch King did have a shiny new helmet, and that's gotta count for something. And the scene that I mentioned, did we read that Gandalf tells Pip that the deadliest servant, "Ain't no big thang..."?

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by alatar

Strictly from the movie, what's a Maia?

Aint tha' loike them Aztecs, 'cept from Peru? I mispoke, Al. Nowhere is Maia or Maiar mentioned in the movie. But it is interesting that in The Two Towers during the flashback sequence in the 'White Rider' scene there are specific mentions of a supernatural occurence:

'Through fire and water.'

(Flashback: Gandalf is battling the Balrog on a peak)

'From the lowest dungeon to the highest peak, I fought him, the Balrog of Morgoth.'

(Gandalf holds up Glamdring and a flash of lightning strikes it before he plunges the sword into the Balrog. With a final cry, the Balrog falls from the peak and lands, smoking, onto the icy rocks below)

'Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.'

(On top of the mountain, Gandalf crawls a little ways and then collapses)

'Darkness took me. And I strayed out of thought and time.'

(The camera zooms in Gandalf’s eye and enters an amorphous realm of stars and whirling galaxies, ending in a blinding white light)

'Stars wheeled overhead and every day was as long as a life-age of the earth. But it was not the end. I felt life in me again.'

(The camera zooms out from Gandalf’s eye; he is lying, naked and very still, in the snow. His hair has turned white and his wounds are completely healed. He suddenly shudders with a deep gasp as life returns to him)

'I've been sent back until my task is done.'

Who completely healed Gandalf of his wounds (he looked quite beat up before his transformation)? He's been sent back by whom? Even if one discounts the lack of background information regarding Eru/Valar/Maiar, one has to get the implication that God himself sent Gandalf back to finish his task. Otherwise, what can you assume the script is referring to? Again, with such an implication, how then can we go from Gandalf defeating a Balrog 'of Morgorth' (who is this Morgoth, by the way?), being ressurrected and completely healed, breaking Saruman's staff and chasing away Nazgul on the Pelennor, to having his staff shattered, being unhorsed and cowering in fear to the WitchKing? It is bogus and utterly inconsistent. Silly even.

Originally Posted by alatar

But the Witch King did have a shiny new helmet, and that's gotta count for something. And the scene that I mentioned, did we read that Gandalf tells Pip that the deadliest servant, "Ain't no big thang..."?

I don't believe I ever said in this entire conversation that Gandalf treated his confrontation with the WitchKing lightly. But in the movie Gandalf did have a Hobbit with him. So, based on Eowyn and Merry defeating the WitchKing, I believe that Gandalf having Pippin by his side would certainly tip the scales in his favor.

Have I mentioned I have, once again, drank far too much coffee today?

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

It's funny, but apparently Jackson had originally intended to mention the fact that the wizards were Maiar. In one of the various books that were published about the making of the films, one of those for FotR is "embellished" with quotes from the film broken out into boxes. One is a quote from Saruman, speaking to Gandalf, in which he says (as I remember it; the book is in storage somewhere), "Are we not both Maiar, members of a most excellent order...?" I don't recall the entire quote, but I do recall that the word is mentioned, and it is a line that never appears anywhere in LotR the book. It plainly came from the script as it stood at the time the book was laid out, and was either never filmed or was deleted.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

It's funny, but apparently Jackson had originally intended to mention the fact that the wizards were Maiar. In one of the various books that were published about the making of the films, one of those for FotR is "embellished" with quotes from the film broken out into boxes. One is a quote from Saruman, speaking to Gandalf, in which he says (as I remember it; the book is in storage somewhere), "Are we not both Maiar, members of a most excellent order...?" I don't recall the entire quote, but I do recall that the word is mentioned, and it is a line that never appears anywhere in LotR the book. It plainly came from the script as it stood at the time the book was laid out, and was either never filmed or was deleted.

Problem is, if you don't know about Gandalf's real nature, his return is pretty much inexplicable, and looks more like the standard Hollywood 'here's-one-of-the-favourite-characters-coming-back-to-help-save-the-day-just-when-you-thought-he-was-gone-forever' eye rollers, aka the Han Solo Syndrome.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Definitely a problem. For a long time, I've felt that in Jackson's permutation of Tolkien's world, it would've made more sense to leave Gandalf dead than to bring him back and really serve no purpose to the remaining plot. Since Jackson and his co-writers found ways to put nearly all of Gandalf's important lines (and deeds) from the second and third books into the mouths and actions of other characters (or utterly discard them), permanent death would have been a more dignified treatment of his character. Aragorn's "kinglyness" should not have relied on any of the other characters being diminished, nor should the Witch King's apparent power have needed the lessening of Gandalf, or anyone else. These things were not required in the book. That they apparently were required in the movie seems, to me, to indicate flaws in the way Jackson and his co-writers "reimagined" it. IMHO, of course.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

Definitely a problem. For a long time, I've felt that in Jackson's permutation of Tolkien's world, it would've made more sense to leave Gandalf dead than to bring him back and really serve no purpose to the remaining plot.

That makes so much sense.

I guess we have to realize that the writers were limited in that they could not find a way that they thought the audience would 'get' where Aragorn becomes more kingish and yet Gandalf remains a step above.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Who completely healed Gandalf of his wounds (he looked quite beat up before his transformation)?

Who healed cliff-diving Aragorn? Brego?

He's been sent back by whom? Even if one discounts the lack of background information regarding Eru/Valar/Maiar, one has to get the implication that God himself sent Gandalf back to finish his task.

Conjecture. I use my sister as the penultimate example of the average viewer (as she has never read the books). She would have never guessed that it was a god that sent Gandalf back, but that he, being a wizard, had pulled it off somehow on his own.

Otherwise, what can you assume the script is referring to?

The local wizards guild?

Again, with such an implication, how then can we go from Gandalf defeating a Balrog 'of Morgorth' (who is this Morgoth, by the way?),

Exactly.

being ressurrected and completely healed, breaking Saruman's staff and chasing away Nazgul on the Pelennor, to having his staff shattered, being unhorsed and cowering in fear to the WitchKing? It is bogus and utterly inconsistent. Silly even.

Which is exactly the problem. Even if the Witch King was powered up to the level of Sauron with the Ring, it did not seem so in the film, and so even my sister couldn't figure out why Gandalf could kill a balrog but get proned by the Black Flyer.

Have I mentioned I have, once again, drank far too much coffee today?

I would have guessed that you were chewing the beans...

[Sarumian]

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

Aragorn's "kinglyness" should not have relied on any of the other characters being diminished, nor should the Witch King's apparent power have needed the lessening of Gandalf, or anyone else.

The power of WiKi is shown in the book by breaking the Gates of Minas Tirith. The growing power of Aragorn is shown in liberating of South Gondor and leading its men to the battle. It looks like they started altering the storry and couldn't stop.

As it was said many times in this thread, one of the reasons why the scene was altered, was to make it mens' (not wizard's) viktory. But this doesn't work as the final blow to Morgul Host comes from the Dead, and PJ was accused in robbing men of their victory here http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=15272

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Originally Posted by Sarumian

It looks like they started altering the storry and couldn't stop.

That's really the problem, isn't it? I've adapted short stories and novellas for stage performance (most of which required some degree of special effects that needed to be somehow translated to the different presentation), and there's a terrible temptation to want to "make it your own," somehow. To some degree or another, change is necessary because some things just don't work as well in a visual medium as they do in print. Once you start making changes, you have to take care, or you wind up changing much more than is needed, and it becomes a snowball effect. One change triggers another, and another, and soon, the changes that you thought were necessary for adaptation aren't that at all: they're changes needed to support something you altered that either wasn't necessary or wasn't particularly well thought out. In my opinion, a lot of the problems in Jackson's version of LotR hinge on the decision to weaken Aragorn's character in regards to his leadership and desire to be a king. That is really what ultimately led to the change in the confrontation between Gandalf and the WK. If Aragorn of the movies had behaved more like Aragorn of the book from the start -- a man who is striving to be king not for glory, but for the love of Arwen and of his people -- then there would not have been a need for other "stronger" characters to be diminished so that he could step in and take command.

I could go on at some length about this, but I don't think this is the proper topic for it. Suffice it to say that in my opinion, Jackson et al made some questionable decisions early in the scriptwriting process, which led to more and more poor decisions as the process continued. The confrontation between Gandalf and the WK was just another part of that snowball that appears to have gotten badly out of control.

All just my opinion, as ever.