Gandalf Vs. The Witch King

Originally Posted by narfforc

As The One Ring wasnt forged until c1600 SA, and The Ringwraiths did not appear until 2251 SA, I think that Gandalf/Olorin the Maia, who was present at The Creation, might just be a bit older by the odd thousands of years.



DO NOT JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER.

Who are you aiming this at? I have no idea what you are trying to say!

[Gurthang]

I think that narfforc is saying that Gandalf's appearance belies his real age. Gandalf appears maybe 60ish(never been good at guessing ages ) in the movies, but is actually a few tens of thousands of years old, at the youngest.

Originally Posted by alatar

Watching the confrontation between the WK and Gandalf really spoiled the movies for me. It seems that in PJ's version Gandalf's role is lessened when compared to the books, and this scene is the worst of it.

After watching the scene, I watched it again with PJ's commentary, hoping to get some insight regarding 'why'. Nothing. I'm very disappointed with ROTK:EE.

And does Gandalf have a staff when he boards the ship at the end?

I think it is a really ruined part in this movie and that Gandalf The White is at least 4 times more powerful than the witch king. He the most powerful human in lord of the rings after sauron ( i think ) and with a lift of his staff should be able to chase the witch king and make him run for his life, as in the book the witch king himself feels overpowered and flees. It is terrible that they make him weak and pathetic like this.

Originally Posted by staff_and_sword

I think it is a really ruined part in this movie and that Gandalf The White is at least 4 times more powerful than the witch king. He the most powerful human in lord of the rings after sauron ( i think ) and with a lift of his staff should be able to chase the witch king and make him run for his life, as in the book the witch king himself feels overpowered and flees. It is terrible that they make him weak and pathetic like this.

Don't forget that in the first film & book, Gandalf the Grey appears anxious of an encounter with the Balrog of Morgoth, even afraid. But after a titanic battle he defeats it & his superiority is highlighted against all save Sauron (& perhaps Saruman at the time).

I believe that a similar thing was about to happen when the Witch King confronted Gandalf the White. The Witch King inspired anxiety into Gandalf, but ultimately Gandalf would have been victorious if the two fought in battle. (I don't think the Witch King would have defeated the Balrog - more likely he would flee from it at the death of the battle. We never actually see any proof of how powerful the Witch King was in the book or the film, but we did with Gandalf).

Maybe PJ thought GANDALF vs WK would take away the focus of the film away from what it really was about - not a duel between two powerful individuals, but a battle between Aragorn for the free people of ME & Sauron for Mordor.

Originally Posted by Mansun

Don't forget that in the first film & book, Gandalf the Grey appears anxious of an encounter with the Balrog of Morgoth, even afraid. But after a titanic battle he defeats it & his superiority is highlighted against all save Sauron (& perhaps Saruman at the time).

I believe that a similar thing was about to happen when the Witch King confronted Gandalf the White. The Witch King inspired anxiety into Gandalf, but ultimately Gandalf would have been victorious if the two fought in battle. (I don't think the Witch King would have defeated the Balrog - more likely he would flee from it at the death of the battle. We never actually see any proof of how powerful the Witch King was in the book or the film, but we did with Gandalf).

Maybe PJ thought GANDALF vs WK would take away the focus of the film away from what it really was about - not a duel between two powerful individuals, but a battle between Aragorn for the free people of ME & Sauron for Mordor.

More close view of Gandalf's might :-

Gandalf holds off all nine Nazgul at Weathertop (book)

Gandalf defeats the Balrog (film & book)

Gandalf breaks the staff of Saruman (film & book)


More closer view of the WK:-

Held of by Aragorn & gandalf at weather top (film &/or book).

Defeats nobody major at all in the entire book but is later able to break the staff of Gandalf the White?? (film)

Is defeated by a hobbit & a woman (albeit with luck).


The point is, lets not forget that the WK is made to look inferior as an opponent also!!

[Essex]

Originally Posted by Mansun

Defeats nobody major at all in the entire book but is later able to break the staff of Gandalf the White?? (film)

Is defeated by a hobbit & a woman (albeit with luck).

The point is, lets not forget that the WK is made to look inferior as an opponent also!!

Oh dear, here we go again!!!!

In both Book and Film, the Witch King in his last form is far mightier and Superior to his 'former' self - Tolkien has mentioned this in his Letters, and Jackson mentions that they had to 'up' the power of the WK as they needed a 'baddie' to cocentrate on in this movie - either that or have Sauron appear at the Black Gate. Now THAT would have caused mass hysteria by a lot of Tolkien fans!

So therefore, Jackson was following Tolkien's lead in 'powering up' the WK.

I have explained here and in other threads, and I put it to you now that the Staff is a symbolic token that a Wizard carries, and at most a conduit of his power - Remember Gandalf broke Saurman's staff both in move and book with his Voice. Not a blast from his Staff. One of the only places in the book I can see Gandalf use his staff is to light a fire! (oh and to light the way in Moria!)

Merry and Eowyn. Luck???? No way! The Witch King was defeated by a blade of Weseternesse that was designed with possibly that exact purpose in mind, and wielded by the courageous hand of a halfling. Eowyn then gallantly killed the Witch King after the spell holding his sinews to his will were unknit by Merry.

But I do understand that the WK/Gandalf scene is different in that Gandalf's staff is broken, and thath he lies on the floor. But do we really know what would have happened if the two DID fight? Remember Gandalf was in a body that could be inflicted by wounds exactly as a normal man - he could die as easily as a man could. And (and I think I'm in the minority here) - from the very first time I read the book, I always wondered how much of a Bluff Gandalf's words to the WK were.............did he know himself whether he could defeat the WK or not?

But the end of this scene in both book and movie is exactly the same. Rohan have arrived in the nick of time to Save the Day. And Jackson ramps up the tension by having Gandalf on the floor to show the Movie world this.

Originally Posted by Essex

Oh dear, here we go again!!!!

In both Book and Film, the Witch King in his last form is far mightier and Superior to his 'former' self - Tolkien has mentioned this in his Letters, and Jackson mentions that they had to 'up' the power of the WK as they needed a 'baddie' to cocentrate on in this movie - either that or have Sauron appear at the Black Gate. Now THAT would have caused mass hysteria by a lot of Tolkien fans!

So therefore, Jackson was following Tolkien's lead in 'powering up' the WK.

I have explained here and in other threads, and I put it to you now that the Staff is a symbolic token that a Wizard carries, and at most a conduit of his power - Remember Gandalf broke Saurman's staff both in move and book with his Voice. Not a blast from his Staff. One of the only places in the book I can see Gandalf use his staff is to light a fire! (oh and to light the way in Moria!)

Merry and Eowyn. Luck???? No way! The Witch King was defeated by a blade of Weseternesse that was designed with possibly that exact purpose in mind, and wielded by the courageous hand of a halfling. Eowyn then gallantly killed the Witch King after the spell holding his sinews to his will were unknit by Merry.

But I do understand that the WK/Gandalf scene is different in that Gandalf's staff is broken, and thath he lies on the floor. But do we really know what would have happened if the two DID fight? Remember Gandalf was in a body that could be inflicted by wounds exactly as a normal man - he could die as easily as a man could. And (and I think I'm in the minority here) - from the very first time I read the book, I always wondered how much of a Bluff Gandalf's words to the WK were.............did he know himself whether he could defeat the WK or not?

But the end of this scene in both book and movie is exactly the same. Rohan have arrived in the nick of time to Save the Day. And Jackson ramps up the tension by having Gandalf on the floor to show the Movie world this.

Don't forget that Gandalf the White was more powerful than when Grey! And while Grey he defeated the greatest foe that walked ME after Sauron in the form of the Balrog of Morgoth! This is evidence enough that Gandalf is a truly dangerous enemy when challenged to the death. Was the WK so upgraded in power that he was even on the same level as a Balrog?? I think not.

Gandalf also claimed that he was the most dangerous opponent after Sauron in the two towers. Aragorn also said that Gandalf was mightier than all the Nine Nazgul. Legolas said that the Balrog was the most dangerous foe after Sauron. All the evidence still points to the fact that Gandalf the White was the most powerful foe after Sauron.

Also, the finding of & usage of the enchanted blade which Merry used to defeat the WK was down to luck. Was it not for the magical blade, both Merry & Eowyn would have died instantly.

[narfforc]

I think you may want to change the word luck for fate. Was it lucky that Bilbo found the Ring or was it fate, Gandalf seemed to think he was meant to find it, therefore it is no stretch of the imagination that the hobbits were meant to get lost on The Barrow-downs. If this is so, then fate ordained, that a blade of Westernesse would be present at the time of The Witch-kings demise.

[Essex]

Originally Posted by Mansun

Don't forget that Gandalf the White was more powerful than when Grey! And while Grey he defeated the greatest foe that walked ME after Sauron in the form of the Balrog of Morgoth! This is evidence enough that Gandalf is a truly dangerous enemy when challenged to the death. Was the WK so upgraded in power that he was even on the same level as a Balrog?? I think not.

ah, and there's the rub. you said it yourself. I THINK not. You do not know. it is all circumstantial evidence.

Also, the finding of & usage of the enchanted blade which Merry used to defeat the WK was down to luck. Was it not for the magical blade, both Merry & Eowyn would have died instantly.

as nafforc says, it was fate rather than luck. you could say the same, that it was luck that gollum Fell and therefore the Quest succeded? No. It was Frodo's compassion in not killing him the many chance he had. therefore, frodo, and middle-earth were saved.

Originally Posted by Essex

ah, and there's the rub. you said it yourself. I THINK not. You do not know. it is all circumstantial evidence.

Are you in effect accusing Gandalf the White, Aragorn, & Legolas of lying, or at least exaggerating?

I don't believe Gandalf is arrogant, probably a bit too cautious & unsure of himself on rare ocassions.

He feared the Balrog in the book & film but defeated it. He was anxious of the WK due to its great ability to influence the battle for ME on Minas Tirith (in the book). But the likelihood is that he would be too much for the WK in the end ...... the WK would withdraw after finding out for itself that it can match Gandalf but cannot defeat him, & would then cast its terror on the battlefield instead etc.

That is what PJ should have done in the film. One of the few errors in what was otherwise a great effort by PJ & Co.

[Guinevere]

This thread apparently never dies!
I think the never ending arguments about who is more powerful, Gandalf or the Witchking, are beside the point.
In the book the moment when they are poised against each other at the gate is full of tension, just because it is not clear to the reader who might be stronger. Gandalf is not without fear (as Pippin notices, in the book), but to show him thrown to the ground and looking helpless and hopeless is so out of character. He should just stand there and not give way. The dramatic moments are obviously never dramatic enough for PJ - he has always the tendency to overdo them, which, for me at least, ruins them. (Same with the Sammath Naur scene)

[Essex]

Originally Posted by Guinevere

This thread apparently never dies!
I think the never ending arguments about who is more powerful, Gandalf or the Witchking, are beside the point.
In the book the moment when they are poised against each other at the gate is full of tension, just because it is not clear to the reader who might be stronger. Gandalf is not without fear (as Pippin notices, in the book), but to show him thrown to the ground and looking helpless and hopeless is so out of character. He should just stand there and not give way. The dramatic moments are obviously never dramatic enough for PJ - he has always the tendency to overdo them, which, for me at least, ruins them. (Same with the Sammath Naur scene)

Guinevere, my head was nodding so much in agreement reading this that it almost fell off. What stopped it was the last sentence in brackets. But that's worthy of ANOTHER thread in itself!!!!! I thought the Sammath Naur scene (though different) worked really well movie wise!

Anyway back to Gandalf / WK - Absolutley - I think you've hit the nail on the head. I have been so vociferous against posters who say Gandalf's DEFINATELY stronger than WK blah blah blah - he may well have been but we DON'T KNOW THIS.

What you state is so true to what I think Tolkien was getting across here. There is SO much tension whilst reading this in the book. To get this scene full of tension (for NON book readers who are in the majority - sorry but that's true - these films were for them just as much as for us - even the EE I would hazard to guess) - PJ added more of a situation in Gandalf looking weaker so that we can see the Rohirrim, and therefore the World of Men, saving the day.

But to show Gandalf thrown to the ground and apparently beat I now admit to not liking - But only because Guinevere states a very good case, not just GANDALF IS FAR BETTER THAN THE WK, or in other words my dad's bigger than yours.

Cheers Gunivere! After just over 1 year I finally concede that by having Gandalf prostrate on the Floor is a bit over the top!

Originally Posted by Mansun

Gandalf feared the Balrog in the book & film but defeated it. He was anxious of the WK due to its great ability to influence the battle for ME on Minas Tirith (in the book). But the likelihood is that he would be too much for the WK in the end ...... the WK would withdraw after finding out for itself that it can match Gandalf but cannot defeat him, & would then cast its terror on the battlefield instead etc.

I don't think that Gandalf was ever going to destroy the WK ........... not unless the WK stayed long enough to battle for hours (as was the case with the Balrog of Morgoth). I also think Gandalf was much more terrified of a possible encounter with the Balrog, far more than with the WK. Only a hint though that the Balrog was more dangerous than the WK. The truth rests with Mr Tolkien.

[Guinevere]

Come to think of it, this encounter in the book is in quite a different setting - it is much more important than the one in the movie!
In the book scene Grond has just broken the great gate of Minas Tirith and no enemy has yet entered the City. Gandalf on Shadowfax alone stands there to hinder the Witchking from entering.("all fled before his face")
And when the horns are heard, it is indeed the Rohirrim who save Minas Tirith from being invaded.

In the Movie encounter, the enemy is already in the City.( PJ wanted some more fighting!) The arrival of the Witchking on the fell beast is impressive, but not all that important. Gandalf just standing unmoving and steadfast wouldn't make that much sense, since he's not guarding the gate against the invasion. Even if Gandalf would defeat the WK, what would it help the City?
Even the arrival and the brave fight of the Rohirrim aren't that important either. In the end it's the ghastly green termite-army of the undead who saves the town.

A lot of changes which in turn caused other changes ... (most of them not to my liking, since I am not at all fond of battle and fight scenes. I usually skip them when watching the DVD!)

[Essex]

We have to remember also, in the book, that Rohirrim's forces were also fading. When they saw the ships with the black sales all hope was lost. So therefore, Aragorn and his men also saved the day. In the film, as you point out Guinivere, that

In the end it's the ghastly green termite-army of the undead who saves the town.

I've tried to answer this one before. If we do not have the men of the Dead in the Pellenor, then we would have to have yet ANOTHER battle scene at Pelagir on the River. We would have to invest time in the men of the Dead fighting the Corsairs, Aragorn freeing the Slaves, Aragorn picking up all the other men, Aragorn freeing the King of the Dead and his people from their curse - in the book we had this told to us in retrospect - this would not work in a movie - all none book readers would be shouting 'where di all the green guys go?'

so without the 'green men' at Pellonor we would have to have ANOTHER big fight scene, lots of scene setting and dialouge which would SLOW the film down now that Jackson has helped skillfully bring it up towards a crescendo, and therefore we would have no surprise entrance into the Pellenor (as we have in the book) by Aragorn and co.

Therefore film wise, I can understand why Jackson had the Dead help fight Sauron's forces at Pellenor rather than at Pelagir. It was the lesser of two evils. Hey, I'd like a full length unabridged version of the text made into a mini series, and then we can have the EXACT scenes acted out as Tolkien described them. 54 hours of material (thats how long it takes to read it out aloud), with exposition, retrospective telling of tales etc cannot be fitted into three 3-4 hour movies.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Essex

Therefore film wise, I can understand why Jackson had the Dead help fight Sauron's forces at Pellenor rather than at Pelagir. It was the lesser of two evils. Hey, I'd like a full length unabridged version of the text made into a mini series, and then we can have the EXACT scenes acted out as Tolkien described them. 54 hours of material (thats how long it takes to read it out aloud), with exposition, retrospective telling of tales etc cannot be fitted into three 3-4 hour movies.

But couldn't we have cut one dwarf drinking scene in exchange for showing Aragorn freeing one of many slaves, so that when the little green men do 'deboat,' they do so along with other non-ghost help?

[Essex]

yes, why not? free a few slaves and let them jump off too and fight. don't think that would need too much exposition to do. maybe pj thought of this but didn't want the thought of even more fighters at the Pellenor people would have to keep track of. hang on, is he a baddie or a goody? I know that guy with the painted face is a baddie. but what about these other 'humans'?

just trying to see WHY he did it this way. yes, the films aren't perfect and there are occasions where we see things we could have done much better (I can't wait until we meet faramir in the TT discussion thread!)

I take back the comments originally posted - PJ has explained these elsewhere already.

Wow! It's been a little over a year, and this thread is still sparking heated conversation as I never thought I would arouse. Thank you everyone for your shared intellect and well mannered behavior, I would expect nothing less.

[Essex]

Argonath,

talk about 'Light the blue torch paper and retire'

I take it you like setting off Fireworks then!

[alatar]

We can now finally answer the question posed by this thread. The new The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II video game website has both Gandalf the White and the Witch-King on the Fellbeast. Each character is modeled as in the PJ films. If someone or persons would like to pitch in, buy and send me the game, I will volunteer my scientific background to put this question to the test.

A HD monitor (23" or greater) may yield more convincing results .

[narfforc]

I have played this game, having recently bought it. You are able to play as Evil or Good. I have played both, and utterly destroyed both Gandalf the White and The Witch-King against each other, defeating Sauron is not too difficult either. Playing as Sauron is pretty cool though. Both Battle for Middle-earth and Battle for Middle-earth II are great games, but are not the answer to this question. For instance, I defeated Gondor using Saruman and a Balrog. The games are great for what if's, you can even have a dragon to control.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by narfforc

Both Battle for Middle-earth and Battle for Middle-earth II are great games, but are not the answer to this question.

Too cool. But note that I'm still willing to undertake conducting the experimentation at other's expense.

narfforc, shhh! I'm trying to get someone to buy me the game...

[narfforc]

Best of luck Alatar with your attempts at getting your hands on a freebie copy of the games, I have always found the best way is to borrow it from someone, and then forget who lent it to me, pleading ignorance when my irate ex-friend turns up at my door purple-faced and talking in a foreign language full off four letter words. Once you have got hold of one of the games, I hope you do enjoy them, playing as Gandalf the White is good, you get to call for Shadowfax and charge into battle. I destroyed The Witch-King with the beam from his staff, the one you see in the film, this is called The Light of the Istari, however I killed Gandalf by continually landing on his head whilst riding my fell-beast, now why didn't Peter Jackson think off that instead of that silly grovelling scene, ummm......

Originally Posted by narfforc

Best of luck Alatar with your attempts at getting your hands on a freebie copy of the games, I have always found the best way is to borrow it from someone, and then forget who lent it to me, pleading ignorance when my irate ex-friend turns up at my door purple-faced and talking in a foreign language full off four letter words. Once you have got hold of one of the games, I hope you do enjoy them, playing as Gandalf the White is good, you get to call for Shadowfax and charge into battle. I destroyed The Witch-King with the beam from his staff, the one you see in the film, this is called The Light of the Istari, however I killed Gandalf by continually landing on his head whilst riding my fell-beast, now why didn't Peter Jackson think off that instead of that silly grovelling scene, ummm......

The above statements are irrelevant to this thread. If you wanted to discuss these games, try all those idiots on the online format of the game.

One thing I wanted to clear up was - why did Sauron give the WK an added demonic force? Was it to prevent the upgraded Gandalf from making the current WK looking like an overrated lowly adversary, to destroy Gandalf, or just to scare off anyone else (e.g. Aragorn) who dared challenge him in his attempt to capture Minas Tirith? I think it was the former or the latter of these, but not the middle ground. Afterall, Sauron doesn't even have his Ring, so just how much power could he afford to suck out of him & onto his servant? Not enough power to destroy Gandalf I think!

[Trotter]

Hey,

This particular scene had me yelling at the TV in unspeakable rage when I first saw it! I cannot fathom why this scene was portrayed as it was. PJ's excuses don't do it for me. Fact is, (all arguements about Gandalf's and WK's power aside) it was a weak scene that served no purpose when it could have been a strong scene that was full of it! It is a sad thing indeed, for had this scene been filmed the way that Tolkien wrote it, it could have been one of the most dramatic scenes in the film.

[narfforc]

I am saddened for I thought on this website someones likes or ways would not be disparaged. It seems that after reading Tolkien for 35yrs and having a library of over 300 books on the subject, if I play the odd game then I am irrelevent, Alatar and I have been linked with 'all those idiots, then I obviously cannot have any say. The fact that our light-hearted comments have been taken out of context this way saddens me, this thread has gone round and round, duplicating the same arguments over and over, for what harm our comments made to it, I am sorry, however as there is no forum for these games on this website, and maybe, just maybe others (that is people who are not you), could have wanted to know of these video games, and as they are linked to the movies visually, well that is why the subject arose.



All that is written is not clever
All who play games are not daft
If you think your way for ever
Maybe it's at you next could be laughed.


P.S Thank you Mansun for your humane understanding of other peoples pass-times, whatever you do don't let on that you train spot, do flower arranging or read silly fairy stories, you know how the morons will class you an idiot for having a hobby other than theirs.

Originally Posted by narfforc

P.S Thank you Mansun for your humane understanding of other peoples pass-times, whatever you do don't let on that you train spot, do flower arranging or read silly fairy stories, you know how the morons will class you an idiot for having a hobby other than theirs.

It is no coincidence then that I share the same hobby as you, as I own BFME I & II, as well as the Fellowship of the Ring, Return of the King, & the War of the Ring. However, these games should not be discussed here - there are PLENTY of games forums & online chat rooms available (including on the games themselves). And I said idiots as a slang term, not an insult - something that probably better refers to the younger generation of gamers like me & many others.

The reason why this thread does get more than its fair share of comments (sometimes repeated albeit) is because it is a highly contraversial scene in the movie, & EVERYONE is entitled to discuss this scene regardless of how exhausted the topic may seem to get to you, particularly those who are new to the Barrow Downs, or those who may want to find answers to different angles of the topic.

[Essex]

Mansun,

read the line "The fact that our light-hearted comments have been taken out of context "

they were having a laugh.

Luckily, we can have a laugh on this forum - a well as having serious inepth discussions (as we have done esp on this thread) - so they were not irrelevant.

To me if someone comes up with a reason why gandalf is stronger than the WK from the game of the movie, it's JUST as relevant as someone else saying 'but Gandalf was stronger than the Witch King' from reading the books as we have no proof of this in this matter, as everything on this matter is CIRCUMSTANTIAL at best.

I though it was funny anyway guys!!!!

Originally Posted by Essex

Mansun,

read the line "The fact that our light-hearted comments have been taken out of context "

they were having a laugh.

Luckily, we can have a laugh on this forum - a well as having serious inepth discussions (as we have done esp on this thread) - so they were not irrelevant.

To me if someone comes up with a reason why gandalf is stronger than the WK from the game of the movie, it's JUST as relevant as someone else saying 'but Gandalf was stronger than the Witch King' from reading the books as we have no proof of this in this matter, as everything on this matter is CIRCUMSTANTIAL at best.

I though it was funny anyway guys!!!!

They were not taken out of context - they were in the wrong context from the start. As I said before, there are other places to have a laugh about the games. This thread is about the movies - WK laughs . . . .

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by alatar

We can now finally answer the question posed by this thread. The new The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle-earth II video game website has both Gandalf the White and the Witch-King on the Fellbeast. Each character is modeled as in the PJ films. If someone or persons would like to pitch in, buy and send me the game, I will volunteer my scientific background to put this question to the test.

A HD monitor (23" or greater) may yield more convincing results .

Using a game franchise in which Gandalf was once practically Eru on Arda and the Witch-King is about to get an expansion which will give him the ability to summon enormous spiritual werewolves and destroy entire armies with it does not answer anything involving Tolkien's work.

I can see it now; Gandalf will be riding a tidal wave and lifting up rocks with his mind while shouting "I am God!" On the other side of the battle field, the Witch-King will be flying through the air (without a fell beast) shooting lightning from his hands shouting "Power! Unlimited power!" Overblown Gandalf and Super Sidious to be do not account for Regular Gandalf and Regular Witch-King.

Overall, Tolkien does nothing to suggest that any warrior is stronger than the other in the showdown at the gate. Gandalf has been grim regarding the possible fight, and the Witch-King shows no fear of Gandalf at the gate. Gandalf may be a maia, but the book shows that he's probably thinking "This guy might kick my butt" at the gate.

In the end, they didn't fight, so there's no need to look at this confrontation with a telescope in the books. As for the movie, that was a, so to speak, "badass-proving moment." (Yes, I know, you don't like swears, but I'm making a point here.) Overall, that scene was pretty much just to create an "Oh snap" moment for Gandalf fanatics who bought the EE.

[The Saucepan Man]

A light-hearted aside concerning computer games does not constitute an off-topic discussion.

Were the thread to descend into a full-blown discusion of the games, then it would have veered off-topic, but that has not happened here.

Best leave the modding to the mods, Mansun.

And can everyone please remember to keep the discussion polite and courteous.

Thanks.

[The 1,000 Reader]

I've noticed that many fans (even here) seem to forget that when Gandalf told the Witch-King to go away, the Witch-King laughed in his face, called him a fool, and drew his sword. Rohan wasn't an excuse for the Witch-King to run, Rohan was an interruption in the battle. The Witch-King left to support and save his army, and Gandalf wanted to make chase so that the Witch-King wouldn't do what Gandalf was trying to prevent, said deed being protecting and leading the army. The Witch-King did not cower out. Aragorn, Legolas, Faramir, etc would all have done the same thing if enemy reinforcements arrived, causing panic within the troops.

[Essex]

excellent points on your last two posts, 1,000th reader

to repeat myself for the 1,000th time, there is no evidence, one way or the other to state whom is stronger than who in the aforesaid battle, except for circumstantial evidence.

and the end result was the same in both book and movie. the battle was finished by the horns of the rohirrim who came to save the day. the only difference was that gandalf was prone on the floor in the movie - a point I finally conceded about 6 months or so ago on this thread if I can remember correctly.

I was just glad to get somtething akin to the book in the EE edition of this movie, even though parts were different.

PS - Come the World War III, with a few of us lucky (or unlucky) ones sitting in our nuclear bunkers or under a mountain, we will still be here arguing whether Gandalf was stronger than the Witch King............

[The 1,000 Reader]

Originally Posted by Essex

excellent points on your last two posts, 1,000th reader.

Thanks. It's nice to have people compliment you to your face instead of with a rep.

Originally Posted by Essex

PS - Come the World War III, with a few of us lucky (or unlucky) ones sitting in our nuclear bunkers or under a mountain, we will still be here arguing whether Gandalf was stronger than the Witch King............

There'll be more things than that. We'll have robotic-like fans, good guy (and bad guy) zealots, weirdos that hate the movies simply because they're movies, people who don't realize how demeaning it is for Sauron to lose to a dog, people who still debate power level stuff as if this was DBZ, etc. Like any fanbase, Tolkien's works have the rabid packs as well.

[narfforc]

If anyone could kindly read post #262 of this thread they will see that right from the off I said the games were not an answer to this question. At the time I was responding in a light-hearted manner to a fellow Downer, on a thread subject that was stagnant, and I still think has blown its fuse. Once again I apologise for the 3 or 4 replies out of the 270 odd.


P.S Why did it take nearly five months to figure out that our posts were irrelevant, maybe because the thread was nearly as dead as The Witch-king.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Mansun

The above statements are irrelevant to this thread.

Mayhap is, mayhap not. My point, besides a tongue-in-cheek attempt to get someone to buy me not only the Middle Earth video game but some super cool hardware, was to show that, possibly, there was a way to glean more information about the Gandalf versus Witch-King debate. Having formerly been a scientist, or at least having played on TV, I tend to see the world in a particular way. I would like to see Gandalf (book or movie) square off against the Witch-King, and see what happens (note that I would prefer to have control over as many variables as possible in an attempt to rule out other factors affecting the contest, like roosters, Rohan and Pip). Maybe run the event 10 times to make sure of the results. However, whether the books or the movie, I cannot do this as it is a one time event - it happened, no data, that's it - and so was looking for another way.

Hence the game post.

Now, it's possible that the game programmers know nothing of Tolkien , and care nothing about the maia or man's ranking in Arda. So Gandalf could win or lose on any given play. Ted Sandyman may or may not be able to best the Balrog, and Rosie Cotton could give Galadriel fits. In that case, there would be no information. We'd be back shouting across the trenches.

If the programmers assigned some type of ranking to the characters so that the most probable outcome were that some creatures would almost always best others (again, single combat, no other help, etc), then we would like to find out why they ranked said characters higher than others. Was it whim, the programmer's personal feelings (i.e. if it were me, Gandalf would be able to whoop three Witch-Kings with one staff tied behind his back), or was some guidance/information provided by some outside source? Was this source linked to the Tolkien estate or to Peter Jackson/WETA/New Line? If so, then there is new information available that would help us in this discussion. Can we get that information? I'm not sure. Someone might be able to get hold of a programmer/spokesperson for the game and see if s/he can help. I volunteered to use my analytical skills with the game to see what I could find out. I didn't think that purchasing the game myself was ethical, as..., well, I'll get back to you on that one .

So, you see that, though I used a chirpy tone, I actually had a serious question in my original post, which I will restate: Do the games, based on the Peter Jackson movies, contain any new information regarding the Gandalf versus Witch-King debate? Right now, as we have none, any information would be something other than forum members' opinions.

And by the by, anyone who wants to get a real taste of my in-depth serious dissertation-style posting tone, well, stop by the SbS.

If you wanted to discuss these games, try all those idiots on the online format of the game.

I did, and though I read the walkthrough for the Gandalf on the Wall of Minas Tirith level (of the EA Return of the King video game), I still can't finish that level. That then puts me a level or two below idiot, and I would wholeheartedly agree - I used to be so good at games, then I got slow. Tis surely a shame.

Originally Posted by Essex

Come the World War III, with a few of us lucky (or unlucky) ones sitting in our nuclear bunkers or under a mountain, we will still be here arguing whether Gandalf was stronger than the Witch King...

I can see some supervillian in the future's sole goal, not to take over the world but to get the last word, once and for all, in the Gandalf versus Witch-King debate.

Cape or no cape?

[narfforc]

Yeh I was gonna say that Alatar.....................................

Originally Posted by alatar

Mayhap is, mayhap not. My point, besides a tongue-in-cheek attempt to get someone to buy me not only the Middle Earth video game but some super cool hardware, was to show that, possibly, there was a way to glean more information about the Gandalf versus Witch-King debate. Having formerly been a scientist, or at least having played on TV, I tend to see the world in a particular way. I would like to see Gandalf (book or movie) square off against the Witch-King, and see what happens (note that I would prefer to have control over as many variables as possible in an attempt to rule out other factors affecting the contest, like roosters, Rohan and Pip). Maybe run the event 10 times to make sure of the results. However, whether the books or the movie, I cannot do this as it is a one time event - it happened, no data, that's it - and so was looking for another way.

Hence the game post.

Now, it's possible that the game programmers know nothing of Tolkien , and care nothing about the maia or man's ranking in Arda. So Gandalf could win or lose on any given play. Ted Sandyman may or may not be able to best the Balrog, and Rosie Cotton could give Galadriel fits. In that case, there would be no information. We'd be back shouting across the trenches.

If the programmers assigned some type of ranking to the characters so that the most probable outcome were that some creatures would almost always best others (again, single combat, no other help, etc), then we would like to find out why they ranked said characters higher than others. Was it whim, the programmer's personal feelings (i.e. if it were me, Gandalf would be able to whoop three Witch-Kings with one staff tied behind his back), or was some guidance/information provided by some outside source? Was this source linked to the Tolkien estate or to Peter Jackson/WETA/New Line? If so, then there is new information available that would help us in this discussion. Can we get that information? I'm not sure. Someone might be able to get hold of a programmer/spokesperson for the game and see if s/he can help. I volunteered to use my analytical skills with the game to see what I could find out. I didn't think that purchasing the game myself was ethical, as..., well, I'll get back to you on that one .

So, you see that, though I used a chirpy tone, I actually had a serious question in my original post, which I will restate: Do the games, based on the Peter Jackson movies, contain any new information regarding the Gandalf versus Witch-King debate? Right now, as we have none, any information would be something other than forum members' opinions.

And by the by, anyone who wants to get a real taste of my in-depth serious dissertation-style posting tone, well, stop by the SbS.



I did, and though I read the walkthrough for the Gandalf on the Wall of Minas Tirith level (of the EA Return of the King video game), I still can't finish that level. That then puts me a level or two below idiot, and I would wholeheartedly agree - I used to be so good at games, then I got slow. Tis surely a shame.



I can see some supervillian in the future's sole goal, not to take over the world but to get the last word, once and for all, in the Gandalf versus Witch-King debate.

Cape or no cape?

Lets get back to the main theme of the thread, the titanic confrontation between Gandalf vs WK which promised so much but delivered so little in the ROTK, rather than turning it into a Punch & Judy thread.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Mansun

Lets get back to the main theme of the thread, the titanic confrontation between Gandalf vs WK which promised so much but delivered so little in the ROTK, rather than turning it into a Punch & Judy thread.

The movie messed up. The incident in the book is essential. Gandalf turns from the confrontation with Angmar in order to save Faramir. He does the right thing, because he is the only one who can save Faramir. It is an act of trust in Eru, that in the end a good act will be rewarded. Frodo makes the same choice with Gollum if you think about it. Gandalf rejects the belief that the end justifies the means, that it would be ok to let Faramir be killed in order to win the battle. To desert Faramir would have been immoral. Gandalf had no choice if he was to stay true to himself & what he was fighting for.