Frodo with the Ring On (Beware! spoiler!)

[Eonwe]

Seeing Frodo with the Ring on in the movie was a trip. I really didn't expect the whirling tornado vision that he got...

Just wondering: What do you think PJ will do to handle the points in TT and RoTK where Frodo or Sam has the Ring on and needs to see where he is going? Like when Sam has it on and can hear the Orcs talking and can see the light in the tower of Cirith Ungol? Or will these scenes be passed by...? I guess I thought Frodo sitting on Amon Hen would be in the movie, but...

[PRH]

I guess I thought Frodo sitting on Amon Hen would be in the movie, but...

huh? it was in the movie!

[Harad]

Youre right PRH. What wasnt in the movie was Gandalf striving with Sauron to get Frodo to take off the Ring. (And Frodo putting on the Ring again after taking it off.) In the movie, Frodo shows more bravery than in the book by contending with Sauron his own self.

[SupremeWizard]

Originally posted by Eonwe
Seeing Frodo with the Ring on in the movie was a trip. I really didn't expect the whirling tornado vision that he got...

Just wondering: What do you think PJ will do to handle the points in TT and RoTK where Frodo or Sam has the Ring on and needs to see where he is going? Like when Sam has it on and can hear the Orcs talking and can see the light in the tower of Cirith Ungol? Or will these scenes be passed by...? I guess I thought Frodo sitting on Amon Hen would be in the movie, but...

I think that the only problem isnt that Frodo or Sam wont be able to see where they are going, but didnt you notice that the Eye of Sauron and his servants (the ringwraiths) seemed to be immediately aware of the ring when Frodo put it on for a few seconds? In the TTT and RotK Sam clearly has the ring on for about 10 minutes or more. Wouldn't Sauron have perceived the location of the ring by then?

[Harad]

That's a problem with the book, tho, not the movie. There are all sorts of weasel ways out of it (e.g. Sauron was distracted by launching the Witch King Army), but the bottom line is that the book did not keep the properties of the Ring consistent thruout.

[SupremeWizard]

Wow! Criticizing Tolkien??:eek: I didnt know you were allowed to do that on this forum.:rolleyes:

[PRH]

the book did not keep the properties of the Ring consistent thruout

Harad, please elaborate on this. I know the properties of the Ring were not always the same, but I thought it was consistent (or at least the changes were adequately accounted for).

BTW - Frodo could absolutely see where he was going in the movie's treatment of the Ring-vision, people were just blurry (except the Wraiths). Don't forget, Frodo ran away from Boromir and climbed the seeing seat in the movie all while wearing the Ring.

Harad - what also wasn't in the movie was all the great visions Frodo had before the Barad-Dur caught his eye. I missed that although I can basically understand omitting it.

[Eonwe]

See (bloated, but interesting) thread Attraction/Addiction to the Ring:

http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1671

I think I agree with Harad that the book is inconsistent with the Ring's effect

I gotta see the movie again, I forgot about Frodo on Amon Hen fighting Sauron himself :)

But still what about the barely able to see through tornado in the land of Oz vision when Frodo puts on the Ring? How will Sam be handled at Cirith Ungol I wonder?

[Harad]

Must remember...

Well there was wearing the Ring on Amon Hen and almost getting caught and wearing the ring 100 yards from Amon Hen, no sweat.

There was Gandalf holding the Ring in the "Shadow of the Past" and never touching it again (nor Galadriel nor Elrond).

There is Sam wearing the Ring in Minas Morgul, no sweat.

There's the whole attraction of the Ring to the Nazgul. In the Shire one Nazgul sniffs right next to the Ring, then gallops off in the wrong direction. Several Nazgul attack Crickhollow several days after the Ring is gone.

The Watcher in the Water and the Orc Chieftan going after the RingBearer in Mordor, yet other evil creatures (including the Nazgul) missing it.

Each one of these and others have been argued about, but the preponderance of nit-picking inconsistencies remain.

[PRH]

Eonwe:
But still what about the barely able to see through tornado in the land of Oz vision when Frodo puts on the Ring?

I addressed this:
Frodo could absolutely see where he was going in the movie's treatment of the Ring-vision, people were just blurry (except the Wraiths). Don't forget, Frodo ran away from Boromir and climbed the seeing seat in the movie all while wearing the Ring.

There really is not a problem seeing with the Ring on.

Harad, I'm inclined to argue almost every one of your points but I'm sure I would have the same arguments as have been repeatedly presented before.

[Tar-Palantir]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only time Sauron's aware that Frodo has the Ring on is on Amon Hen (besides when Frodo's at Mount Doom). Maybe it's Amon Hen itself that allows Sauron to be aware of it.

[PRH]

I think your absolutely right. Amon-Hen, the seeing seat exposes Frodo directly to Barad-Dur.

PLUS, I would think this is the first time Frodo might actually trying to use the power of the Ring a little bit, rather than just wearing it. This is his very next wearing of it after his conversation with Galadriel about how it works (read the last page of "The Mirror of Galadriel").

It's one or both of these factors that allowed Sauron to be aware someone was wearing the Ring when Frodo was upon Amon-Hen.

[Harad]

That is certainly a "one-of-a-kind" explanation that has been tried before. It explains why Sam wearing the Ring at Minas Morgul or Frodo wearing the Ring 100 yards from Amon Hen is not detected.

It doesnt explain why Sauron doesnt know that Frodo is on Amon Hen if its "one-of-a-kind" nor how Sauron knew enuf to send Orcs to Parth Galen and attack the Fellowship but didnt know enuf to realize that Frodo was on Amon Hen.

[PRH]

Parth Galen was orc-partol country. They got a little lucky.

Wearing the Ring at Amon-Hen would probably have the same feeling to Sauron as someone wearing it at Orthanc, Minas Tirith or possibly a few other high places. Or maybe it just amplified the vibes coming off Frodo, making it seem as though someone real powerful was wearing the Ring (who could've been anywhere). Or maybe Sauron DID know Frodo was at Amon-Hen and the escape Frodo made was only to escape the dominion of Sauron's will rather than just being physically found by him (gotta read that part over).

There are many explanations...

[Harad]

All lame.

The worst is the idea that there were several possible places like Amon Hen. At the same time Saruman had sent Ugluk and Sauron had sent Grishnakh to waylay the Fellowship at Parth Galen. If Sauron could add 2+2 he knows that Amon Hen is the only possibility. Also he knows from Grishnakh that halflings were taken at Parth Galen. What does he do about it? Sends a few Snaga along with Grishnakh to contend with Ugluk the Magnificent. Somewhat of a stretch.

[Eonwe]

ok, so the answer to my question is: it isn't too bad to walk around with the Ring on:rolleyes:

[Grond]

Originally posted by Harad
Youre right PRH. What wasnt in the movie was Gandalf striving with Sauron to get Frodo to take off the Ring. (And Frodo putting on the Ring again after taking it off.) In the movie, Frodo shows more bravery than in the book by contending with Sauron his own self. I would have sworn I heard Gandalf's voice telling Frodo to take it off... but I could be mixing scene's up.

[Grond]

And Harad, as has (lamely in your opinion) been argued in the past, the Ring wasn't "known" to Sauron except when it was being used. It was used only twice in the book, once on Amon Hen and once when Frodo claimed it in the Barad-dur. Sauron knew where it was immediately when Frodo put it on in Mordor, he was but 20 or so miles away. When it was put on at Amon Hen, it took Sauron a little while longer to get his locator beam fixed on Frodo's locations, thanks to Gandalf striving with Sauron and thanks to Gandalf's mental warning to Frodo to take it off.

Lame in your view...logical in mine. PRH... I'm with you man.

[Harad]

oops..How about Sam at Minas Morgul "using" the Ring.

Also Sauron "knew" where Frodo was since his good bud Grishnakh had been sent to Parth Galen. How lame that Sauron missed Frodo at Amon Hen?

[Grond]

Alas Harad, once again we get into semantics. I meant using not wearing. Frodo was using the Ring's power on Amon Hen to look out upon the land and again at Mount Doom when he claimed it for his own. Sam never attempted to "use" the power of the Ring and hence, never came under Sauron's scrutiny.

Lame but that's my story and I'm stickin' to it.:)

[PRH]

What's so special about Grishnakh? He's an orc captain among many. Why was the party at Parth Galen the only orc party on patrol and if they were why does Frodo wearing the Ring on Amon Hen have anything at all to do with the orcs being there? Parth Galen is a spot along the river just above the Falls of Rauros - a good patrol spot to hang out at.

Using the Ring and wearing it are not equivalent. Frodo wore the Ring in Bombadil's house and The Pony and Amon Sul. Frodo used the Ring on Amon Hen (wore it again as he went to the boat) and then used it again at Sammath Naur. Sam wore the Ring once but really wasn't using it.


Eonwe:
ok, so the answer to my question is: it isn't too bad to walk around with the Ring on

If you're speaking in terms of seeing where the wearer is going, I think that's correct, in the movie context and the book.

[PRH]

you beat me to it Grond...

[Harad]

Why not? Make every instance a special case, and you can explain everything. Did Sam get invisible...sure but he wasnt "using" the Ring, just "wearing" it. Did Frodo sit on Amon Hen and look out-Aha! thats "using" the Ring not "wearing" it. The other times Frodo "wore" the Ring he didnt look out...kept his eyes closed, I suppose. What about Gollum did he "use" the Ring to steal things and murder? Nope just "wore" it. And what about Sauron? Maybe somedays he just "wore" the Ring to take it easy. Then other days when he was feeling peckish, he "used" it.

[Grond]

Harad, we've been through this argument before and we just agreed it was semantics and your view and my view of the way the Ring was used is different. I think put it on and you've got a Ring that makes you invisible. Attempt to use it (as described by Gandalf) and bring down the wraith (and fear) of Sauron. You think putting it on should be enough to light up the blue light special at K-Mart. Your opinion isn't unsound, it's just different than mine. And before you start, I'm sure your argument is based in sounder logic than mine. My argument is based in my imagination... so there. :)

P. S. To PRH
It appears Grishnakh is very special because he has a few things going for him.
1) He apparently is an Orc of some rank in Mordor because he has apparent direct access to the Wraith.
2) More importantly, he appears to know about the Ring. Remember, he is the Orc that carries Merry and Pippin away from the Orc encampment.

[Harad]

Frodo "using" the Ring on Amon Hen:

Soon he came out alone on the summit of Amon Hen, and halted, gasping for breath. He saw as through a mist a wide flat circle, paved with mighty flags, and surrounded with a crumbling battlement; and in the middle, set upon four carven pillars, was a high seat, reached by a stair of many steps. Up he went and sat upon the ancient chair, feeling like a lost child that had clambered upon the throne of mountain-kings. At first he could see little. He seemed to be in a world of mist in which there were only shadows: the Ring was upon him. Then here and there the mist gave way and he saw many visions: small and clear as if they were under his eyes upon a table, and yet remote. There was no sound, only bright living images. The world seemed to have shrunk and fallen silent. He was sitting upon the Seat of Seeing, on Amon Hen, the Hill of the Eye of the Men of Númenor. Eastward he looked into wide uncharted lands, nameless plains, and forests unexplored. Northward he looked, and the Great River lay like a ribbon beneath him, and the Misty Mountains stood small and hard as broken teeth. Westward he looked and saw the broad pastures of Rohan; and Orthanc, the pinnacle of Isengard, like a black spike. Southward he looked, and below his very feet the Great River curled like a toppling wave and plunged over the falls of Rauros into a foaming pit; a glimmering rainbow played upon the fume. And Ethir Anduin he saw, the mighty delta of the River, and myriads of sea-birds whirling like a white dust in the sun, and beneath them a green and silver sea, rippling in endless lines. But everywhere he looked he saw the signs of war. The Misty Mountains were crawling like anthills: orcs were issuing out of a thousand holes. Under the boughs of Mirkwood there was deadly strife of Elves and Men and fell beasts. The land of the Beornings was aflame; a cloud was over Moria; smoke rose on the borders of Lórien. Horsemen were galloping on the grass of Rohan; wolves poured from Isengard. From the havens of Harad ships of war put out to sea; and out of the East Men were moving endlessly: swordsmen, spearmen, bowmen upon horses, chariots of chieftains and laden wains. All the power of the Dark Lord was in motion. Then turning south again he beheld Minas Tirith. Far away it seemed. and beautiful: white-walled, many-towered, proud and fair upon its mountain-seat; its battlements glittered with steel, and its turrets were bright with many banners. Hope leaped in his heart. But against Minas Tirith was set another fortress, greater and more strong. Thither, eastward, unwilling his eye was drawn. It passed the ruined bridges of Osgiliath, the grinning gates of Minas Morgul. and the haunted Mountains, and it looked upon Gorgoroth, the valley of terror in the Land of Mordor. Darkness lay there under the Sun. Fire glowed amid the smoke. Mount Doom was burning, and a great reek rising. Then at last his gaze was held: wall upon wall, battlement upon battlement, black, immeasurably strong, mountain of iron, gate of steel, tower of adamant, he saw it: Barad-dur, Fortress of Sauron. All hope left him. And suddenly he felt the Eye. There was an eye in the Dark Tower that did not sleep. He knew that it had become aware of his gaze. A fierce eager will was there. It leaped towards him; almost like a finger he felt it, searching for him. Very soon it would nail him down, know just exactly where he was. Amon Lhaw it touched. It glanced upon Tol Brandir he threw himself from the seat, crouching, covering his head with his grey hood. He heard himself crying out: Never, never! Or was it: Verily I come, I come to you? He could not tell. Then as a flash from some other point of power there came to his mind another thought: Take it off! Take it off! Fool, take it off! Take off the Ring!

Clearly Frodo is trying to take over all of Middle Earth, "using" the Power of the Ring. Someone like me, a bit more naive than others, might think that Frodo sat down while "wearing" the Ring and looked about. Or that getting invisible while "wearing" the Ring doesnt count but looking around while "using" the Ring does.

[Grond]

Harad, I won't argue with you over it. I agree that your logic makes greater sense. Mine is flawed but mine. I also feel that my logic is probably closer to the logic of the author. My logic is the only explanation that makes sense with the story. If you want the story to make sense, move to my side. If you want to shoot holes in the logic of the story, it's no skin off my back. Your bullets can't shake my love of the works.

[Harad]

I dont derive any less enjoyment of the story, even with my eyes open.

[Thorin]

Harad, your quote here:

" In the movie, Frodo shows more bravery than in the book by contending with Sauron his own self. "
------------------------------------------------------------------------
seems to me to be some sort of defense for Frodo's character as portrayed in Jackson's movie...To me, it only shows (for at least the third time) that Jackson has really downplayed the power of the ring that Tolkien was trying to establish...The movie makes the ring like it is something that can be worn, shared and given with no problems whatsoever....The book shows the struggle and selfishness the ring causes much more solidly...Even in the fact of being discovered by the eye on Amon Hen, Frodo was reluctant to take it off...That shows power...Jackson has not shown that power over the user in my opinion...Except maybe for Bilbo but he fudged the one scene in Rivendell. He has not really shown the strength of Frodo's character (took it away at the Fords) so what comes out in the movie is not Frodo's great strength, but the lack of power of the ring.

[PRH]

Grond:
It appears Grishnakh is very special because he has a few things going for him.
1) He apparently is an Orc of some rank in Mordor because he has apparent direct access to the Wraith.
2) More importantly, he appears to know about the Ring. Remember, he is the Orc that carries Merry and Pippin away from the Orc encampment.

He could still be, as I said, and orc captain among many - many of whom might have direct access to a Nazgul. Many of whom would know that one of the halfling carried something important (not necessarily that it was the Ring).

All I'm just saying that because Grishnakh was at Parth Galen, it doesn't mean Sauron had put all his eggs in the Amon Hen basket (in terms of searching for the Fellowship).


Harad,

Surely the is a difference between simply wearing the Ring and actually using it -- tapping into it's powers on some level other than passive invisibility. I think that Frodo's conversation with Galadriel at the mirror about how Frodo hasn't even tried to really use the Ring up to that point (last page of 'The Mirror of Galadriel')is some indicator that he was doing something differently upon Amon Hen. Amon Hen was clearly his most intense experience with the Ring to date.

[Harad]

so what comes out in the movie is not Frodo's great strength, but the lack of power of the ring.

PRH,
Its not surprising, I'm sure, but I completely disagree with this. From the very beginning of the movie, Sauron wielding the Ring, and ESPECIALLY, Isildur's inability to destroy the Ring, the power of the Ring over mortals is shown.

Bilbo, as in the book, does not show ill effects from the Ring at first.

But,

1. The EXTREME difficulty of Bilbo giving up the Ring is shown in excruciating detail in the movie.

2. Gandalf's inability to pick up the Ring and refusal to even touch the Ring (emphasized MORE than the book)

3. The pull on Frodo to put on the Ring is shown under the hedge in the Nazgul scene.

4. The inability of Frodo to avoid putting on the Ring at Weathertop.

5. The "Bilbo the Monster" switch of perspective scenes at Rivendell (that unfortunately, most people dont understand because it is a Rashomon-like switch of persepective)

6. Boromirs downfall because of the Ring, anticipated by the scene on Caradhras (not in the Book).

7. And finally Frodos personal struggle on Amon Hen.


I can not help if you refuse to see these 7 (8 if you count Isildur) incidents in the movie as portraying the power of the Ring. I can only conclude that you choose to intrepret it as a failing of the movie regardless of the evidence.

And on another point:
And where on Amon Hen is Frodo doing anything except "looking" while wearing the Ring? Was Gollum tapping into its powers while strangling Orcs? Just go ahead and define "invisibilty" as passive and "looking" as active. I can't stop you.

[Grond]

Harad, you point out an inconsistency that to you, may compromise the integrity of the work. Those of us who defend our interpretation, do so, to make the work logical for the reader. No work is perfect and we must attempt to "find the mind of the author" to make these things work out logically for us.

I am now going to nominate you to the Nit-picking weenie guild because of your relentless unwillingness to accept that which I am saying. "One must see these inconsistencies in the light of casual use versus intentional use to keep true to the logic of the book." Continue to point outr the inconsistency if you must, but we will continue to defend it in this way for our own self interpretation of the work.

[Harad]

you point out an inconsistency that to you, may compromise the integrity of the work

Lets try this one more time: the inconsistencies do not make me disklike LOTR. I continue to like it a great deal. I am not so starry-eyed about it, however, that I feel the need to ignore inconsistencies. That attribute applies to others.

[Grond]

Harad, you bring me right back to the point I was trying to make and apparently failed to accomplish. Those of us who love the works deeply, will "rationalize" the inconsistencies so that they appear in the most favorable light. I was agreeing with you on the one hand while defending a "loyalist" position on the other. Taking that stance allows us to "have our cake and eat it too."

You don't have to agree with that, but you should at least be able to understand it.

[Thorin]

Originally posted by Grond
Harad
I am now going to nominate you to the Nit-picking weenie guild because of your relentless unwillingness to accept that which I am saying.

Hey! Wait a minute! What if we don't want him in the NPW guild??? :D

Harad, I believe your comments should be directed toward me not PRH. (Though I don't mind him taking my flack!)

I will admit that PJ has given some instances of showing the rings power, but he definitely is inconsistent and contradictory most times...I did mention that Bilbo was an example of when the ring's power was shown, but after that it doesn't give the ring it's due like the book does.

[Harad]

Sorry PRH. I probably disagree with you on something but not that point. It didnt sound like you, so I dont know what I was thinking.

As far as membership in NPW, the honor is such that I will stay out of the argument entirely.

PJ is more consistent with treatment of the Ring than JRRT--this may be bad or good--somebody here keeps arguing that the more inconsistency and illogic, the better.

Two examples:

1. Gandalf never touches the Ring in the Movie, he touched it ONCE in the book.

2. Frodo puts the ring on again right after barely escaping from Sauron on Amon Hen in the book but not the movie.

The 8 instances in the movie where the power of the Ring is demonstrated are not enuf?

[Grond]

I'm never one to argue in the face of fact and the facts to me show that the power of the Ring was adequately portrayed in the movie. As a matter of fact, I think it was well handled given that a movie can't provide the same narrative background as the book and must find short-cuts to make the point. Now, Arwen is another story.;)

Your points concerning Gandalf touching the Ring and Frodo using it on Amon Hen and then again at the River have been discussed at length in other threads and we don't need to start the same debate here.:)

[PRH]

Harad,
Sorry PRH. I probably disagree with you on something but not that point. It didnt sound like you, so I dont know what I was thinking.

I had it coming.

[Eonwe]

Originally posted by PRH
Eonwe:


If you're speaking in terms of seeing where the wearer is going, I think that's correct, in the movie context and the book.

Ok so my next question is (I think my thread has been hijacked anyway) do you think it is harder for Frodo to see what he is doing with the Ring on at Amon Hen in the book or in the movie?

[Beleg Strongbow]

Originally posted by Eonwe
Seeing Frodo with the Ring on in the movie was a trip. I really didn't expect the whirling tornado vision that he got...

Just wondering: What do you think PJ will do to handle the points in TT and RoTK where Frodo or Sam has the Ring on and needs to see where he is going? Like when Sam has it on and can hear the Orcs talking and can see the light in the tower of Cirith Ungol? Or will these scenes be passed by...? I guess I thought Frodo sitting on Amon Hen would be in the movie, but...



Yeah i was a bit suprised by it 2. But i don't think it was 2 bad. Although i liked it in the way it was in the book. It is a bit ridiculous that Sauron could sense Frodo in bree when he has the ring on.

[Eonwe]

Harad

I am in agreement with you re: inconsistency in Ring handling/using/treatment and when Sauron notices. I just thought of something after reading the Amon Hen portion of the book:

Remember that the two times Sauron knows someone has the Ring on are at Amon Hen and at Sammath Naur. And I submit to you, that in both those cases Frodo is not using the Ring, the Ring is using Frodo!

Evidence: At Amon Hen, Frodo is drawn irresistably towards Barad-Dur (BY WHAT!). And at Sammath Naur, the Ring has taken over, Frodo says he decided not to complete the quest.

hmmm hooom

[Grond]

Originally posted by Eonwe
...Evidence: At Amon Hen, Frodo is drawn irresistably towards Barad-Dur (BY WHAT!). And at Sammath Naur, the Ring has taken over, Frodo says he decided not to complete the quest.

hmmm hooom From, The Fellowship of the Ring, The Breaking of the Fellowship,
"...Thither, eastward, unwilling his eye was drawn. It passed the ruined bridges of Osgiliath, the grinning gates of Minas Morgul, and the haunted Mountains, and it looked upon Gorgoroth, the valley of terror in the Land of Mordor. Darkness lay there under the Sun. Fire glowed amid the smoke. Mount Doom was burning, and a great reek rising. Then at last his gaze was held; wall upon wall, battlement upon battlement, black, immeasuably strong, mountain of iron, gate of steel, tower of adamant, he saw it: Barad-dur, Fortress of Sauron. All hope left him." There you go Eonwe, I had forgotten all about that portion of the passage. I agree with your assessment, he didn't willingly look, he was inexplicably drawn to gaze at the Barad-dur.

[Harad]

Hail Eonwe! Super point. So good, lets see if you get any argument...tick...tick...tick...

[ReadWryt]

PJ is more consistent with treatment of the Ring than JRRT--this may be bad or good--somebody here keeps arguing that the more inconsistency and illogic, the better.

Wait, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Frodo have that damned thing out of his pocket and is fidgetting with it like every 12 minutes of the movie? I don't seem to remember Tolkien having Frodo standing about alone, hand outstretched with the ring sitting in his open palm EVER in ANY of the books, not to mention when he KNEW there were Orcs about...I would say that the glaring inconsistency of having Frodo screwing around with the ring all the time is enough to counter any flaws in the logic of the books right from the start..."Gee, look...it's the single most dangerous thing in all of Middle-earth, I think I'll use if as a 'worry stone' and keep it in my hand all the time because that seemed to work so well for Gollum!".

[Harad]

I would say that the glaring inconsistency of having Frodo screwing around with the ring all the time is enough to counter any flaws in the logic of the books right from the start

"inconsistency" ???

Somebody else attacking the movie says the Ring is portrayed as not having much power. Here somebody says that Frodo being obsessed with the Ring (and how many times does he take it out?) is "inconsistent."

I can remember:

1. beneath the hedge in the shire--as in the book
2. at bree--as in the book
3. at weathertop--as in the book
4. at rivendell--as in the book
5. on caradhras--it falls out--another subject of scorn for movie attackers but a very effective scene for its effect on Boromir and the interaction with Aragorn
6. with Galadriel? --as in the book?
7. at Amon Hen--as in the book and more sensible than the book since he doesnt blithely put the Ring back on again after barely escaping from Sauron.
8. before crossing the Anduin--in the book he is WEARING the Ring, so he can hardly take it out. In the movie we get to SEE this dramatic moment--PJ's staging is superior IMO.

[ReadWryt]

Ehem...well, to be fair I DID say "someone correct me if I'm wrong"...

In truth the only inconsistency in the movie's portrayal of the Ring and it's powers isn't directly to do with the Ring so far as I can tell. I'm still scratching my head over why, after leaving it behind to go to Numenor and be a hostage, an act which does not apparently diminish let alone KILL him, does having the Ring cut from his hand cause Sauron to suddenly "die"? I mean, if all they had to do was cut his fingers off to "kill" him it's a damned good thing Sauron never went out to join the Yakuza! Boromir took three heavy arrows and still didn't die for a while but if you lop off a few fingers from the hand of Sauron he goes to pieces..LITERALY! Blinding white flash and all...I thought that it was handled much better in the book, where he was actually allready DEAD when they cleaved one finger off his hand, it held symmetry with the Frodo/Gollum thing later because both ring bearers lost a finger...

Unless there is some logical explaination for why having a couple digits sliced off could kill an "Angelic Being"..

Other then that, Frodo never takes the Ring out under the hedge, let alone taking out of his pocket, almost putting it on and then after running off opening his hand to expose it in view of Sam, Pippin and Merry. There is no clear mention of him taking the Ring out in the Prancing Pony, only that he may have fiddled with it in his pocket and slipped it on when he lost his ballance, but definately nothing about playing around with it under the table in a crowded pub...Rivendel doesn't count for he is told to display it, and there is no mention of him showing it to Sam as Gandalf and Elrond looked on. In the Book he never shows the ring to Galadriel, only offers it to her in word...not deed. At least Wearing the ring at the River would hide him from the Orcs, should he have felt that Aragorn was correct in saying that they were near...and in the movie he KNOWS they are all about. But in the book he never pulled it out to offer to Aragorn...he handles the ring irresponsably in the movie so far as I can tell.

[Harad]

So Frodo didnt "handle the ring irresponsibly in Bree" in the book? Which book was that?

He didnt feel pressure to put the ring on under the hedge in the book? Well goodness, the movie SHOWS this? I suppose it IS a movie, so maybe we should see things that are only written about in the book.

No mention is made of Weathertop, and Rivendell doesnt count.

Finally, the scene at Parth Galen is reconfigured to contrast the behavior of Boromir and Aragorn more closely. My memory is that Frodo does not "offer" the Ring to Aragorn. Instead, Aragorn demonstrates that he can overcome the attraction/addiction to the Ring that Boromir can not. The whole idea in the book that Frodo puts on the Ring again after barely escaping Sauron on Amon Hen, is so inconsistent, that I appreciate any alternative take on it, such as PJ's offering.

I will have to reread the book to verify the contention that Sauron was defeated BEFORE the Ring was taken. Sounds odd to me.

[ReadWryt]

Oh wait, I missrememberd the order of things. It was indeed after the one finger was removed from Sauron that he "forsook" his body. I guess I had mentally interpreted "thrown down" to mean killed because I couldn't imagine him letting some mortal cut off his finger. I went back and read it last night again, having presumed I remembered it accurately. My bad...

I'm just saying that there are more intelegent and creative ways to show that Frodo is fondling the ring in his pocket then to just say "Screw it" and having him constantly pulling it out and playing with it. All Jackson had to do was show Frodo putting it on a chain like a modern pocket watch and slipping it into his pocket. I don't think it's a dangerous assumption that an audience seeing Frodo with his fingers in a pocket that has a chain going into it would get the fact he was playing with the Ring.

Why he shows it to Sam in Rivendel is beyond me!

[Grond]

Originally posted by Harad
I will have to reread the book to verify the contention that Sauron was defeated BEFORE the Ring was taken. Sounds odd to me. From the Silmarillion, Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age,

"...But at last the siege was so strait that Sauron himself came forth; and he wrestled with Gil-galad and Elendil, and they were both slain, and the sword of Elendil broke under him as he fell. But Sauron also was thrown down, and with the hilt-shard of Narsil Isildur cut the Ruling Ring from the hand of Sauron and took it for his own. Then Sauron was for a time vanquished, and he forsook his body, and his spirit fled far away and hid in waste places; and he took no visible shape again for many long years."

I take this to mean that Gil-galad and Elendil defeated Sauron and threw him down though they died in the effort. Isildur then took the hilt shard of Narsil and cut Sauron's finger off while he was down. He was thus defeated by Gil-galad and Elendil and ultimately vanquished by Isildur. Of course, that's just my interpretation. One may take what they will from the quote. :)

[Harad]

My interpretation is that Gil-galad and Elendil were "slain" and Sauron was "also thrown down." Does this mean slain? Absolutely not, because later after another act--cutting off the Ring by Isildur--he is "for a time vanquished." If my reasoning abilities have not completely left me, then Sauron would not have been "for a time vanquished" without the subsequent act of Isildur. Instead he would have been "thrown down." Even someone as meek and mild as my own self has gotten up when I am thrown down. I presume Sauron could as well.

As far as the complaint about us SEEING the Ring in the MOVIE...lets consider the medium of the movie--visual. Seeing the RING in the Lord of the RINGs: Fellowship of the RING, is not, to me, something to carp about.

[Grond]

Originally posted by Harad
My interpretation is that Gil-galad and Elendil were "slain" and Sauron was "also thrown down." Does this mean slain? Absolutely not, because later after another act--cutting off the Ring by Isildur--he is "for a time vanquished." If my reasoning abilities have not completely left me, then Sauron would not have been "for a time vanquished" without the subsequent act of Isildur. Instead he would have been "thrown down." Even someone as meek and mild as my own self has gotten up when I am thrown down. I presume Sauron could as well.

As far as the complaint about us SEEING the Ring in the MOVIE...lets consider the medium of the movie--visual. Seeing the RING in the Lord of the RINGs: Fellowship of the RING, is not, to me, something to carp about. I guess it's just really definition. The definition of slay according to Webster's is 1 : to kill violently, wantonly, or in great numbers; broadly : to strike down :. I actually was attempting to help you prove your point to ReadWryt. But aside from that, I never said that Elendil or Gil-galad slew Sauron. I meant that they incapacitated him long enough for Isildur to "vanquish" him. My point being that the removal of the Ring from Sauron's hand by cutting it off is what defeated him. That's an agreement with you Harad. What bothers me is that once again, we are rendering an argument on words that have multiple meanings and are arguing over the meanings of the words instead of the intent of the text.

BTW, I don't have a problem with the audience seeing the Ring now and again, it gives them a reference point and again reminds them of the purpose of the Movie all over again. (Movie audiences have a notoriously short attention span.)

[PRH]

At least Isildur believes he was the one who ultimately killed Sauron (or want's others to believe it):

from the Silmarillion (going off memory):
"This [the Ring] I will take as weregild for my father and brother.....for was it not I who dealt the enemy his death blow?"

This statement could certainly be along the lines of "it was a birthday present" but it may be the only clear evidence we have.

[Harad]

I agree with the last two posts, without qualification.

[PRH]

Even considering my last post, while he was vague I certainly don't think Tolkien ever meant to say that simply cutting Sauron's finger off/cutting the Ring from his finger killed his body and diminished his spirit for so many years. Especially considering (as RW brought up) that Sauron willingly forsook his Ring for years to become a hostage in Numenor.

Isildur must have only finished Sauron off. This was poorly portrayed in the movie.

[Harad]

OK, now I cant agree anymore:

...slopes of Orodruin where Gil-galad dies, and Elendil fell, and Narsil broke beneath him; but Sauron himself was overthrown, and Isildur cut the Ring from his hand with the hilt shard of his father's sword, and took it for his own.

So one can interpret "and Isildur" as "and THEN Isildur" or "as Isildur..." I believe the movie version is consistent with the events as they really happened, and dramatically speaking has it all over a hypothetical version in which Isildur loots Sauron's seeming corpse.

What would have happened to the "overthrown" Sauron if Isildur did not take the Ring?

[Eonwe]

good quesion Harad. It is not at all clear what state he is in... What you quote gives somewhat more info also:

Elrond gives a slightly different bent (that where your quote is from?) in FoTR the Council of Elrond:

"I was the herald of Gil-galad and marched with his host. I was at the Battle of Dagorlad before the Black Gate of Mordor, where we had the mastery: for the Spear of Gil-galad and the Sword of Elendil, Aiglos and Narsil, none could withstand. I beheld the last combat on the slopes of Orodruin, where Gil-galad died, and Elendil fell, and Narsil broke beneath him; but Sauron himself was overthrown, and Isildur cut the Ring from his hand with the hilt-shard of his father's sword, and took it for his own."

and then

"But Isildur would not listen to our counsel. 'This I will have as weregild for my father, and my brother', he said..."

"overthrown" sounds a bit more than just fallen, and of course since he is a Maia the point of death is not well known. I think this is strange since in FoTR JRRT does not have Elrond say specifically that cutting off the Ring by Isildur "killed" Sauron, and he only gives the first part of the quote from Isildur about a weregild (nothing about the "death blow".)

Perhaps this is a point that developed in JRRT after the publishing of LoTR; I wonder what date the Rings of Power section of the Sil was completed. But certainly in none of the versions is Sauron walking around like Robby the Robot and somebody cuts off his fingers, and then he turns into charcoal. :) In fact 9 fingers is mentioned by Gollum as "that is enough" for Sauron, and this parallels Frodo with 9 fingers.

I think this thread is off the tracks and needs to be moved to the book section.

[Harad]

It gets off the track because people criticize the movie for things which are IMO in the book. Then the discussion focuses on the book. What I really want to talk about is why wearing the Ring makes you gay.

[Grond]

Harad, I'm just going to nit-pick with you a litte. First the book never portrays the Battle at the foot of the Barad-dur as having Isildur cleave a finger off of Sauron with a wild swipe of the sword hilt of Narsil. I understand why it was done from a cinematic standpoint. All the people being involved and then having to explain why Isildur cut the Ring off the weakened Sauron and all. But for you to say "That is in the book" is just plain stretching the truth to the outer limits. :)

these changes are acceptable to most as necessary for plot simplification and audience understanding but they don't really reflect the events as they took place in the book. There are many things that are changed. This is one of them. Argue for the changes as being necessary for the movie, but please don't argue that the changes aren't really changes and that we are all too simple minded to realize what is in the texts. We know.

[PRH]

In the book, Sauron with the One Ring still didn't have dominion over Middle Earth. He would have gained it if the Last Alliance had not acted when it did. Sauron's forces had diminished while he was in Numenor while Gil-Galad's had increased, giving the Elves a little advantage. Also, look at how Sauron submitted to Ar-Pharazon. He just wasn't that all-powerful even with the Ring. He was still working at it.

As the 3rd age drew to a close, Numenor was of course long gone and the might of the Elves had gone overseas leaving only somewhat of what they had been in the days of Gil-Galad. Sauron's forces were probably almost (or more) than what they had been during the Last Alliance. Add the Ring to that and factor in the lack of enemies an age later and his ability to achieve dominance over Middle Earth was certain.

This contrast is a lot of detail to show in a movie so what they end up saying is that the Ring is all Sauron needs to control Middle Earth -- 2nd age or 3rd, legions of Elves and Numenoreans in their glory or naught. The only reason Sauron wasn't lord of Middle Earth all along was because just when all seemed lost at the Last Alliance - Isildur striked a very lucky blow in desperation.

This is an outright change to the book, not just a slight misinterpretation. It's probably an acceptable change because explaining it the correct book way would just be far too complicated and it would diminish the importance of the Ring.

[Harad]

The only reason Sauron wasn't lord of Middle Earth all along was because just when all seemed lost at the Last Alliance - Isildur striked a very lucky blow in desperation. This is an outright change to the book, not just a slight misinterpretation.

Its amazing to me what you accuse the movie of now. The 2nd Age was not even a consideration in the movie except for the battle of the Last Alliance. Where does the movie mention or imply that Sauron "wasnt lord of Middle Earth all along..." Where are the Glory Years of Numenor referred to? Why not complain that the First Age is woefully explained as well?

LOTR is based upon the poem "Three Rings for Elven Kings..." The concept of the One Ring is the fundamental concept of the book and, rightfully, the movie. The fact that Sauron lost the One Ring at the end of the Second Age WAS the reason he was defeated. Otherwise he would have won, since he was not killed, his enemies were killed, and he would have retained the One Ring. If the "outright change" is based upon the quotes mentioned above then "outright" means the difference between Isildur robbing the comatose body of Sauron, rather than taking the Ring from a Sauron that is still fighting. You are welcome to call that an "outright change" or to "stretching the truth." The fact is you can not accept anything else but your rigid intrepretations, based upon your personal and non-binding reading of a few sentences of text.

[Eonwe]

Originally posted by Harad


Otherwise he would have won, since he was not killed, his enemies were killed, and he would have retained the One Ring.

Weeeelll the first person there (Elrond and Isildur were the only ones to stand with Gil-galad and Elendil) cut the Ring off with "the hilt-shards of Narsil". So it couldn't have been too hard for someone to do it?

my interpretation isn't rigid. Its just inflexible :)

BTW whats the difference between Sauron without the Ring in Numenor and Sauron without the Ring on the slopes of Orodruin?

Answer: a bag of matchlight charcoal

[Harad]

the first person there (Elrond and Isildur were the only ones to stand with Gil-galad and Elendil) cut the Ring off with "the hilt-shards of Narsil". So it couldn't have been too hard for someone to do it?

Certainly in the book Cirdan was there too. If it was so easy to do then why didnt Elrond or Cirdan do it. Save us all a lot of trouble.

[ReadWryt]

There is a point where, in my opinion, one has to ballance the irresponsable toying with the Ring in public for the sake of reminding the audience that "Hey, this is the thing the movie is about" and finding creative ways to let the audience know that Frodo is being tempted...that the ring is having an effect on him.

I'm not part of the group who apparently feel that since film is a visual medium one needs to literally show the audience everything in an overt manner. I feel that this is an insult to the intelect of the audience and laziness on the part of the film maker. To imply that Galadriel or Aragorn HAD to see the ring to be tempted by it when it is "offered" to them is simply, as I see it, rationalization for the actions as they were portrayed in the movie.

There are so many aspects of the movie that demonstrate tremendous creativity in handling sensative or hard to relate concepts from the book, showing Sauron in armor alone to avoid having to create an image of him that would be satisfactory to the hardcore fans...The conversation between Frodo and Gandalf in the beginning of the film...the portrayal of what I call "Wraith Space" that Frodo enters when he dons the Ring are all good examples. Nobody had to explain to the audience that "This is what one sees when they are wearing the One Ring", the audience just gets it.

Instead we get the most dangerous object in the world, a thing that it is made quite clear must be kept "Secret and Safe" repeatedly...a device which can bring about the ruin of all of Middle-earth as the characters know it being freely fondled by Frodo and we are expected to feel that he is being brave for knowing the gravity of his quest when he stands at the Council and announces that he will take it to be destroyed. One might read from the film's portrayal that one of the powers of the ring is a complete lack of reason!

Even after nearly loosing the thing in the snow, Frodo STILL has not found a place that is safe in which to conceal it, it flops out and nearly falls into the Mirror in Lorien. It actually plays like a comedy of errors in that, no matter how badly Frodo appears to attempt to screw up the quest, it somehow seems to suceed anyways in spite of his complete lack of ability to keep the ring safe...

[Harad]

The Ring is kept on the person of Frodo Baggins. Its not locked in a safe deposit box in First Gondor Mercantile Bank.

Aside from the hedge in the Shire, Bree, Weathertop, Rivendell, Amon Hen, and crossing the Anduin you are right that Frodo doesnt overtly handle the Ring in the book.

Nevertheless, for one example he says to Galadriel in the book, "I will give you the One Ring, if you ask for it. It is too great a matter for me." Are we really to care in the movie whether he shows it to her or not, considering we all know it is kept on his body?

The Ring is the central item in the three movies. If dramatic effects concerning the Ring offend you: Boromir toying with it, or its approaching the Mirror of Galadriel-- then you dont understand movie magic. These are precisely the things that allow audiences to like the movie, aside from people who bash the movie since it doesnt adhere to their strict non-cinematic views of the book.

[PRH]

Harad:
Its amazing to me what you accuse the movie of now. The 2nd Age was not even a consideration in the movie except for the battle of the Last Alliance. Where does the movie mention or imply that Sauron "wasnt lord of Middle Earth all along..." Where are the Glory Years of Numenor referred to? Why not complain that the First Age is woefully explained as well?

You misunderstand me, by "lord of middle earth all along" I meant all through the 3rd age, from the point of the forging of the Ring up until the events of the years 3018-3019.

Sure, if Isildur hadn't cut the Ring from Sauron he probably would've gone on to rule Middle Earth in short order. But cutting the Ring off was not the only thing that saved them. It had as much to do with the battle of Dagorlad and the seige of the Barad-Dur and of Gil-Galad and Elendil doing direct battle with Sauron and 'throwing him down' as 'they themselves perished in the deed.' Isildur's cutting the Ring from Sauron's hand when he was down was the icing on the cake that kept Sauron from coming right back and winning the battle. It wasn't just a lucky stroke in the midst of an utterly hopeless battle.

[Harad]

It wasn't just a lucky stroke in the midst of an utterly hopeless battle.

Nor does the movie portray it that way. In the movie there is an ebb and flow in the battle. At first the Alliance are winning, then Sauron has the upper hand, then the combination of Elendil, Gil-galad, Elrond (?), and Isildur close in on Sauron, culminating in his being defeated by Isildur's stroke.

This is completely in accord with the book, except if you want to split hairs, with the detailed sequence of when the Ring is removed from Sauron. Cinematically there is no contest--PJ did it in the best way possible. To argue that this is not true to the book is your choice and others that have jumped on this bandwagon.

[Grond]

Harad, it is not in accord with the book. In the book the army of Elves and Man have Sauron under siege in the Barad-dur and he finally comes out to challenge Gil-galad and Elendil mana o mano. There are only 7 people in the scene. Gil-galad, Elendil, Isildur, Cirdan, Elrond and Sauron. It is a duel between Elendil and Gil-galad on the one hand and Sauron on the other. Cirdan, Elrond and Isildur are there merely as heralds. No where in the text does it speak of anyone fighting with Sauron but Gil-galad and Elendil.

We are not nit-picking. The book makes it clear it did not happen the way it is portrayed in the movie. Get over it.

[Harad]

You must be talking about the book "Hallucinations and Inability to Understand."

The book I read is LOTR by JRRT which says:


- You remember? - said Frodo, speaking his thought aloud in his astonishment. - But I thought, - he stammered as Elrond turned towards him, - I thought that the fall of Gil-galad was a long age ago. 'so it was indeed, - answered Elrond gravely. - But my memory reaches back even to the Elder Days. Eärendil was my sire, who was born in Gondolin before its fall; and my mother was Elwing, daughter of Dior, son of Lúthien of
Doriath. I have seen three ages in the West of the world, and many defeats, and many fruitless victories. - I was the herald of Gil-galad and marched with his host. I was at the Battle of Dagorlad before the Black Gate of Mordor, where we had the mastery: for the Spear of Gil-galad and the Sword of Elendil, Aiglos and Narsil, none could withstand. I beheld the last combat on the slopes of Orodruin, where Gil-galad died, and Elendil fell, and Narsil broke beneath him; but Sauron himself was overthrown, and Isildur cut the Ring from his hand with the hilt-shard of his father's sword, and took it for his own. At this the stranger, Boromir, broke in. - So that is what became of the Ring! - he cried. - If ever such a tale was told in the South, it has long been forgotten. I have heard of the Great Ring of him that we do not name; but we believed that it perished from the world in the ruin of his first realm. Isildur took it! That is tidings indeed. - Alas! yes, - said Elrond. - Isildur took it, as should not have been. It should have been cast then into Orodruin's fire nigh at hand where it was made. But few marked what Isildur did. He alone stood by his father in that last mortal contest; and by Gil-galad only Círdan stood, and I. But Isildur would not listen to our counsel.
- "This I will have as weregild for my father, and my brother," he said; and therefore whether we would or no, he took it to treasure it. But soon he was betrayed by it to his death; and so it is named in the North Isildur's Bane. Yet death maybe was better than what else might have befallen him.
- Only to the North did these tidings come, and only to a few. Small wonder it is that you have not heard them, Boromir. From the ruin of the Gladden Fields, where Isildur perished, three men only came ever back over the mountains after long wandering. One of these was Ohtar, the esquire of Isildur, who bore the shards of the sword of Elendil; and he brought them to Valandil, the heir of Isildur, who being but a child had remained here in Rivendell. But Narsil was broken and its light extinguished, and it has not yet been forged again.
- Fruitless did I call the victory of the Last Alliance? Not wholly so, yet it did not achieve its end. Sauron was diminished, but not destroyed. His Ring was lost but not unmade. The Dark Tower was broken, but its foundations were not removed; for they were made with the power of the Ring, and while it remains they will endure. Many Elves and many mighty Men, and many of their friends. had perished in the war. Anárion was slain, and Isildur was slain; and Gil-galad and Elendil were no more. Never again shall there be any such league of Elves and Men; for Men multiply and the Firstborn decrease, and the two kindreds are stranged. And ever since that day the race of Númenor has decayed, and the span of their years has lessened.

So the "mastery" was at Dagorlad. The last battle was at Mt. Doom. This is perfectly in accord with the movie, within cinematic license. Back to the withdrawing board, eh?

[PRH]

Not so fast!

Nor does the movie portray it that way. In the movie there is an ebb and flow in the battle. At first the Alliance are winning, then Sauron has the upper hand, then the combination of Elendil, Gil-galad, Elrond (?), and Isildur close in on Sauron, culminating in his being defeated by Isildur's stroke.

This just not how the film went. The alliance had the upper hand, then Sauron came down and everything went to hell, then Isildur got his lucky stroke. When did Gil-Galad or Elrond close in on Sauron? Elendil charged him but was immedietly tossed aside in one of the big swoops.

No, the movie changed the details of how Sauron was defeated at the end of the 2nd age. BUT, I basically agree with you that the movie showed it the best possible way (it'd have been nice if Isildur only sliced one finger) -- the correct way would've been just too much detail for the prologue and it would have diminished the importance of the Ring somewhat.

[Harad]

then Sauron came down and everything went to hell, then Isildur got his lucky stroke. When did Gil-Galad or Elrond close in on Sauron? Elendil charged him but was immedietly tossed aside in one of the big swoops.

Ok, as suggested I am taking a deep breath..

Now... Elendil and Gil-galad, otherwise supreme on the battlefield, in the movie as in the book, finally confront Sauron, in the movie as in the book. They are killed in the movie as in the book. Simultaneously and because of this confrontation Isildur is able to get under Sauron's guard and make his "lucky" stroke, an "enhanced" version but consisent IMO with the book.

And to be agreeable, I agree that a finger would be better than a hand. Why not a finger? More gruesome, less clear? How do you get 1 finger in a lucky stroke anyhow? Maybe Sauron was gloating "I'm Number 1. I'm Number 1."

[Grond]

Harad, you're arguing where the battle took place, I'm arguing that Isildur was a bystander that cut the Ring off of Sauron's hand after he had been cast down and was out for the count; hence, the movie was a totally different portrayal than the book. The movie also showed Sauron kicking butt of an entire Elf army.... is that in the book?

From the Silmarillion, "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age",
From Imladris they crossed the Misty Mountains by many passes and marched down the River Anduin, and so came at at last came upon the host of Sauron on Dagorlad, the Battle Plain, which lies before the gate of the black land...

The host of Gil-galad and Elendil had the victory, for the might of the Elves was still great in those days, and the Numenoreans were strong and tall, and terrible in their wrath. Against Aeglos the spear of Gil-galad none could stand; and the sword of Elendil filled Orcs and Men with fear...

Then Gil-galad and Elendil passed into Mordor and encompassed the stronghold of Sauron; and they laid siege to it for seven years, and suffered grevious loss by fire and by the darts and bolts of the Enemy, and Sauron sent many sorties against them. There in the valley of Gorgoroth Anarion son of Elendil was slain, and many others. But at the last the siege was so strait that Sauron himself came forth; and he wrestled with Gil-galad and Elendil and they both were slain... But Sauron was also thrown down, and with the hilt-shard of Narsil Isildur cut the Ruling Ring from the hand of Sauron and took it for his own."

Your quote validates my comments that Isildur, Elrond and Cirdan were there as heralds not participants. The movie portrayed it as a Battle Royale with Sauron taking on the Elven army and all comers. When you put your quote from LotR together with the above quote, you get a clear picture of how wrong the movie portrayal was in relation to the book. Again, the difference is understandable but I again fail to see how you can argue that it is true to the book.

(You must be talking about the book "Hallucinations and Inability to Understand.)" That comment is uncalled for. I have presented my arguments backed up by facts. Heck, you are backing up my argument with quotes. Thanks for saving me the trouble of typing it out as it illustrates how wrong you are on this subject. The only thing you've proven is that the battle occurred on the slope of Orodruin. The quote above from the Sil might make one feel it occurred at the foot of the Barad-dur since it was that which was under siege. Where ever it took place doesn't change the fact that Isildur didn't struggle with Sauron.

[Harad]

As has been pointed out before and you refuse to UNDERSTAND, the Silmarillion is not a valid source to contradict other evidence in LOTR. It was unpublished during the lifetime of JRRT and never "adjusted" to be consistent with LOTR. If you opened your eyes you would see that what you quoted is not consistent with Elrond's story in LOTR. To hold Peter Jackson accountable for not portraying the inconsistent depiction in the LOTR AND the Silmarion, is IMO, ridiculous.

And as far as "uncalled for comments"

My suggestion Harad is that it is you who needs to reread the book.

[Grond]

Harad, I am conceding that the fight occurred on Mount Doom. That isn't the issue. The issue is the portrayal of Isildur in hand to hand battle with Sauron. Does that occur in any of the quotes we've cited on this thread?

Sauron was cast down and then Isildur cut the Ring from his finger. Was that reflected in the movie? Yes or no.

[Harad]

As I stated above the ONLY relevant quote in LOTR is:

...slopes of Orodruin where Gil-galad died, and Elendil fell, and Narsil broke beneath him; but Sauron himself was overthrown, and Isildur cut the Ring from his hand with the hilt shard of his father's sword, and took it for his own.

So one can interpret "and Isildur" as "and THEN Isildur" or "as Isildur..." I believe the movie version is consistent with the events as they really happened, and dramatically speaking has it all over a hypothetical version in which Isildur loots Sauron's seeming corpse.

Your whole argument then devolves to whether "and" should be intertpreted as "and then" or as "as." That is not enuf for me to say "stretching the truth." That is enuf for me to say "bravo!"

[Grond]

Okay Harad, you win. The movie was a perfect portrayal of the book.

[lilhobo]

Originally posted by Grond
Okay Harad, you win. The movie was a perfect portrayal of the book.

you wuzz!! :D :D :D

actually Isildur cut all Sauron's fingers off on the left hand.....heheheh

[PRH]

Harad,

In the movie while we do see Gil-Galad, we never see him charge Sauron or see him get killed by him - only Elendil.

As for the rest of the debate, we're just not going to resolve this one. I maintain my view and you can keep yours. I envy you, I wish I could believe that the movie had followed the book in this regard but I just don't. On the bright side, I think it was a worthwhile change for reasons I've explained earlier.

[Harad]

Things are pretty rushed in the movie at this point. I have seen evidence in stills that there are more scenes of Gil-galad in particular. (I have the stills but not the link anymore). So maybe the scenes you crave are on the cutting room floor, and the forthcoming DVD. If you are interested in seeing 2-3 nifty jpgs of Gil-galad send me your email in a pm.

[scaffleen]

I have a question about the ring. when sauron had the ring on he wasn't invisible why? and I think isildur wasnt invisible when he had it on either.

[Grond]

I posted this reply to the same question on another thread.

Gandalf states in FotR, The Shadow of the Past,
"A mortal, Frodo, who keeps one of the Great Rings, does not die, but he does not grow or obtain more life, he merely continues, until at last every minute is a weariness. And if he often uses the Ring to make himself invisible, he fades: he becomes in the end invisible permanently, and walks in the twilight under the eye of the dark power that rules the Rings. Yes, sooner or later -- later, if he is strong or well-meaning to begin with, but neither strength nor good purpose will last -- sooner or later the dark power will devour him."

This passage can be clearly taken to mean that any of the 20 Great Rings would make a mortal invisible but JRRT later refines his answer. The Elven Rings do not confer invisibility as they were never touched by Sauron and Power was not their aim. The seven Dwarf-rings did not confer invisibility on the Dwarves but would have on Man or Hobbit. (I would deem that Tolkien did not mean to include Dwarves with mortals). The Nine did exactly as the quote from Gandalf states and "consumed" the essence of the nine kings who received them, turning them into wraiths.

The ultimate explanation was that it allowed those who had no defined being on the other side (Aman/Heaven) existed in that plane while wearing one of the Great Rings. In other words it only effected Man or man-products such as Hobbits with invisibility.

It should be noted that in the Appendix it refers to Isildur's death. He is swimming across the river Anduin to escape the orc party and is invisible. The Ring then slips off his finger and he is rendered visible, thus allowing the orcs to see him and shoot him full of arrows. Thus it is the Ring that is called Isildur's Bane and not the orc arrows. :)

[scaffleen]

Now I understand! thanks

[greypilgrim]

frodo's senses are affected by the ring in the movie. when he first puts in on, he can't see that clearly. but in the movie, like the books, the more he used it, the more accustomed to the effects he became, until he could (in the book) from amon hen, see isengard and falling trees, and sauron's tower, to the top of barad-dur.
all this he saw from amon hen, with the ring on his finger. he grew comfortable with the Ring.
right?

[Grond]

Of course there will be those that disagree, but I feel that Frodo saw clearly because he was actually trying to see those things. He had the Ring on and as he started focusing on the far places, the Ring and its Power were being put to use, albeit unconciously. That appears to me to be the reason Frodo is ensnared in Sauron's gaze, because he is using the Ring and doesn't even realize it. :)

[Harad]

Even more, IMO, Sam was "using" the Ring when he used it to become invisible in Cirith Ungol.

After the fact, people explain why Sauron noticed Frodo "looking" with the Ring, and didnt notice Sam "stalking/challenging/hearing/looking" with the Ring. Why didnt the Ring move Sam's gaze toward X,Y,Z and reveal him? "Line of Sight" is not an issue since Frodo "saw" many things not in his line of sight.

Its just a "minor" inconsistency that I can live with.

[Grond]

Harad, I agree that it is splitting hairs but putting the Ring on makes one invisible. I tend to think that Frodo was intentionally trying to focus on those far off things while sitting on Amon Hen while Sam was just trying to stay out of sight. To me, that is enough of a difference of intent. Frodo trying to use the power while Sam is just getting a byproduct of wearing the Ring.

Yes, I know it is a splitting hairs, nit-picking comment but it makes the situation more palatable to me. :)

[Snaga]

Its interesting to note some of how the Amon Hen stuff developed in JRRT's mind. In HoME it emerges that he at first thinks that Frodo's vision on AH is just a product of the hill itself. He writes a subsequent vision for Aragorn. Then he decides - no vision for Aragorn, its just the ring that gives Frodo the vision. Then finally he decides Aragorn will see a hunting eagle to the north, but that Frodo will see more because of the ring. In other words, the hill is special, and the Ring amplifies it.

This perhaps explains why Sam in Cirith Ungol, Frodo at Weathertop, and at the Prancing Pony, even leaving Amon Hen, are not percieved by the Eye. The danger is more often that the Nazgul will feel the power of the ring. The main problematic bit is that the local Nazgul don't seem to know that Sam has the ring on. Although its not too clear how close they are.

My view is that the film overdoes the perception of the Eye looking at you when you have the ring on. Lets face it Bilbo used the ring often, and never got spotted!

I also think that the danger to Frodo at Amon Hen is not just that his location will be revealed but also his identity, thoughts and plans, perhaps?

[Harad]

The problem with Amon Hen being the salient point is that according to the book, Sauron "misses" Frodo. Considering all the "intelligence" that Sauron has on the whereabouts of the Fellowship and the specialness of Amon Hen, doesnt Sauron have brain enuf, Evil tho it is, to figure out where Frodo is, regardless of that interfering Wizard.

My view is that the film overdoes the perception of the Eye looking at you when you have the ring on

I felt oppositely: the struggle to avoid the Eye (at least on Amon Hen) is abbreviated in the movie compared with the book.

[ReadWryt]

Besides, how would you show a lidless eye NOT looking at you and still look like an eye?!:p

i actually thought that the Lidless Eye stuff was handled brilliantly. I couldn't think of a better way to portray the influence of Sauron without having the characters talk about it instead. When Gandalf touches the Palantir and sees the eye it's the type of unspoken revelation that keeps the dialog flowing naturally without beating the audience up with the obvious...Not too much, not too little. In the immortal words of Goldie Locks, "Just Right".

[Harad]

When Gandalf touches the Palantir

Also, I believe...memory retrieval unreliable...we see the Eye when Gandalf almost touches the Ring at Bag End.

[Snaga]

Nearly at the 1000 mark RW!

I understand what you're saying. 'Almost he was revealed' is how Gandalf puts it. I suggest as an explanation that Sauron knew someone was watching, but might not have known instantly who it was. After all he might have expected Denethor or Saruman, rather than a ring-bearing hobbit. In the film its a bit harder to get away with that since the Eye spots you almost immediately regardless of where you are (unless you are Bilbo leaving a party of course.:p )

Anyway I'm not in the business of trying to attack the film - you're right it DOES work (sorry Thorin!) but I'm prepared to defend the book. After all, JRRT put a lot of effort into its internal consistency and its worth the effort of trying to find it. Harad appears to be trying to found a third Guild, which I name the FIBs (Film Improves the Book!).

If however you want the film to religiously follow the book (and I don't really) then you have to say that in the book there is not the same sense of the eye searching for you the moment you put it on. So I'll withdraw the perjorative 'overdoes' and replace with 'emphasises more'. And to agree with Harad, more emphasis in general, but less in the special circumstance of Amon Hen.

The actual imagery itself was fantastic. It will be fascinating to see how this is handled in the film as Frodo enters Mordor, and sees the Eye in his mind all the time. I think that sense of relentless oppression that JRRT builds is a real cinematic challenge.

[Harad]

VoK,

Suprising as it seems, when you rework a piece of literature, which for all its greatness, is not PERFECT, there is the possibilty for small improvements in the logic, for example. I can think of many instances where the book is better than the film. I can also think of a few instances where the movie is better. Of course, I dont expect any agreement on a forum with staunch love-it-or-leave-it-book-defenders, and others who want to bash the movie. No matter.

[Snaga]

Fair enough - I'm only teasing, I don't mean anything by it:)

I just don't think in this case there is a problem with the book's logic!:)

[Harad]

VoK,
I am just guessing...but, when you examine all 1000+ pages...you might not find any instances when the logic is problematic. If you do, let me know.

[Grond]

Harad, you won't see a post where I have bashed the logic of the movie. PJ did what he did to give the audience the immediate sensation necessary in film to convey what the author may spend five pages of text explaining in narrative. I also have agreed with you on numerous occasions that there are inconsistencies in the way Tolkien portrays events from book to book and in some cases from chapter to chapter. Our Battle of the Last Alliance debate is one such instance. Us diehards(as you call us) are just willing to interpret the logic put before us in a manner that 1) makes sense to us as a reader, 2) allows for a consistency through the works (in our minds) and 3) leaves our image of this great work unscathed.

You have presented many arguments (many sound and some not so) citing JRRT's logic lapses. His works are not perfectly harmonious. I'm willing to give you that. I have never defended these inconsistencies. What I've defended are my interpretations of the author's intent. This very thread is one such example. You think it is a blaring error for Frodo to put on the Ring and almost get caught at the summit of Amon Hen and then put it back on shortly thereafter to cross the river. Many of us here have laid out our explanations.... none of which have been acceptable to you. Sorry!! But they are acceptable to us. That's why you get no slack and as you put it, no people jumping on your band wagon. Our loyalties are to the author J. R. R. Tolkien and not to Harad. It appears your destiny to be the great voice of discontent in the logic lapses of the author. You will point them out.... we the faithful will argue our interpretations which make them sesible to us and you will again be alone in your dissention. Sad....... but true. :(

[Harad]

Doesnt bother me...nor is it the least bit sad. I prefer to be alone and correct, than in a crowd with their heads in the sand.

In the case of the Last Alliance, my interpretation is just as consistent as the crowds, just not as fashionable (with the "fashion" starting yesterday).

[Grond]

What is the benefit of being correct only in one's own mind?? I fail to see your argument.

[Harad]

History is full of examples of crowds being objectively wrong. It should be a warning sign, but of course, it never is.

[greypilgrim]

wow

[Thorin]

Originally posted by Harad
Doesnt bother me...nor is it the least bit sad. I prefer to be alone and correct, than in a crowd with their heads in the sand.

In the case of the Last Alliance, my interpretation is just as consistent as the crowds, just not as fashionable (with the "fashion" starting yesterday).

Harad, you astound me.....NPW I do crown you. I have gotten lambasted by you and others for making conclusive statements such as "it was the mountain, pure and simple", and then you say that you are "alone and correct"?? Don't you think that is arrogant considering some of the illogical arguments and justifications you've been making over the movie and JRR Tolkien bashing?

Once again, I truly do question your objectivity and where your allegiance lies in the grand scope of Middle Earth.

[Harad]

I prefer to be alone and correct, than in a crowd with their heads in the sand.

I stand firmly behind that statement. If you dont agree with that statement, then I can only salute your courage in publicly adopting its converse.
illogical arguments and justifications you've been making over the movie and JRR

Such assertions by you, do not make them so. In fact considering your many stands, just one excellent example is shown above, such assertions by you, I wear as a badge of honor.

and where your allegiance lies

And what, pray tell, is this about? My allegiance to truth, justice, and the American Way? But of course. My allegiance to slavishly accepting what "so-called" experts say? It is to laugh. My allegiance to the perfection of the bless-ed JRRT? Sorry, but after all, he was just a man. Great writer, but not perfect.

[Grond]

Then Harad, please explain your purpose for participating in this forum. Are you here only to agitate most of the other members? Is it to simply show your brilliant intellect? (If so, then you're failing miserably.) Is it to bash a truly great writer to the benefit of the enhancement of the movie? (Aha!) I don't know and neither can I figure you out.

One last question which I've asked before and don't remember you ever answering. Have you ever been wrong in your life? I can't find one instance the forum where you have ever admitted it. Just wondering.

[Harad]

No my purpose is to showcase your great intellect. An intellect that shirley didnt miss my post directly above:

Great writer, but not pefect.

[Thorin]

Originally posted by Harad
No my purpose is to showcase your great intellect. An intellect that shirley didnt miss my post directly above:



Shirley? Who's Shirley? Is she on PJ's payroll as well?

Grond is right, Harad. I'd be hard pressed to find a situation where you've admitted that you are wrong concerning your opinion on the movie....Everyone seems to be wrong and you are "alone and correct" as you've stated before. Maybe you'd earn some more respect from some of us NPWs like Grond has amongst the FADs just by seeing someone else's point of view, yet still be able to disagree on it, when your logic has failed and you've been backed into a corner....Most of us have eaten humble pie (God knows I have to try and get through to some of the FADs here). Why can't you?

[Harad]

Show me the proof. When its a matter of opinion, let me have mine. When its a matter of facts, show me the evidence.

There is at least one place on this forum, and I am not saying where, that I admitted wholeheartedly that an opinion I voiced was incorrect, because proof was shown. Take it as an assignment to find it. But I dont think you really care to. Its much easier to be able to make blanket accusations against me.

No matter. As long as I dont attack anybody personally, I am allowed to voice my opinions, aint I? Free speech and the Queen and all that...

[Snaga]

Originally posted by Harad
VoK,
I am just guessing...but, when you examine all 1000+ pages...you might not find any instances when the logic is problematic. If you do, let me know.

I promise to Harad, although I won't be examining all 1000+ pages in order to find fault. My point is that Tolkien took care to ensure consistency and succeeded to a remarkable extent. I do allow the possibility that he got it wrong on occasion, and I will treat each case on its merits.

PS I agree with you that it is better to be alone and right, than in a crowd and wrong. Also better than being alone and wrong, I think!;)

[Thorin]

Yes, you're right....It is easier to make blanket statements against someone who out of 480+ posts has only one place where they've admitted they're wrong...That right there makes me not want to waste my time finding it, never mind making the blanket statements.

Having or not having the proof doesn't negate the fact of occasionally bending on an opinion.

[Harad]

Also better than being alone and wrong, I think!

Yes... I think that's right too. Fascinating.

who out of 480+ posts has only one place where they've admitted they're

Once again the English is too challenging: "at least one." Also just think how many of the 480+ are not opinion at all, but just defending myself against attacks.


Having or not having the proof doesn't negate the fact of occasionally bending on an opinion.

Ah. Thats where a little scientific background might help. Blanket statements ARE negated by one piece of proof.

[Eonwe]

if that piece of proof can be repeated

[Harad]

I always wondered about the mentality that didnt quite believe Hiroshima, and wanted a repeat.

[Bragollach]

I thought the question about active/passive use of the ring and the subsequent ease with which Sauron can spot it was resolved by Eonwe supplying an answer that suggested that it was the ring itself that drew Sauron's attention at Amon Hen. The question was no longer one of the method of using the ring (for far-seeing, or invisibility) but one of who is actually in control (the ring, or its wearer). Grond and Harad both praised Eonwe for the point, but later in the same thread both seem to have fallen back on their previous opinions (that it was a circumstance of active use, or just an inconsistency in the literature). Neh, just odd to see the praise and then return to theories that were (seemingly) inferior to the one offered by Eonwe.

[Harad]

Good point, Bragollach. I did and still accept that point.

That point means that the argument about "using" the ring rather than "having" the ring or "wearing" the ring, goes away. Frodo did not "use" the Ring. He was used by the Ring.

[Bragollach]

Are you, Harad, suggesting that the circumstance of the ring being the user, rather than the used, is still a logical leap for a reader to make? That would seem consistent with your earlier position, that one can explain away inconsistencies by asserting a unique situation. I'm just trying to nail down your point to make sure I get the most out of your criticism. That aside, even given the textual evidence supplied by Eonwe would you still hold that the prescence of two particular situations (two circumstances where the ring 'takes over') is insufficient to think it was a part of the author's intention or that it supplies a solution for the logical inconsistency?

[Eonwe]

Originally posted by Bragollach
Neh, just odd to see the praise and then return to theories that were (seemingly) inferior to the one offered by Eonwe.

Story of my life. I like you Bragollach. I'll send the check in the mail :)

[Harad]

Getting back to first principles. I believe "wearing" the Ring is "using" the Ring is "touching" the Ring is "owning" the Ring. Others have made distinctions about "intentions" or "how much time" etc.

Therefore I do not distinguish Sam wearing the Ring at Cirith Ungol with Frodo wearing the Ring at Amon Hen. Others have said that Frodo "used" the Ring making Amon Hen a unique situation. Eonwe interpreted Amon Hen as the Ring "using" Frodo. Therefore if the Ring is in control, why didnt the Ring "use" Sam at Cirith Ungol. Hence an inconsistency.

[Grond]

Originally posted by Harad
Getting back to first principles. I believe "wearing" the Ring is "using" the Ring is "touching" the Ring is "owning" the Ring. Others have made distinctions about "intentions" or "how much time" etc.

Therefore I do not distinguish Sam wearing the Ring at Cirith Ungol with Frodo wearing the Ring at Amon Hen. Others have said that Frodo "used" the Ring making Amon Hen a unique situation. Eonwe interpreted Amon Hen as the Ring "using" Frodo. Therefore if the Ring is in control, why didnt the Ring "use" Sam at Cirith Ungol. Hence an inconsistency. At last, Harad!!! Something we can disagree on again. Your failing to differentiate between the different categories is why you fail to see the beautiful logic that JRRT has built into the tale concerning why one may wear the Ring without using it. One may own the Ring without touching it. One may touch the Ring without wearing it. But, one may not use the Ring without wearing it. Get it? :):D

[Eonwe]

Originally posted by Harad
Therefore if the Ring is in control, why didnt the Ring "use" Sam at Cirith Ungol. Hence an inconsistency.

hmm the Ring "didn't" "use" Sam at Cirith Ungol.

How would the Ring "use" Sam? What are the possibilities? Are you saying there was no effect on Sam? What can a Ring do to "use" someone?

I can agree his eyes weren't drawn to the Barad-dur (EDIT: this is the example of the Ring using Frodo at Amon Hen, that we know of), but there was no opportunity for this to happen...

EDIT: see my thread http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2866

[Harad]

I can agree his eyes weren't drawn to the Barad-dur (EDIT: this is the example of the Ring using Frodo at Amon Hen, that we know of), but there was no opportunity for this to happen...

Cirith Ungol was a high pass overlooking Morrrdorrr. At some point Sam is on the way into Morrrdorrr itself:


Without any clear puropose he drew out the Ring and put it on again...At once the road turned left and plunged steeply down. Sam had crossed into Mordor...He took off the Ring, moved it may be by some deep premonition of danger...Sam was looking at Orodruin.

So even in Mordor, even with Mount Doom in sight, the Ring decides not to "use" Sam. Sam is able to "take off the Ring" no problemo.

[Eonwe]

you didn't answer the question: what is the ring capable of doing to someone? What are its powers to "look after itself"? How do you think this scene of Sam immediately taking off the Ring differs from Frodo on Amon Hen?

you are also leaving out his plans for a botanical garden on the plain of Gorgoroth, hmm? :)

[Harad]

what is the ring capable of doing to someone?

Read your post.
http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2567&perpage=15&pagenumber=3

You have the Ring directing Frodo's attention toward things that no hobbit should be attentive to. All I ask is that the Ring, in Mordor, do the same to Sam.

[Eonwe]

Frodo puts on the Ring on Amon Hen, Orodruin is right in front of him. He is immediately drawn to Barad-dur.

This is your point? I don't think the story goes like that.

Could Sam stand at the edge of Mordor forever with the Ring on and no effect...

[Harad]

Frodo puts on the Ring on Amon Hen, Orodruin is right in front of him. He is immediately drawn to Barad-dur... I don't think the story goes like that.

Thats pretty much how the story in my book goes. Do you mean he looks around more? Momentarily, without an opportunity to escape he is drawn into peril. Sam on the other hand, already in Mordor, suffers no such coercion.

[Eonwe]

Here we go again...

"...Thither, eastward, unwilling his eye was drawn. It passed the ruined bridges of Osgiliath, the grinning gates of Minas Morgul, and the haunted Mountains, and it looked upon Gorgoroth, the valley of terror in the Land of Mordor. Darkness lay there under the Sun. Fire glowed amid the smoke. Mount Doom was burning, and a great reek rising. Then at last his gaze was held; wall upon wall, battlement upon battlement, black, immeasuably strong, mountain of iron, gate of steel, tower of adamant, he saw it: Barad-dur, Fortress of Sauron. All hope left him."

Yep he went as fast as a cat out of a shower, right to Barad-dur. :rolleyes: Of course this quote leaves out the time before this were he looks north, west and south before being drawn, but I'll give ya that for free...

...does the Ring have no effect on Sam? Does it not attempt to make him claim the Ring and reveal himself?

[Snaga]

In HoME it is suggested that the rings power over Frodo increases if he has just worn it. It goes on to suggest that part of Frodo's reasoning to go it alone to Mordor is influenced by the malice of the ring trying to make him do something that makes it more likely that the ring will get back to its master.

Just thought I'd throw that in, as everyone's getting majorly stuck on one point, when there's more to this IMO.

[Harad]

No doubt since Frodo is going from: "Here take the Ring" to Galadriel in Lorien, to "Give it back, its Mine" to Sam at Cirith Ungol.

Meanwhile the Ring, which should be getting hot to trot as its walked into Mordor with Sam wearing it, doesnt protest as he takes its off.


Without any clear purpose he drew out the Ring and put it on again. Immediately he felt the great burden of its weight, and felt afresh, but now more strong and urgent than ever, the malice of the Eye of Mordor, searching, trying to pierce the shadows that it had made for its own defence, but which now hindered it in its unquiet and doubt. As before, Sam found that his hearing was sharpened, but that to his sight the things of this world seemed thin and vague. The rocky walls of the path were pale, as if seen through a mist, but still at a distance he heard the bubbling of Shelob in her misery: and harsh and clear, and very close it seemed, he heard cries and the clash of metal. He sprang to his feet, and pressed himself against the wall beside the road. He was glad of the Ring, for here was yet another company of orcs on the march. Or so at first he thought. Then suddenly he realized that it was not so, his hearing had deceived him: the orc-cries came from the tower, whose topmost horn was now right above him, on the left hand of the Cleft. Sam shuddered and tried to force himself to move. There was plainly some devilry going on. Perhaps in spite of all orders the cruelty of the orcs had mastered them, and they were tormenting Frodo, or even savagely hacking him to pieces. He listened; and as he did a gleam of hope came to him. There could not be much doubt: there was fighting in the tower, the orcs must be at war among themselves, Shagrat and Gorbag had come to blows. Faint as was the hope that his guess brought him, it was enough to rouse him. There might be just a chance. His love for Frodo rose above all other thoughts, and forgetting his peril he cried aloud: - I'm coming, Mr. Frodo He ran forward to the climbing path, and over it. At once the road turned left and plunged steeply down. Sam had crossed into Mordor.

He took off the Ring, moved it may be by some deep premonition of danger, though to himself he thought only that he wished to see more clearly. - Better have a look at the worst, - he muttered. - No good blundering about in a fog! Hard and cruel and bitter was the land that met his gaze. Before his feet the highest ridge of the Ephel Dúath fell steeply in great cliffs down into a dark trough, on the further side of which there rose another ridge, much lower, its edge notched and jagged with crags like fangs that stood out black against the red light behind them: it was the grim Morgai, the inner ring of the fences of the land. Far beyond it, but almost straight ahead, across a wide lake of darkness dotted with tiny fires, there was a great burning glow; and from it rose in huge columns a swirling smoke, dusty red at the roots, black above where it merged into the billowing canopy that roofed in all the accursed
land.
Sam was looking at Orodruin, the Mountain of Fire.

[greypilgrim]

You all know (I'm sure) that the ring tempted Sam to claim it as his own right there in Mordor wher he "used" it. His love for Frodo gave him better judgment, and he took the ring off. What inconsistency is there again? I may see a little inconsistentcy if Sam just gave the Ring back to Frodo after "using" the thing, and didn't have a shred of regret or loss at doing so.
Even Sam's thick skull would be penetrated by the Ring's power.

[Thorin]

Keep in mind that Sam:

1) Had no clear purpose in mind for using it
2) Only used it temporarily and did not claim it in any way
3) Took it off as he crossed over to Mordor


I think the ring functions in intensity and addiction according to the lusts and desires of those who possess or desire it, it and how long they possess it...Sam didn't have it long enough to really make a difference even at Mordor's borders. Frodo was already well under it's sway and the ring worked on him even harder the closer they got to Mount Doom.

[Harad]

The "inconsistency" is Frodo's great difficulty with the Ring at Amon Hen, and Sam's relative ease with it entering Morrrdorrr. "Sam is stronger than Frodo" is the apparent explanation. In terms of actual time wearing the Ring, Sam may be a weener. If you add up Frodo's time at TB+Bree+Weather Top+Amon Hen (the latter being most of his time) and compare it to Sam running around wearing it at Cirith Ungol, its a close call. Add this to the fact that the Ring should be getting more powerful the closer it gets to Master, then Sam's time should be pro-rated.

[Eonwe]

you fell into the trap though :)

Frodo is able to put the Ring on near Amon Hen, right after he takes it off and Sauron has nearly pinned him down. You said yourself, how does this happen?

Sam is able to walk all around Cirith Ungol with it on, for a long time. How does this happen?

What is the difference between Frodo ON Amon Hen with the Ring for a while, "looking around", and:

1) off Amon Hen a few seconds later, with the Ring on probably much longer
2) Sam in Mordor with the Ring on for a few seconds, looking at Orodruin for a few seconds with the Ring on.

The difference is that the Ring has time to see with Frodo's senses (sight) and to notice where Barad-dur is! The book says, that Sam knew having the Ring on in Mordor would allow Sauron to spot him quick. So if he has the Ring on for a long enough time for the Ring to start seeing and feeling what he sees, its going to find the direction that Barad-dur is in, as long as it is in his sights.

As Gandalf says, it takes time for it to work evil on a person. There is a period where the Ring has to become accustomed to the senses and to find out where the evil is. It certainly has no notion of the pass of Cirith Ungol, and it can't read Sam's mind about where he is, but if the will of Sauron is directly in front of it, and it is seeing what a Ring wearer sees, it will see where the will of Sauron is, just as the wearer would, and then the power of the Ring will work on the wearer to go that way.

All IMHO. I could be wrong, but I like this theory.

[Harad]

Oops looks like its your finger in the trap. Nine-fingered Eonwe. LOL

To the Ring, line-of-sight doesnt matter. When Sam wears the Ring in Cirith Ungol, the Dark Tower is right across the plain. Sam wears it almost continually from the Shelob's lair until he enters Mordor. Plenty of time for the awakened, powerful, just aching to get to Sauron-Ring, to get oriented (or orientated for the UK crowd).

The Ring apparently took a holiday when Sam was wearing it.

[Eonwe]

line of sight of Barad-dur? Where's the quote on this? I thought the tower was at the border of Mordor, and all you could see before the tower was the pass, the mountains on either side, the tower and the pass just next to the tower?

i.e. he is next to the tower, passes the tower, then he can see Morrrdorrrr...

EDIT: if you can stand on the edge of the Ephel Duath (or whatever they are called) and look right at Barad-dur for an hour or so while you listen to Orcs far away, without the Ring noticing that Barad-dur is in front of you with your eyes, then I am with you all the way Harad... :)

[Harad]

To the Ring, line-of-sight doesnt matter.

For example, on Amon Hen, Frodo sees all sorts of nasty things that he couldnt see in his line-of-sight. Using the idea that Barad Dur has gotten a lot closer and the Ring ought to be a lot stronger, when Sam steps over the pass into Morrrdorrrr, WITHIN SIGHT OF MOUNT DOOM, why doesnt the Ring Yank his eyeballs over to make eye contact with its Worse Half?

[Eonwe]

line of sight does matter! why else would amon hen work?

Originally posted by Harad

on Amon Hen, Frodo sees all sorts of nasty things that he couldnt see in his line-of-sight. Using the idea that Barad Dur has gotten a lot closer and the Ring ought to be a lot stronger, ...the Ring Yank his eyeballs over to make eye contact with its Worse Half?

There you go with use again... at least its with idea instead of Ring :)

like what does he see? Orcs crawling out of the misty mountains? Is he looking through a mountain? Fighting under the eaves of Mirkwood? Is he looking into Thranduil's shower?

Re: Sam is stronger than Frodo. Could be. That's why Sam is on top when they lie naked together.

Already explained about Sam on the border. if it doesn't YANK Frodo's eyes immediately to Barad-dur, its not going to YANK Sam's eyes immediately to Barad-dur.

The Ring likes the Red Socks, not the Yanks.

right?

[Harad]

Look pal,
I am trying to have a serious discussion about trivia, and you are making it a Colin Mockery.

[greypilgrim]

The Ring was working it's magic on Sam all the time.
As he kept it on his finger, then took it off, then put it back on again, he began to thinkl of using it. Maybe Sauron was "looking" past the border of Mordor, seeking the one who would claim the Ring (he knew somebody had it) and assail him, and THAT is why little Sam Gamgee was "overlooked" in Mordor.
I don't know about line of sight or whatever, but Sauron believed that nobody could get into Mordor, and Sam had the Ring and used it and gave it back to Frodo all BEFORE the Nazgul (through orc-reports) discovered there was an "elven warrior on the loose" in Mordor.
Sam got by on pure luck!

[Harad]

If the Ring had any strength at all, as it did on Amon Hen against Frodo, then it should have had enuf strength in Mordor, of all places, to do a little bending of Sam's will. But...it didnt.

[Grond]

I think the Ring has a little on/off switch and that Frodo accidentally activated the on switch while on Amon Hen. That was the only time it was on. All the rest of the time it was off. That's what I think. ;)

[Eonwe]

Nah, its consistent :)

He was lucky he took it off when he did.

Sam even with the Ring OFF his finger, thinks about becoming the greatest gardener ever, right at the cleft of the pass of Cirith Ungol. He feels like a great big shadow on the pass, and says he'd spot me and cow me pretty quick if I put the Ring on now, in Morrdorr... He feels that he has only two choices, to claim the Ring, or to forbear it and deal with the constant pressure of wanting to put it on.

The book hints that Sauron is trying to look through the shadows he has made to prepare for war, to pierce the shadows on the borders of his land.

Its line of sight, because that's all the bearer would have as far as senses, and therefore that's all the Ring has...

Sauron = Burn 'ee Williams

[Harad]

Its line of sight, because that's all the bearer would have as far as senses, and therefore that's all the Ring

Amon Hen proves it isnt.

[Eonwe]

Amon Hen proves it is.

[Harad]

Nonsense to another dimension.

On Amon Hen Frodo "sees" many things that could not possibly be in his line of sight.

Q.E.D.

[Eonwe]

and I asked you before to elaborate (provide quotes) on this, but you didn't.

S.P.Q.R.

[Harad]

Up he went and sat upon the ancient chair, feeling like a lost child that had clambered upon the throne of mountain-kings. At first he could see little. He seemed to be in a world of mist in which there were only shadows: the Ring was upon him. Then here and there the mist gave way and he saw many visions: small and clear as if they were under his eyes upon a table, and yet remote. There was no sound, only bright living images. The world seemed to have shrunk and fallen silent. He was sitting upon the Seat of Seeing, on Amon Hen, the Hill of the Eye of the Men of Númenor. Eastward he looked into wide uncharted lands, nameless plains, and forests unexplored. Northward he looked, and the Great River lay like a ribbon beneath him, and the Misty Mountains stood small and hard as broken teeth. Westward he looked and saw the broad pastures of Rohan; and Orthanc, the pinnacle of Isengard, like a black spike. Southward he looked, and below his very feet the Great River curled like a toppling wave and plunged over the falls of Rauros into a foaming pit; a glimmering rainbow played upon the fume. And Ethir Anduin he saw, the mighty delta of the River, and myriads of sea-birds whirling like a white dust in the sun, and beneath them a green and silver sea, rippling in endless lines. But everywhere he looked he saw the signs of war. The Misty Mountains were crawling like anthills: orcs were issuing out of a thousand holes. Under the boughs of Mirkwood there was deadly strife of Elves and Men and fell beasts. The land of the Beornings was aflame; a cloud was over Moria; smoke rose on the borders of Lórien. Horsemen were galloping on the grass of Rohan; wolves poured from Isengard. From the havens of Harad ships of war put out to sea; and out of the East Men were moving endlessly: swordsmen, spearmen, bowmen upon horses, chariots of chieftains and laden wains. All the power of the Dark Lord was in motion. Then turning south again he beheld Minas Tirith. Far away it seemed. and beautiful: white-walled, many-towered, proud and fair upon its mountain-seat; its battlements glittered with steel, and its turrets were bright with many banners. Hope leaped in his heart. But against Minas Tirith was set another fortress, greater and more strong. Thither, eastward, unwilling his eye was drawn. It passed the ruined bridges of Osgiliath, the grinning gates of Minas Morgul. and the haunted Mountains, and it looked upon Gorgoroth, the valley of terror in the Land of Mordor. Darkness lay there under the Sun. Fire glowed amid the smoke. Mount Doom was burning, and a great reek rising. Then at last his gaze was held: wall upon wall, battlement upon battlement, black, immeasurably strong, mountain of iron, gate of steel, tower of adamant, he saw it: Barad-dur, Fortress of Sauron. All hope left him. And suddenly he felt the Eye. There was an eye in the Dark Tower that did not sleep. He knew that it had become aware of his gaze. A fierce eager will was there.

I dont need to categorize what your goal is in this exchange, but you are succeeding. If you believe that Frodo could see Minas Morgul, Minas Tirith, Moria, Lorien, Barad-dur, Rohan, Orthanc, the Havens of Harad, in his line-of-sight then as Bob Dylan said, "Good luuuuck," and Red Skelton, "And my Gawd Bless."

[Eonwe]

HA! Notice how many times it says "looked", "beheld", "see","saw" You're "teetering" on the edge of no evidence!

HAHA! weak, weak Harad, your inconsistency is now riding on supposed obstacles in the path of his sight! I can hear the bubbling misery of the inconsistency theory just like Shelob after Sam pricked her.

Amon Hen = "hill of the eye". Look on the map all these places are in sight!

JRRT says the Ring "enhances the abilities of the wearer"

Sam can hear an incredible amount when he has the Ring on. Hobbits are far sighted even without the Ring. But with the Ring, on the hill of the eye, Frodo could see incredibly far!

He sees it all, clearly, and Barad-dur last!

[Harad]

Its a joke? Hunh? Too bad you are wasting my time.

The horizon of Earth (or ME) after the First Age is, for example, 112 km (60 miles) from the top of a 1 km hill (3000 ft). Amon Hen which was "scaled" in about 5 minutes and still had trees, etc. could not have been much higher than this.

The places Frodo saw, not only weren't in the line of site, they were WAAAAAAAAAAAY below the horizon! The Land of Beornings was ~1000 km away.

Back to elementary school for you.

[Snaga]

There are some very simple points to be made here.

(1) The ring impairs vision - it doesn't aid it normally. Everything goes foggy, because you are in wraith-world.

(2) Amon Hen