saruman and sauron alliance ????

[jonahfish7]

I am pretty sure that the book version of LOTR did not have an alliance betweeen Sauron and Saruman - Saruman was seeking the one ring for his own personal power trip. Am I correct, and if so, why did the movie version invent an alliance between the Sauron and Saruman?

[Darth Saruman]

Originally posted by jonahfish7
I am pretty sure that the book version of LOTR did not have an alliance betweeen Sauron and Saruman - Saruman was seeking the one ring for his own personal power trip. Am I correct, and if so, why did the movie version invent an alliance between the Sauron and Saruman? I believe that Sauron and Saruman played lip service to each other. They pretended to be allies although, in truth, neither of them were fooled by the other. Both desired power for themselves alone. As for the movie, it is true that Saruman seems to serve Sauron. That may remain true in TTT, but I believe that it might change. It may be revealed that Saruman has an ulterior motive and wants to claim power only for himself.

[Thorin II]

Well said, Darth :D


Thorin the Second.

[Aragorn*9]

Yes, that was well said. That was pretty much what I was going to say when I saw this thread!
Julie

[Thorin II]

Originally posted by Confusticated

For viewers who haven't read the book I'm sure it looks exactly like Saruman is working for Sauron. Those of us who knows that he is really in it for himself might notice little things that others do not. At one point in the movie an Orc hobbles up to Saruman and asks: what orders from Mordor? What does the eye command? This indicates that Saruman allows his orcs to know that Sauron is the big boss. Later we see Saruman speaking with his Uruk-hia. Saurman asks :Whom do you serve?" The uruk-hia answers "Saruman"

Who gives them man-flesh to eat? Saruman. What does the bigwig Lord Sauron give them? BUGGER ALL!!! I'd go with the one dishing out the food over the nasty politician any day :D

That'd be me if I were an Uruk-Hai.


Thorin the Second.

[ReadWryt]

As for the movie, it is true that Saruman seems to serve Sauron. That may remain true in TTT, but I believe that it might change.

...then you need to take this up with Jackson, who in the ten minute preview of The Two Towers on the DVD quite plainly states that not only is there an aliance between them but that the fruit of that aliance is an attempt at Genocide to wipe out all of Mankind in Middle-earth...

[Talimon]

What does that prove, RW? The fact remains that Saruman is still having his orcs bring the ring back to him in the movie, and he does tell Lurtz something to the effect of, "They have something that is of great value to me. Bring them back alive and unspoiled."

There is no way for us to tell on this issue yet.

What's your take on the genocide bit though? Pushing it, or fleshing out Tolkien tale? I tend to go with the latter, since there are numerous mentions in the book to Saurons and Sarumans cruelty towards the people of Rohan and Gondor. On the other hand, if you say that their ultimate goal was the genocide of mankind, why did they take men (Harad etc.) as allies/slaves?

[Darth Saruman]

Originally posted by Talimon
On the other hand, if you say that their ultimate goal was the genocide of mankind, why did they take men (Harad etc.) as allies/slaves? Treachery; they will destroy them later.

[LadyGaladriel]

When Sauraman asks Gandalf to Join him, Gandalf ( Being a Smart ass) says only one can weild the Ring and that is Sauron . Sauraman Knows this already after studying deaply into the Ring early on in his Career.
Sauraman has no intention of keeping upman alliance with Sauron. He asks the Urak Hai to actaully capture the Halflings and BRING THEM BACK TO ORTHANC. Sauraman belives that he is a lone person but really Sauron is using him as a pawn nothing more , nothing less . There is no Alliance apart from the similarity between their wants . They both use the Plantir simply to communticate and try to be cunnning enough to work out any Juicy details the other knows . The deserve each other . They are both too evil and too consumed in The one ring that they could never have Allainces . A great fault. I know this isn't relative when I was typing that lot out something occured to me . You know the Nazgul? well, they are drwan to the ring . Doesn't Sauron think that the Nazgul might just take it for themselves?

[Aragorn*9]

Originally posted by LadyGaladriel
You know the Nazgul? well, they are drwan to the ring . Doesn't Sauron think that the Nazgul might just take it for themselves?

Okay first of all I don't think they even think that way or think at all for that matter and second of all they wouldn't dare, Sauron would kill them (even though they're not alive:p ) Anyway, they are under his controll they think and do all for him and that's all they can do.

[ReadWryt]

Originally posted by Talimon
What does that prove, RW? The fact remains that Saruman is still having his orcs bring the ring back to him in the movie, and he does tell Lurtz something to the effect of, "They have something that is of great value to me. Bring them back alive and unspoiled."

There is no way for us to tell on this issue yet.

What's your take on the genocide bit though? Pushing it, or fleshing out Tolkien tale? I tend to go with the latter, since there are numerous mentions in the book to Saurons and Sarumans cruelty towards the people of Rohan and Gondor. On the other hand, if you say that their ultimate goal was the genocide of mankind, why did they take men (Harad etc.) as allies/slaves?

I just think it's another case of Jackson shoving his size 9 Hiking Boot into his own mouth and not realising it because he honestly does think that he is taking the "undue" complexity out of the story for all the "braindead" moviegoers...

[Talimon]

Actually, concerning Saruman and Saurons evil, there really isn't much complexity. There aren't any great motivations behind thier actions. While we obviously can't tell yet, one could venture a guess that PJ elaborating on the sufferage of the people of Rohan is just a way for the audience to hate Saruman even more.

[ReadWryt]

What does that prove, RW? The fact remains that Saruman is still having his orcs bring the ring back to him in the movie, and he does tell Lurtz something to the effect of, "They have something that is of great value to me. Bring them back alive and unspoiled."

I failed to address this question when it was asked of me. What does it prove when I pointed out that in the Ten Minute Preview of "The Two Towers" Jackson states quite plainly, and I quote, "The title "The Two Towers" refers to the tower of Orthanc which is where Saruman, Christopher Lee's character, is based...and the tower of Barad Dur in Mordor...the home of Sauron, and the two are in alliance..."? It points out that either the guy has oversimplified the story, is lying in the preview or really doesn't understand the story at all...

[PRH]

The 10 minute preview of TTT is correct in saying there is an alliance between Orthanc and Barad-Dur. This genocide business is an out and out change. More on that later...

This "Saruman allegiance" is a sore point for me. There are a few indicators in the movie that he was in it for himself ("whom do you serve," Uruks bringing the halflings back to Isengard), but there was too much that suggests Saruman is totally a servant of Mordor. Bottom line, it's unclear but leans toward Saruman being just a servant.

In the book, Saruman feigns allegiance to Sauron but intends to do for himself. But he wants to be in a position that if things don't go his way, he can fall back on being Sauron's trusted and powerful servant. Sauron, on the other hand, realizes some value in Saruman's feigned allegiance and allows him to act as he "will." All the while though, Saruman, unknowningly is fully ensnared to Sauron's will by means of the Palantir. It's very complex...who know's exactly where it will go in TTT.

I think I'll open a thread on this genocide business because it's a topic onto itself.

[Arvedui]

To me, this is the most anoying change from the books to the movie. It is quite clear in the books that there is no alliance between Sauron and Saruman. Saruman works for himself, he thinks. What he does not realize is that he is under the will of Sauron, having used the Palantir too many times (which also goes for Denethor II). Likewise, there is no hint in the books that Saruman is capable of commanding Mount Caradras. Rather, it is the will of the mountain itself that denies passage for the fellowship.

[pohuist]

You are absolutely right about Caradras.

As far as alliance goes -- Saruman initially pledged allegiance to Sauron and had him fooled for some time, he, of course, was in it for himself from the beginning. Sauron realized his treachery when he understood that Saruman knew where the Ring was but failed to report it. (UT, the hunt for the ring). Also from the UT:
1. Its unlikely that Saruman would be able to kill the Nasgul and get the Ring. Vice versa, it says that Saruman was probably able to withstand the assault of the 9 while under the protection of Orthanc (emphasis added). I remember the earlier thread where opinions were mixed as to whether Gandalf the White (stronger than Saruman) was able to better just the chief Nasgul. As a side note, Nasgul would have undoubtedly brought the Ring to Sauron, they were totally under his dominion.

2. Sauron actually dominated Saruman's will through the Palantir. So it is unclear if Saruman has enough will left to claim the Ring for himself if he ever got it. There is a note in UT saying that although Saruman, a Maia is much stronger than Denethor, the latter is much less under Sauron's influence, b/c Denethor was the rightful owner of the Palantir of MT, and Saruman was not the rightful owner of the Orthanc's stone.

3. It will be logical for the movie to have Sauron assume Saruman's treachery when the latter is deprived of the Palantir and has no Hobbit to deliver and even does not answer the calls through Palantir. However, w/r/to the movie I have nothing to add to what ReadWryt said on this and any other threads. Nice, PJ, but no cigar.

[Talimon]

Likewise, there is no hint in the books that Saruman is capable of commanding Mount Caradras. Rather, it is the will of the mountain itself that denies passage for the fellowship.

Let me follow this with a quote from the book:

'I wonder if this is a contrivance of the Enemy,' said Boromir. 'They say in my land that he can govern the storms in the Mountains of Shadow that stand upon the borders of Mordor. He has strange powers and many allies.'

'His arm has grown long indeed,' said Gimili, 'if he can draw snow down from the North to trouble us here three hundred leagues away.'

'His arm has grown long,' said Gandalf.

'His arm has grown long' sounds like an alliance with Saruman if there ever was one. Also note that I highlighted Boromirs words. To me this settles the fact that there was more involved in Caradhras the pure bad wheather.

[Arvedui]

I agree, but still there is no sign in the book that Saruman is the Enemy mentioned. The Enemy they talk about must, in my opinion, be Sauron. I think PJ over-emphasized the role played by Saruman. There are a couple of other details that I don't like, but they are not connected to this link.

[Niniel]

It says somewhere that Saruman was a double traitor, meaning that first he went over to Sauron's side and then betrayed Sauron as well, by starting to work for himself. So IMO he first joined Sauron, and I think that's what the filmmakers mean.

[mr underhill]

o think in the movies saruman and sauron are best buddys......
it looks like saruman may die in helms deep if they cut the scouring of the shire.... oh well...

[Arvedui]

If they cut out the scouring of the Shire, and let Saruman die anywhere else, then they take away an important part of the story. Remember that Frodo already have seen the scouring in Galadriel's mirror, so they might have to keep this as a part of the film. One thing though: We have not seen Galadriel giving the gifts to the other members of the fellowship, among which were the gift to Samwise.
The scouring of the Shire must be a part of the Return of the King, as well as Frodo going to the Grey Havens. If not, I will be very, very, very disappointed!

[Talimon]

I feel you, but the Scouring was cut. PJ's own words. The Grey Havens, on the other hand, will probably be there, considering that PJ said it is his favorite scene in the trilogy. The reason the Scouring was cut (more accurately never filmed) was due to cinematic/dramatic reasons. There are others here who have made the argument for cutting it pretty well, though I still want it there, at least in the DVD.

Saruman will probably be in in all 3 movies. He could still die in the Shire for all we know. Just because the scouring was cut doesn't mean his death was. He could still be up there and could still be killed by Wormtongue.

[Ariana Undomiel]

The whole Sauron Saruman alliance in the books was a reality but it was also a farce at the roots. Neither Sauron nor Saruman would have shared the ring with the other had either one actually gotten their hands on it. Saruman would have replaced the dark lord quite easily had the ring fallen into his hands for he was a powerful maia with a heart corrupted by his greed for the ultimate power.

~Ariana