🧙 The Tolkien Forum 🧝

Welcome to our forum! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox! Plus you won't see ads ;)

Book Arwen Movie Arwen

Mrs. Maggott

Home is where the cat is
Joined
Oct 2, 2002
Messages
3,478
Reaction score
11
Location
Long Island, New York
A good horse at top speed does about 35 miles an hour. But most horses can't run at top speed for an hour much less several hours. Most riders who wish to go long distances rapidly will gallop the horse at well under his "flat out" speed and then perhaps walk him for several miles, alternating this mode of travel in order to go the farthest distance in the fastest time. But that brings one's speed considerably under 35 mph.

If Rivendell was "6 days away" at the time of the attack, then how far could Aragorn (carrying Frodo) have come with the hobbits on foot behind him before he met up with Arwen? I can't imagine that it was more than one day. Seeing how desperately ill the hobbit was becoming, Aragorn would have (in fact, DID) stop to find something (athelas) to treat the wound so that Frodo would not slip into the wraith world before help could be found. That still leaves 5 days to Rivendell when she finds them (I will be even willing to lower that estimate to 4, although it would be a BIG stretch). Taking off 1 day (and that's giving more time than should be necessary) from the fords to the house, that still leaves 3 to 4 days to the fords. I still say that there would have had to be at least a FEW HOURS and probably more, during which Arwen with Frodo would have had to rest the horse on the journey to the fords - and when that happened - well, you know. :rolleyes:

As for Arwen in the river: I did not see her "back up" except to go a few feet closer to the bank. I certainly did not see her RIDE UP ONTO the bank. If she did, fine, but I don't remember seeing it. Still, if she did call down the flood, why stop to do so while you're still in the river? And if she wished to taunt the Riders into going far enough into the water to be carrier away when the flood came, why could she not have done so FROM THE BANK? Surely the fact that she was no longer in the river would not have prevented the Riders from continuing their persuit. :confused:
 

Parrot

You're kiddin', right?
Joined
Mar 6, 2002
Messages
305
Reaction score
0
Location
Montana
Oh, I have problems with Arwen too, like all the clothes she wears all the time. I mean if Elrond can make floods couldn’t he whip up a hot-tub in pretty short order and get us some gratuitous bikini shots and couldn’t PJ have fabricated (I forgot the classic “fabricated”!) a bit part for Alicia Silverstone as Arwen’s hot friend or handmaiden or something, is that really so much to ask? and maybe we could work Milla Jovovich or Lucy Liu or maybe in there and go for the hat trick and they could be like Elrond’s Angels and all like posing with cool swords and stuff and they could gallop around Rivendell scantily clad on their thundering steeds and uuuhhh……….. oops, sorry, wandered off there, heh, heh……

Whoa, I wish TTT would hurry up and get here so we can have some fresh, completely pointless, drivel to argue over like the fate of the world hangs in the balance.
 

Mrs. Maggott

Home is where the cat is
Joined
Oct 2, 2002
Messages
3,478
Reaction score
11
Location
Long Island, New York
To be quite candid, I ENJOYED the enlarged version of Aragorn (which Arwen's increased role made necessary) because he is my favorite character in the book and Tolkien made him so, well, indestructable; so untouchable; so academic; so damned British! It was great seeing him get banged around and appear to be actually in danger from time to time. I realize that Tolkien's version was more "mythopoeic", but frankly, I prefer my melodrama DRAMATIC!

And I had no problem with the love scenes. Again in the book, it was all so "academic" that although one knew about the eventual consummation of their love, it sort of reminded me of that play, "No Sex, Please! We're British!" I enjoy all of this in the movie, but I do wish he (Jackson) had spent just a little time making the audience aware that the hobbits acted out of love and loyalty rather than just being in the wrong place at the wrong time!

I frankly see no reason why you can't have a little fun along in a momentous epic, but a film like this walks a fine line between great entertainment and a sort of big screen video game where one can spend all one's time toting up the ever increasing body count!
 

Eowyn14

Registered User
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
8
Reaction score
1
First of all, to all involved in the discussion back when it was hot and heavy: Well done! Wish I would have been a member at that time in order to have participated. But now that I am, I think I'll throw my two cents in.

Oh! For the record, I am in agreement (for the most part) with the points raised by Mrs. Maggot, but not always for her same reasoning.

Also, in my arguments I will try to stick to the movie and NOT the books except when the instance arises when I need to address them.

(If you don't want to rehash or reargue old points, then new points to debate are below in blue.)


Okay...

Regarding the whole "race to the ford thing" (ie. how many days it took / where Arwen was coming from / who was the faster rider / elven equine / change of scenery / it got lighter outside):
Not ENOUGH is made clear in the movie as to time frame to make a clear determination in my mind... so I'm going to stay away from it. ((Note: OMG, you guys spent forever on that issue.)) ;)

Regarding Ariana's statement something to the effect of Arwen being an elf and her horse being elvish and so the realm of reality can easily be altered:
In what universe? She doesn't live in another dimension where she can warp time and get to Rivendell before the Nazgul. She is a creature of ME subject to the same laws of physics as the rest. Also, there is no indication that the horse in the movie (not the book!) has any "special skills". To the movie viewer he's just a regular old horse.

Regarding the "increase" of the "sub-plots" of Saruman and Arwen:
Necessary in my opinion. These two characters are important and pivotal in how their existance (their relations with others and their actions) effects the ENTIRE storyline. The Old Forest, Tom Bombadil and Goldberry, and the Barrowdowns are not significant overall characters to the driving force of the story; therefore, cut them (even as being a "bookfan" I would have thought it cool to have seen them).
If PJ doesn't tell Saruman and Arwen's stories through the means of scenes in the movie, how will the viewer be made known of their importance (assuming, of course, that they know nothing about the books and only have the movie as their source for information)?

Regarding the SotS as the climax:
I don't think it is. I didn't feel this way even in reading the books.
IMO, everything after the battles, Mt. Doom, and the coronation / wedding was "wrap up". I think you may concede that the story has a natural climax to it which is the destruction of the ring and the removal of the immediate threat of Sauron getting ahold of it and taking over ME. After that, it is literally and figuratively "clean up".
Yes the Hobbits still have to find out what has happened to their beloved home, .. but.... is there REALLY any overwhelming, edge of doom type of threat to them after the ring is destroyed? No. And the Hobbits don't think so either! Look at the way they perceived the "sheriffs" upon return to the Shire. "What??? Are you kidding me? We have just faced the lidless eye, the all consuming evil power of the one ring, orc kidnapping, the Witch King, a crazy old man ready to light himself and his son on fire, talking/walking/killer trees, giant smelly spiders, the coronation and wedding and return to the throne of the man who rules our land (did we mention he's a personal friend of ours?), and you are telling me 'I can't cross the bridge after night fall?' Get the hell out of my way!" ((Not actual quotes,.. don't post me and say so.)) ;)
So therefore the anticipation and fear that has been building for three books (and will for three movies) has been relieved by the destruction of the ring. The movies, I believe, will reflect this natural climax by making the SotS very minimal, filler between the coronation and Frodo's departure. I, for one (and I think I am in the minority on this), hope the movie does NOT make too much of the SotS, though I DO hope that it will be made known.

Regarding the emasculating treatment of Aragorn's character:
I must say that I agree with Mrs. Maggot's persception of this. IMO, Aragorn is a quiet man, but silence and uncertainty are NOT the same thing. Arwen's "ego stroking" of Aragorn in Rivendell leads the careful nuaces of their relationship into something that I don't think it ever was. Aaand ::bracing for the backlash::, sorry, but Aragorn would NEVER have let Arwen take Frodo the rest of the way to the ford (her arguments or no).
::Quickly moving on::
But ::sigh, shaking head:: since we (the audience) have already been exposed to this now, let me ask you something: How can Aragorn NOT seem like a hypocrit when he later will tell Eowyn that she can't ride with him in battle to face peril? He let ARWEN do it! The love of his life! Who he has to prove himself worthy of before he can have her!!
As the scoreboard stands now, Arwen is leading in the "worthiness" points. Aragorn is going to be a hypocrit on top of it all now?? That's not strength of character and resolve,.. that's weakness!
::Grumble:: Maybe they are leaving room for his character to grow and "become" more "kingly", but one of the reason that men, elves, dwarves, and hobbits pledge themselves to this man with little more proof, reassurance, or guaranteed safety than 'just being asked to do so' is a mark of what a charismatic, intelligent, strong, loyal, self assured, leader of a person that he is. Movie Aragorn had some moments that were really really nice, ... but too many moments when, as a viewer, I doubted him and his ability to know what was best, to know what he wanted, and to know how to accomplish things once a decision was made. Knowing how the book Aragorn is portrayed makes me want the movie Aragorn to reflect these same qualities. IMO, movie Aragorn, disappointedly, isn't coming across with these leadership qualities in the same way. I think that a lot of the fault of that has to do with how the writer's have altered Arwen's character.

If you would like to reply to my above opinions, I would be happy to pick this debate back up. But here is a new question to review the aspect of how Arwen's change will effect things:

How do you think the empowerment of the movie Arwen (defying her father, facing the Nazgul, wielding her sword) will effect the impact of the character of Eowyn (who is much praised for her character's drive to fight) when later she will be doing these same things? Will the surprise of a "lady warrior" be less because the audience has already seen it through Arwen?
 

Mrs. Maggott

Home is where the cat is
Joined
Oct 2, 2002
Messages
3,478
Reaction score
11
Location
Long Island, New York
The Scouring of the Shire is the "climax" of the story not from the matter of importance, but because Tolkien has told his tale THROUGH and FROM the viewpoint of the hobbits and no one else. Therefore, even though "all's right with the world" elsewhere, when the four hobbits leave Gandalf and return to the Shire, it is up to them to put it to rights and, correctly, the LAST BATTLE of the War of the Ring takes place outside the front door of Bag End - where it might be said, the whole thing started.

However, the story in the film is NOT told from the viewpoint of the hobbits and therefore SoS is truly anti-claimactic.
 

Eowyn14

Registered User
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
8
Reaction score
1
Originally posted by Mrs. Maggott
...Tolkien has told his tale THROUGH and FROM the viewpoint of the hobbits and no one else.
Yes, the story mainly followed the travels of the hobbits through the WOTR, but I disagree that it was only ever told THROUGH and FROM the viewpoints of the Hobbits. The Prologue begins by saying that "This book is largely concerned with Hobbits,...". It didn't say it was all inclusively concerned with them. If it ONLY ever showed things from the viewpoints of the Hobbits then Tolkien wouldn't have included portions of the Appendix nor, it could be argued, would he have bothered with the depths to which he gave so many of the non-Hobbit characters or the chapters involved in telling their sides of the story.
... it is up to them to put it to rights and, correctly, the LAST BATTLE of the War of the Ring takes place outside the front door of Bag End...
Yes, technically. Arguably though, the battle itself was relatively small and the overall dangers were not "desperate" even though the battle was very important. The act of the hobbits having to resort to a battle was, I believe, mostly so Tolkien could wrap up Saruman and Wormtongue's story. The Hobbits are the glue and the through-thread that the story follows - but the story is not solely about them.
However, the story in the film is NOT told from the viewpoint of the hobbits and therefore SoS is truly anti-claimactic.
Agreed on both points. Again, however, I'm not sure that you can convincingly argue that the story in the book WAS only from the viewpoint of the Hobbits.
;) I have a feeling we won't see the same on this no matter how much or well we both debate the two sides. I'm pretty much decided in regards to my impression of the story (book and movie) and I get the feeling, by your posting, that you are equally as convinced in your impressions.
Thanks for replying! I love to hear other views.
 

Mrs. Maggott

Home is where the cat is
Joined
Oct 2, 2002
Messages
3,478
Reaction score
11
Location
Long Island, New York
Certainly, the hobbits weren't the ONLY people whose viewpoint was expressed. But the fact is that the hobbits were the MAIN protagonists of the tale. This is noted mainly in the fact that Tolkien permits all FOUR hobbits to go on the quest when, in fact, it would have made infinitely better marshal sense to have two elf warriors go with the other seven. But Tolkien WANTED the hobbits because they become the catalyst through which things happen in the story. Gandalf says as much when he notes that it is Pippin's and Merry's arrival in Fangorn that arouses the Ents. It is Merry's blow which deflects the Witch King's blade and allows Eowyn to destroy him and so forth.

Yes, there are other points of view in the story - including some from the "other side", but it is the HOBBITS who are the criteria from whom and by which the tale evolves and it is the hobbits, alas, that Mr. Jackson primarily fails in his version of the story.
 

Parrot

You're kiddin', right?
Joined
Mar 6, 2002
Messages
305
Reaction score
0
Location
Montana
Eowyn14, lest you start to feel rejected by the defenders, I would just like to say Welcome to the Forum and thanks for your contribution. However, I think that any response I might make to your questions would be just a regurgitation of points already discussed here ad nauseam.

In regards to the decisions made by movie Aragorn, I would leave you with a quote from book Gandalf explaining his decision to take the fellowship through Moria;
“However it may prove, one must tread the path that need chooses!”
See you around. :)
 

HalasĂ­an

Dunedain Ranger
Joined
Dec 16, 2001
Messages
803
Reaction score
269
Location
The Shadows of AnnĂşminas
... PJ could have created fictional scenes to include more of Arwen (like he has in TTT with talks with Elrond and Galadriel) that would have given her more screen time and kept her in character.

By having her (a minor character, even!) come into the scene for the first time as a blazing warrior who all alone defies all the Nazgul at once (something probably even her more powerful ancestors wouldn't have been crazy to do), and stealing the show from other important characters was just a poor characterization of an elven princess beloved by all of elvendom for her inner and outer beauty.

To resort to potraying her (first impression nonetheless) of some sort of mail-dressed, sword-wielding warrior wench is totally different than the way Tolkien portrayed her and it gave the wrong first impression to those who were not familiar with LoTR. Tolkien was quite adamant about drastically altering his characters and that's just what PJ did.....
In the rare moment when I get my EEDVDs out and watch this, the whole part of Arwen catching Arragorn out at unawares in the wild still Shts me to tears". I would have written Arwen in to the screenplay in an expanded role in a much different way, but thenit would become my fanfic instead of Peter Jackson's.

How do you think the empowerment of the movie Arwen (defying her father, facing the Nazgul, wielding her sword) will effect the impact of the character of Eowyn (who is much praised for her character's drive to fight) when later she will be doing these same things? Will the surprise of a "lady warrior" be less because the audience has already seen it through Arwen?
Again, I have two or three alternate screenplays that deals with the whole Arwen/Aragorn/Eowyn sandwich differently. To purists, it would likely be just as dreadful, but to me, it gives a closer depiction of the characters as presented in the book.

Anyway, I ramble. To PJ's credit, the dream scenes between Aragorn and Arwen were beautiful.
 

Gabriel Perry

New Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2019
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Location
South Carolina, USA
I loved it coz it was Liv Tyler huhhuhuhuhuhu
er anyway, it needed some love scene as PJ says in one or other of his interviews, the only thing that annoyed me as that Arwen saved the aragorn and the hobbits and not Glorfindel which was better in the book
Well, I mean, at least we didn't have to see her save them at Helm's Deep... that would have been too much. Not that I don't love the character (because i do, Liv Taylor did an awesome job), but that's WAY too far out. The Lorien Elves were pushing it.
 

Olorgando

not from 'Straya
Joined
Aug 19, 2019
Messages
1,136
Reaction score
584
Location
Franconia
This seems to qualify as a "double-necropost"! First HalasĂ­an revives a thread dormant for almost 16 years, then Gabriel Perry almost a year-and-a-half after HalasĂ­an's post. ;)

But I also found it fascinating that the last of the original 87 posts of the thread, spanning just over 2 months in 2002, dealt not just with the only film that had been available at the time, "Fellowship", but also speculated quite a bit about what was to follow. Well, I can speculate, too. What would have happened here if PJ (who stopped him? Philippa Boyens and Fran Walsh giving him a severe talking to about what would not do?) had succumbed to his urge to give Arwen that "Mary Sue" scene at Helm's Deep that they had, as per the EEs, at least partially filmed.
But then, perhaps this thread should more correctly be titled (in retrospect) "Book Arwen Fellowship Arwen". We are all prone to delude ourselves that we occasionally have "brilliant ideas" that no one else has ever thought of. As this is not even necessarily true of Newton and Einstein … . So perhaps the discussion of "TTT Arwen" and "RoTK Arwen" took place in later threads. There is always the danger of a thread in a chronological "latest post" listing like in most site (sub-) forums I know to be pushed off page 1 - and thus ignored by many participants.
 

HalasĂ­an

Dunedain Ranger
Joined
Dec 16, 2001
Messages
803
Reaction score
269
Location
The Shadows of AnnĂşminas
What would have happened here if PJ (who stopped him? Philippa Boyens and Fran Walsh giving him a severe talking to about what would not do?) had succumbed to his urge to give Arwen that "Mary Sue" scene at Helm's Deep that they had, as per the EEs, at least partially filmed.
In twenty-year retrospect, I have come to the thinking that having Arwen and her brothers leading elves (I'd say Dunedain Rangers here but PJ co-opted the whole northern kingdom out of the story) from Imladris would have made much more sense than a whole army of elves marching to Helms Deep from Lothlorien.

This post is only a couple weeks after Olorgando and his Well-Known Member posted last... :D
 

Thread suggestions

Top