🧙 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 ;)

SWORD that was BROKEN???

G

greypilgrim

Guest
Anyone notice Aragorn's sword after they all left Rivendell?
It doesn't look like...it is not Narsil, the sword that was re-forged.
Why? It should have been re-forged again in Rivendell. Why has Peter Jackson CHANGED the story like that? And in all the other ways he has altered it? He has changed this story too much, it is not the original.
At first, I was pumped about the movie.
After 4 times seeing it, I think is is a joke.
Not very funny, though.:(
 

PRH

Registered User
Joined
Dec 20, 2001
Messages
689
Reaction score
0
He gets it later in the movie. Before the Paths of the Dead.
 

Thorin

LOTR Purist to the end
Joined
Aug 20, 2001
Messages
1,402
Reaction score
15
And Arwen (of course! Who else deserves to give it to him, but the powerful, healing, spell-casting she-Elf) brings it to him and gets involved in Helm's Deep. I said that when Arwen got her steroid part, the door would be open for more of the same role. You don't think after distorting her character like PJ did to introduce her to the audience early, that she would just fade in the background? That would have been worse then had he made her like Tolkien's Arwen and made her fade into the background.

I always felt that the fabricated Boromir scene in Rivendell was useless especially since Anduril was not reforged and given to Aragorn in Rivendell. So much for Helm's Deep "Anduril for the Dunadan!" cry and the fear it inflicts in the elves. By the time Aragorn gets to the Paths of the Dead all the action is done.
 

Snaga

The Usual Suspect
Joined
Feb 11, 2002
Messages
2,261
Reaction score
5
If you want to nit-pick (and you guys do!) Aragorn should carry Narsil with him at Bree, not have left it at Rivendell.
 
G

greypilgrim

Guest
The sword that was broken was forged again in Rivendell, before they all set out. He wouldn't have it in Bree, but would have it when Gandalf, Gimli, Legolas and he go together to Edoras.
 
H

Harad

Guest
As usual a NPW does not even know the story he is nit-picking about. From the "Strider" chapter at Bree:

- I did not know, - he answered. - But I am Aragorn, and those verses go with that name. - He drew out his sword, and they saw that the blade was indeed broken a foot below the hilt. - Not much use is it, Sam? - said Strider. - But the time is near when it shall be forged anew. Sam said nothing.
 
G

greypilgrim

Guest
actually, harad, I know full well what I am talking about.
The sword was forged in Rivendell, and was not whole in Bree.
maybe you misunderstood my last posts.
It doesn't even matter that much to me anyway, just another thing that Peter Jackson decided to ruin from the story.
 
H

Harad

Guest
Then you misunderstood V of K's comment.

By all means: nit-pick away. Thats what the forum is for.
 

aragil

Just another loremaster
Joined
Aug 27, 2001
Messages
1,852
Reaction score
4
Location
Secondarily Beautiful State of Washington
Thorin and greypilgrim- if it makes you at all happy, PJ probably had the 'shrine' right:

FotR, p.324 '"For the Sword that was Broken is the Sword of Elendil that broke beneath him when he fell. It has been treasured by his heirs when all other heirlooms were lost; for it was spoken of old among us that it whould be made again when the Ring, Isildur's Bane, was found."'

RotK, p.401 'Arahael his son (Aranarth, 1st Ranger of the Dunedain's son) was fostered in Rivendell, and so were all the sons of the chieftains after him; and there also were kept the heirlooms of their house: the ring of Barahir, the shards of Narsil, the star of Elendil, and the sceptre of Annuminas'

greypilgrim- I'm glad that it only took you four viewings to realize that PJ's version was not worth your money. PJ is probably glad too. I'm not sure that I follow the logic that any change from the way Tolkien wrote the book is necessarily a change for the worse. Should the story be told exactly the same way every time? If Tolkien were to re-write the books, would he just make them a word-for-word copy? I think that it was Ged who pointed out that re-making 'Psycho'
as a scene-for-scene duplicate of the original was a waste of time. It added nothing to our understanding of the original. A re-making of The Lord of the Rings which was a word for word copy of the book would be long, and would not really add much to our 'Middle-Earth experience'. Personally, I got a lot out of the movie, and it has made me look at many of the parts from the book in a different (not the same as bad) way. Much of the changes were still in the spirit of the books- such as having the shards in a shrine in Rivendell, where the Appendix tells us that the heirs of Elendil are in the habit of keeping it. Having the Boromir scene shows us the lineage of the sword and reminds us how important it is in the mythology. Just because it is different from the books does not make it bad, just as Aragorn not having the reforged sword in Moria, Lorien, or Amon Hen is not necessarily bad. It strengthens the character of Aragorn- assuring us that he is worthy without the sword. New viewers will therefore be less likely to think that it is the sword which makes a man king, rather than anything about the man himself. Do you think this agrees with how Tolkien felt about Aragorn?
 

Snaga

The Usual Suspect
Joined
Feb 11, 2002
Messages
2,261
Reaction score
5
Aragil - Thank you for that. I agree entirely - very well put.

Grey - technically of course it is the Shards of Narsil that he shows to the hobbits at Bree, before Rivendell, but re-forged it becomes Anduril. Just thought I would throw that in, in the spirit of seeing who can pee the highest up a wall! I'm glad you enjoyed the first three viewings of the film enough to keep going back. Must be a good film...;)
 
Last edited:

Bill the Pony

Registered User
Joined
Dec 12, 2001
Messages
188
Reaction score
1
rumors and confusion

A guy named moriarty who talked to PJ at a book signing claims ROTK starts with the reforging of Anduril. (see aintitcool) Assuming Helm's deep is still in TT, that means Arwen does not bring it to him?? Is she there? Who's the sword-wielding elf in RW's pictures?
I guess we'll have to wait 10 months to find out. No need to get angry yet.
 

Snaga

The Usual Suspect
Joined
Feb 11, 2002
Messages
2,261
Reaction score
5
SSGrif, I think by your actions you show that perhaps you ARE one to add to the nitpicking!:)

Anyway the book says
He drew out his sword and they saw that the blade was indeed broken a foot below the hilt.
So what you say sounds right.

But later at the Council of Elrond it says
He cast his sword upon the table that stood before Elrond, and the blade was in two pieces.
So I'm guessing that if he had the hilt at Bree he must have had the rest of the blade too. Whether he showed them both halves, is left to your imagination. But the idea that its in lots of pieces is, therefore, another unconscionable desecration of the book by PJ. (Not!!);)
 
G

greypilgrim

Guest
Variag of K.,
You know what? I am nitpicking. I will admit it.
I will also admit that the movie BROUGHT TO LIFE (for me) the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. Like, it (the movie) made me read the same books since high school that I've read OVER and OVER again, OVER AND OVER again, and loving the story page by page, still.
But , yeah..... I'm nit-picking, as I shouldn't be.
Because I really REALLY liked the movie!
I want the story of the Ring as written to be represented in the fullest, just like all you people do, I'm sure.

Aragil, you made an excellent point about the man and not the sword.
I see that it takes alot more than being a fan of a book to actually portray it on screen. I know nothing about making movies.

I do feel (JUSTLY) robbed of seeing some of my favorite moments from the story
left out or altered in the movie, but I must stop complaining and just admit it.....
IT IS AN AWESOME MOVIE !!!
 

Eol

Registered User
Joined
Dec 23, 2001
Messages
638
Reaction score
0
Aragorn

Sorry but Aragorn has no use for that sword in the movie. This is not the "I'm gonna be King", "Sieze my destiny", "I'm on a mission" guy like the book. He says himself he doesn't want to be king. He is Aragorn - the Underachiever. He just wants to shack up with Arwen somewhere. So why would he reforge that rusty old sword? What does he care of heirlooms or duty or pride in the Dunedain?

I understood what motivated Aragorn from the book. As for this guy, who knows.

Eol - the Dark Elf
 

aragil

Just another loremaster
Joined
Aug 27, 2001
Messages
1,852
Reaction score
4
Location
Secondarily Beautiful State of Washington
Eol-
Is a person who never doubts himself somehow easier to understand? Do you understand what made Aragorn a king in the books? Was it a sword, or was it something about the man himself? Aragorn in the movie never says he doesn't want to be king- in fact, all of his actions in the movie display that he soon will be king and is deserving of it. His words to the dying Boromir and his rejection of the ring when Frodo offers it are two choice examples, one coming directly from the book, one being the invention of PJ. I'm afraid that PJ's Aragorn is no harder to understand than Tolkien's. He is going up against the Lord of Darkness, if he doubts he'll succeed then he's only human. However, this doesn't stop him from trying, and I'm sure that at the end of the third movie we'll be treated to King Elessar, the overachiever.
And oh yeah, if it's only a reforged sword that makes Aragorn a king, he'll have that as well.
 

Snaga

The Usual Suspect
Joined
Feb 11, 2002
Messages
2,261
Reaction score
5
I think Eol is right. very good point Eol, I wish I'd thought of that. Oh, and welcome to the Forum!:)

The point is Aragil, that Aragorn in the book is not in any way conflicted about his heritage and destiny. He carries Narsil, wanting to claim the kingship.

In the film Aragorn has specifically REFUSED his heritage, according to Elrond. He fears that he will have the same fate as Isildur - he is very clear about that at least in his Arwen scene, and so backs away from declaring his lineage. He therefore wouldn't carry the sword. But that doesn't make him more or less human, more or less brave per se. Just different.

Its not that the sword maketh the man, but its a powerful symbol of his right to the thrones of Gondor and Arnor.
 
H

Harad

Guest
Sorry VoK but I disagree.

In the book, Aragorn has "chosen exile" every bit as much as in the movie. Only the finding of the Ring results in his return to Gondor to fight the War of the Ring. If he wins that War, then he gains the opportunity to become King.

Without finding the Ring, Aragorn would have continued being the Chieftain of the Rangers of the North, as he had for 67 years after Elrond told him of his heritage. He would have left alone the stable 1000 year-old government of the Stewards in Gondor.

There are differences between the two Aragorns. But they are less than meets the eye.
 

aragil

Just another loremaster
Joined
Aug 27, 2001
Messages
1,852
Reaction score
4
Location
Secondarily Beautiful State of Washington
I agree with Harad here (it must be that week)- Elrond's statement in the movie could be a reference to Aragorn's time in Gondor. Aragorn in the movie is not an underachiever. He never says that he doesn't want to be king. He has doubts about himself. We don't really know what Aragorn is thinking in the books- the majority of the narrative is through the Hobbit's POV. For all we know the book Aragorn doubted himself as well. The movie Aragorn does not achieve less than the book Aragorn, so I fail to see in what way Eol is correct by saying that movie Aragorn is only looking to shack up with Arwen.
 

Eol

Registered User
Joined
Dec 23, 2001
Messages
638
Reaction score
0
Not exactly. There was a lot foretold about Aragorn. Not that he would be King, but he had a chance to be. Elrond himself tells him after he first meets Arwen some 50-70 years before the movie time that the only way he will permit the marriage is if he becomes King of both Gondor and Arnor. So I think they knew there was something special about this guy. Also you might want to do some reading about Thorongil. That was Aragorn under an assumed name when he was an advisor and champion for Denethor's father. He left Gondor when Denethor took power.

So yes, there are differences, and they are glaring. In the book he is definately working to renew the Kingship in order to renew the kingdoms, the power of the Dunedain, and to win the woman he loves. If he fails, he loses everything. That is why he is so cautious about entering Minas Tirith after the battle. He doesn't want any contention. If for some reason he alienates some faction who later opposes his coronation, then no Arwen. And that can happen, read about the kin-strife in Gondor, also about Arvedui and his claim.

Eol - The Dark Elf
 

Thread suggestions

Top