EPTOn January 06 2013 08:13 MyXoMoPBL wrote:
Also, was the movie supposed to be a complete rip off from the lotr first movie?
Also, was the movie supposed to be a complete rip off from the lotr first movie?
I just hope you're trolling.
[Movie] The Hobbit Trilogy - Page 61
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
|
Kaien
Belgium178 Posts
I just hope you're trolling. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
I think that Boromir was something of a special case, his ambition would clearly get the better of him in any number of scenarios. Faramir, Aragorn, Gandalf, Gimli, various elves, all can resist the ring even when in close proximity to it for a length of time. Sam and Frodo often use the ring and Frodo only has one real moment of weakness. I don't see how using the ring would always go wrong. Isildur had the ring and didn't turn into a dark lord, instead he was killed by some orcs (who didn't obey him as the new master of the ring). | ||
|
Sumahi
Guam5609 Posts
| ||
|
Luolis
Finland7104 Posts
Overall i liked the movie. I dont think im going to a movie theater for the next one because i hate the scenes when suddenly something screams as loud as it can and suddenly jumps on the screen. (especially the Nazgul-thing) | ||
|
Dunmer
United Kingdom568 Posts
| ||
|
Yatzi
United States10 Posts
| ||
|
JeanBob
Canada295 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:05 Dunmer wrote: It was written by the same author in the same setting, but in the second and third movie you will see parts of middle earth that you never saw in the LotR trilogy. Yup, the Lonely Mouintain is somwehere beyond the Misty Mountains so it's legitimate and VERY LOGIC that they use about the same path, but after the Misty Mountains the road gets different. Asking if it is a rip-off because of that would basically be asking if every Harry Potter book is a rip-off of one another because they go to the same place every year. | ||
Falling
Canada11350 Posts
On January 06 2013 08:29 Grumbels wrote: I don't see how the ring can corrupt a race. Maybe it corrupts an individual, who is then surrounded by an army of other people that have been ordered to dispose of him if he starts behaving suspiciously. There are numerous safeguards you can build in. If you have a rotation of elven lords to use the ring to defeat Sauron, then maybe all of them would be terribly scarred, but chances are it could have results. I think that Boromir was something of a special case, his ambition would clearly get the better of him in any number of scenarios. Faramir, Aragorn, Gandalf, Gimli, various elves, all can resist the ring even when in close proximity to it for a length of time. Sam and Frodo often use the ring and Frodo only has one real moment of weakness. I don't see how using the ring would always go wrong. Isildur had the ring and didn't turn into a dark lord, instead he was killed by some orcs (who didn't obey him as the new master of the ring). That's basically what Saruman proposed to Gandalf, but Gandalf didn't think very highly of it. "Only one can wield" or something to that effect. Temptation by proximity I think is very different from the power of the ring once wielded by one of the Great. Isildur was a great man, but a man just the same. I suspect at most he could have been a powerful wraith. But the effect of the ring varies according the measure of a persons power as well as the growing power of Sauron. Sauron was defeated and dispersed when Isildur had it. I think it's a fair assumption that the numerous safe-guard use of the ring method would wind up creating Sauron mark II and the rest of the elf lords wiped out. | ||
|
phantomfive
Korea (South)404 Posts
I don't see how the ring can corrupt a race. Maybe it corrupts an individual, who is then surrounded by an army of other people that have been ordered to dispose of him if he starts behaving suspiciously. There are numerous safeguards you can build in. If you have a rotation of elven lords to use the ring to defeat Sauron, then maybe all of them would be terribly scarred, but chances are it could have results. How exactly does that work......if you are the powerful ruler, are you REALLY going to command the people around you to be prepared to kill you? Are you going to give the ring to someone else who will become more powerful than you? And once you get the ring and become even more powerful, why do you think the ones around you would be able to stop you? Basically in LOTR everyone wise was afraid of the ring because they saw what happened to the ring-wraiths.....they knew to be afraid of dark powers that come from Sauron. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
It would be nice if there was some more clue as to the specifics of the ring's power, since now it's a bit of a mcguffin. On January 06 2013 09:18 phantomfive wrote: How exactly does that work......if you are the powerful ruler, are you REALLY going to command the people around you to be prepared to kill you? Are you going to give the ring to someone else who will become more powerful than you? And once you get the ring and become even more powerful, why do you think the ones around you would be able to stop you? Basically in LOTR everyone wise was afraid of the ring because they saw what happened to the ring-wraiths.....they knew to be afraid of dark powers that come from Sauron. No, you set up a group of, say, five people. Then you place these at the command of the king of Gondor or whatever. You let one person use the ring to win one battle, then this person removes himself from the group and travels back to Rivendell. If at any point this person refuses to give up the ring the king has ordered the army that surrounds him to just kill him. | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
Sauron didn't guard Mount Doom's entrance because he thought nobody could willfully pitch The Ring into the fires of Mount Doom. He thought that anyone who tried would succumb to The Ring's power and simply keep it for their own. In the end, Sauron was 100% correct. The Ring was destroyed by accident in a way nobody could possibly have predicted. With the exception of Gandalf. | ||
|
speknek
758 Posts
http://www.worldcrunch.com/culture-society/my-father-039-s-quot-eviscerated-quot-work-son-of-hobbit-scribe-j.r.r.-tolkien-finally-speaks-out/hobbit-silmarillion-lord-of-rings/c3s10299/#.UOjGbORE5AU | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:29 Grumbels wrote: Gandalf informs the council the ring can't be wielded as a weapon, but at the same time the ring was used by Isildur to no specific ill effect and was used by Bilbo to eliminate Smaug. The ring wraiths were consumed by their rings, but the elves continue to use theirs. There is no historical precedent for someone using the ring of power and turning into Sauron #2, so I don't know how Gandalf can be certain. It would be nice if there was some more clue as to the specifics of the ring's power, since now it's a bit of a mcguffin. The elven rings were never touched, and as such not corrupted, by Sauron. It would be nice if you geniuses read the Silmarillion before you try to draw conclusions (not directed at you particularly, but at the past couple of pages - most of what has been listed as problematic has been accounted for.) | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:35 Ghostcom wrote: The elven rings were never touched, and as such not corrupted, by Sauron. It would be nice if you geniuses read the Silmarillion before you try to draw conclusions (not directed at you particularly, but at the past couple of pages - most of what has been listed as problematic has been accounted for.) Galadriel said that her ring would cease to function with Sauron's ring gone, so there is some effect the one ring has on it. We all know that if Tolkien had decided the elven rings would be a corrupting influence you would have defended that decision also. I just think that since the entire narrative of the book is based on the ring, that it should be explained better. | ||
|
darthfoley
United States8003 Posts
| ||
|
Mafe
Germany5966 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:29 Grumbels wrote: Gandalf informs the council the ring can't be wielded as a weapon, but at the same time the ring was used by Isildur to no specific ill effect and was used by Bilbo to eliminate Smaug. The ring wraiths were consumed by their rings, but the elves continue to use theirs. There is no historical precedent for someone using the ring of power and turning into Sauron #2, so I don't know how Gandalf can be certain. It would be nice if there was some more clue as to the specifics of the ring's power, since now it's a bit of a mcguffin. No, you set up a group of, say, five people. Then you place these at the command of the king of Gondor or whatever. You let one person use the ring to win one battle, then this person removes himself from the group and travels back to Rivendell. If at any point this person refuses to give up the ring the king has ordered the army that surrounds him to just kill him. From my understanding, this could not work in the long run. Basically you should also have a group of people (who ideally also need to rotate with others) around the ringbearer who are ready to kill him if needed ("just kill" an invisible person. Or do you want to have him tied to the ground or something?). Envy and hatred appear to guaranteed amongst those groups/the possible ringbearers and are sure to be amplified by the ring, both if you chose that group from possible ringbeares or not. So sooner or later there will be some sorts of trouble/aggression/fights in the proximity of the ring that a malevolent or maybe just a weak and fast corrupted person of those groups could use to (assassinate the ringbearer and) slip away with the ring through the confusion. For your system to work you would need way more than 5 people, and if only for the fact that the journey to rivendell takes about several months iirc, whereas battles/skirmishes in the peak of the ringwar (which took place far away from rivendell) happened far more often. You would inevitably have too many Boromirs too close to the ring. Or in a battle a (not so) random arrow could hit the ringbearer. Or nazgul appear, the ringbearer uses the ring, sauron becomes aware and "mindcontrols" the ringbearer, who can impossibly resist him in this overwhelming situation. Then what? tl;dr: The chance of the ring being used by the good guys and succeeding with it is lower than the chance of hobbit infiltrating mordor and destroying the ring there. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:51 Grumbels wrote: Galadriel said that her ring would cease to function with Sauron's ring gone, so there is some effect the one ring has on it. We all know that if Tolkien had decided the elven rings would be a corrupting influence you would have defended that decision also. I just think that since the entire narrative of the book is based on the ring, that it should be explained better. Also explained in the Silmarillion. The elven rings were forged with the knowledge given to them by Sauron and hence he would be able to craft a ring which linked them to his. The elves furthermore did not use their 3 rings when Sauron had possession of the one ring. That is actually one of the more coherent parts of the Silmarillion, which confusing as it may be at times, gives more than ample explanation for all the critique raised so far. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11350 Posts
On January 06 2013 09:51 Grumbels wrote: Galadriel said that her ring would cease to function with Sauron's ring gone, so there is some effect the one ring has on it. We all know that if Tolkien had decided the elven rings would be a corrupting influence you would have defended that decision also. I just think that since the entire narrative of the book is based on the ring, that it should be explained better. You are mixing up a couple things. The nine and seven Sauron had a hand in creating in some way or other and where therefore corrupted. The Elven rings were made in secret and Sauron had no part in their creation. The one ring was created to rule all, but the only way he could have an effect over the three is if he divested a good portion of himself/ power into the ring in order to wield it. It is a very common thing with Tolkien that the Enemy is incapable of creation, just corruption. If they do come up with something, it requires an emptying so they become lesser. Morgoth is considerably less powerful by the end of the First Age after expending himself through Orcs, Trolls, wingless dragons, dragons with flight, etc. But it was only by expending so much of himself that he was able to link the fates of the Three rings to the One. I believe they couldn't even use the Three while he wore the One. (Though I could be misremembering.) We have multiple examples of corruption- small scale Gollum, Bilbo, Frodo, and Boromir. Larger scale Ringwraiths, Saruman's fall, and Galadrials temptation. One only need extrapolate what would happen if someone like Gandalf took the One Ring for himself. How many more examples do you need? I guess you could ask for an entirely different story like Mistborn where the hero set out and then failed. And everyone else has to live for thousands of years under the rule of a new darklord. An interesting story to be sure, but a different one altogether. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
| ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On January 06 2013 10:11 Grumbels wrote: Then why does the destruction of Sauron's ring interfere with the three rings? If they are made independently, even with knowledge from Sauron, they shouldn't stop working. Sauron's will is not in it. Because they were created using the same knowledge Sauron had given to the elves. Why do you want me to give you the sparks notes of such a great book? Go and read it for yourself, an explanation given by the very author is actually out there. EDIT: Sauron does not wear the one ring at the same time as the three rings are being worn and as such does not have the capacity to corrupt the wearers. Read above. | ||
| ||
