Uh-oh, Arwen sticking her nose in again...

[Gerbil]

Just read a thing that says that Arwen falls out with Elrond over choosing to stay with Aragorn. And then, SHE reforges Narsil.

Urk... that will be hard to swallow if true.

On the plus point, the same article did mention that Eowyn's love for Aragorn is unrequited - thank God!

[Pailan]

Arwen sword swallowing? :D

[Elf.Freak]

owch...sword swallowing...:rolleyes:

[crickhollow]

Gerbil, Pailan--I'm glad you two have stuck around. What would we do on Oscar night without you? (Y'all are planning to be here for Oscar night, right?)

[Gerbil]

Oscar night...

No nods for PJ or Ian.
Will Ian be eligable for best actor or only best supporting actor again? That'll be freaky - his role changing from film to film.

I reckon this film will garner least nominations of the 3 cos it's the middle. Basically - people don't know how to award oscars to this film, as clearly shown by FotR - they simply assume they have '2 more chances'. Of course, TTT isn't a chance really, cos it has no proper start or end. And by the time RotK comes around, they'll probably want to honour someone else with the oscars which is what basically happened with Happy Days' Beautiful Mind.

Oooh, I am ramping up the cynicism already ;)

Oh, not to mention they'll probably refuse to hand out oscars to LotR in areas it's already won, so an ever diminishing pool of possibilities.

And to top it off, let's not forget that FotR set the record for least actual wins from 13 nominations.

Blah blah blah :)

I was bored, sorry...

[Lefty Scaevola]

Elven Woemen are generally coeval with elven men except that waging war (excepting home defense) is mostly reserved to men and healing is for non warriors, thus mostly woemnly work. There is no thing to keep Arwen from the forge or other crafts.

[Gerbil]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
There is no thing to keep Arwen from the forge or other crafts. Yes I can just see her banging away at the old forge for fun.

Everyone needs a hobby, after all.

[Elfhelm]

In the Walsung-saga ... oh I give up!

The only thing Arwen does in the books is sew a pretty banner. That may have (excuse me) flown in 1940 but it doesn't work in 2002! What movie-goer wouldn't fault Aragorn for not choosing to marry Eowyn (his obvious equal) over some pretty Middle Earth equivalent of Betsy Ross?

He was supposed to re-forge Narsil before he left the last homely house. In the legends that pre-date the Ring, which legends JRRT was completely entranced by, the re-forging of the sword of the fallen father by the heroic son is essential to the character of the hero, and it is supposed to be a material representation of the resumption of the father's quest.

But Arwen of the books is definitely too weak to compete with Eowyn of the books in this post-Xena, post-Mists of Avalon fantasy viewing audience.

Can you, instead of shooting down other people's work, come up with a better idea of how to strengthen Arwen as a viable future Queen of Gondor? She helps to rescue Frodo (which Frodo does himself in the books), summons the waters to protect him (which Gandalf and Elrond do in the books), and now instead of making a banner she will re-forge the sword (?) (which Aragorn is supposed to have done before leaving Elvenhome).

[Gerbil]

Can you, instead of shooting down other people's work, come up with a better idea of how to strengthen Arwen as a viable future Queen of Gondor? Why should I bother? Why should I pretend to think I can rewrite a man's life's works and improve on it? To make it fit with 'my' ideals? Bugger that. If I just wanted my ideals I'd be writing my own books for me, but I don't. Because I want fresh ideas.

Now, onto the point of Arwen - so XX years ago when Tolkien wrote her part 'all' she did was sew a pretty banner. Well, in his mind, that's what she did. So why does she need empowering? A very modern, and ultimtely stupid branch of political correctness slang. Tolkien said she did something, if you can't deal with that, then that's your problem, not mine.

Why are 'we' trying to modernise a story written earlier this century that is supposed to reflect a history thousands of years ago? Modernising it - what a stupid idea.

[Elfhelm]

I have to agree with you on that. I hate when they do that to Shakespeare, too. And you don't have to come up with an answer. But I think those who have knee-jerk reactions could at least try to see the problem a modern filmmaker has in setting LOTR.

Look at the reality of the matter. Could someone who never read the books understand Aragorn's feelings for Arwen? If you don't even see her in Elvenhome, only hear about her in a passing comment in Lothlorien, then see the banner she sewed, could you accept that he loved her so much he didn't even notice Eowyn? Movies don't have narrators to tell us what someone is thinking. People need to have concrete examples in a movie.

[Dunadan]

Originally posted by Gerbil
Why are 'we' trying to modernise a story written earlier this century that is supposed to reflect a history thousands of years ago? Modernising it - what a stupid idea.
I agree as well.

My guess is that they were mainly motivated by making a film more people would want to see. Since Tolkien didn't create a strong, central female character in FOTR, it would probably seem like a risk to NOT beef up Arwen. It's not PC-ness, but market forces.

Then, once you've decided that, you've got to work out how to do it. Not least is (like when you tell lies) figuring out how the change must affect the rest of the story in order to be consistent; you couldn't just leave the film's central romance high-and-dry for a whole film, for example.

On a more sympathetic note, the romance in the book is really only revealed in ROTK, when it becomes apparent to the reader what choice Arwen has made. If you want to develop that theme throughout the whole trilogy (trifilmy?) then you have to work out how to enhance it in the existing plot earlier on.

cheers

d.

Correct me if I'm wrong: Narsil was re-forged not by Aragorn but by elven smiths in Rivendell.

[squinteyedsoutherner]

The problem with Arwen's character in the first film is not romance related. It stems from the deletion of a character and the discontinuity created by the expansion of another in its place. Arwen's open challenge to all nine riders including the Witch king of Angmar, her casting of spells on the river (despite Jackson's odd denial in the commentary) and her spiritual C.P.R. on Frodo which render the book's very theme absent from the first film are the problems.

Showing her beauty, grace and noble Elvish heritage with well written scenes in Rivendell would have shown why she should be beyond the sites of one such as Aragorn, and why Aragorn would be deeply in love with her.

Warriors upon their quests, dreaming of their "fair maidens" left behind is how romance is often handled in medieval (style) tales, and clearly what Tolkien wanted in this case. If flashbacks are all that Jackson has planned for TTT it will be a great improvement over his first film.

[Elfhelm]

I really do agree with you folks, but I can sympathize with the filmmaker as well.

Tolkien has many awesome women for characters. A lot of young American women, who didn't have a Queen Elizabeth II to look up to, found in Galadriel the possibility to be a ruler. And Tolkien created the story of Beren and Luthien when he was a very young man in the trenches of WWI. The idea of a girl who disobeys her father, affects a daring escape, and journeys to the dark fortress to rescue her lover is the sort of thing that brings the audience into the theatre. I think if there's a sequel (prequel?) it shouldn't be the Hobbit, it should be Beren and Luthien.

In the late 40's there were a lot of women who had endured the hardship of the London bombings. To stay at home in 1944 was a treacherous thing. But ever since Kate Hepburn pulled on pants, the Eowyn type has been more apealling to audiences all over the world.

We know that the elves have their own battles to fight during the war of the rings and we can guess that the elven women didn't just sew banners during those battles. The whole idea of cutting away and showing these battles is silly, though. Tolkien didn't show them either. If he had this theatrical problem wouldn't have existed. If Fatty Bolger, for instance, went to Rivendel after the Nazgul attack to find Frodo, and then got involved with the elves when they went to Mirkwood, and finally showed up with Elrond and Arwen for the reunion, it might have been cinematically possible to show. But without some hobbit involved, that battle is just a side issue and without altering the story it would seem that the elves did not even participate in the war.

But on the other hand, in medieval romances, which grew out of stories told to noble women in the court of Eleanor of Aquitaine, the women did stay at home, mostly. Which is kind of funny because Eleanor was not herself the stay-at-home type.

There's no doubt for us when we read the books that Eowyn is not Aragorn's type. Maybe there's a better way to convey it than trying to make Arwen more like Luthien. But compared to all other attempts at filming LOTR, this one is so good that I have to give PJ a little forgiveness when I disagree with him.

[Elvellon]

It is odd that in a time that abhors violence and, apparently, exalts wisdom the best solution found to portray a strong woman is by making her an action figure.

Since PJ believed that it was necessary to enhance her role, and if he wanted to show why Arwen is Aragorn’s equal, why not show how wise she is? He could have given her a voice in the White Council, (but then PJ’s portrait of the council makes one wonder why they were called “the wise” ;)), or he could have her discuss those matters with her father and/or Gandalf before the council, therefore increasing her role without altering the scene of the council.

The fact is PJ alterations to the plot rarely work as well as the solutions we read in the book. Even if he wanted to transform her in an “active” character he easily could have done better. For example, the use of Arwen in the “Glorfindel scenes,” controversial as they were; all he had to do was fit her actions and lines closer to what Glorfindel was supposed to do and say, plus a couple of adjectives of endearment between both characters, and let the actors play (but not overplay) their affection for each other. He didn’t have to make her surprise Aragorn’s at a blade's point, nor have her stole Frodo’s line at the ford (a much better one than the one PJ used anyway). Better, in Rivendel, when Frodo awoke, he could have easily used Frodo’s questions about the brightness of Glorfindel “on the other side,” and apply them to Arwen. With Gandalf answer the audience would learn that she is a princess, powerful among the elves, daughter of Master Elrond.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Gerbil
Oscar night...

No nods for PJ or Ian.
Will Ian be eligable for best actor or only best supporting actor again? That'll be freaky - his role changing from film to film.

I reckon this film will garner least nominations of the 3 cos it's the middle. Basically - people don't know how to award oscars to this film, as clearly shown by FotR - they simply assume they have '2 more chances'. Of course, TTT isn't a chance really, cos it has no proper start or end. And by the time RotK comes around, they'll probably want to honour someone else with the oscars which is what basically happened with Happy Days' Beautiful Mind.

Oooh, I am ramping up the cynicism already ;)

Oh, not to mention they'll probably refuse to hand out oscars to LotR in areas it's already won, so an ever diminishing pool of possibilities.

And to top it off, let's not forget that FotR set the record for least actual wins from 13 nominations.

Blah blah blah :)

I was bored, sorry...
Well my feeling is that FotR didn't deserve to even be nomintaed for Best Picture - let alone win. It certainly didn't deserve to be nominated for best adopted screen play.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
In the Walsung-saga ... oh I give up!

The only thing Arwen does in the books is sew a pretty banner. That may have (excuse me) flown in 1940 but it doesn't work in 2002! What movie-goer wouldn't fault Aragorn for not choosing to marry Eowyn (his obvious equal) over some pretty Middle Earth equivalent of Betsy Ross?

He was supposed to re-forge Narsil before he left the last homely house. In the legends that pre-date the Ring, which legends JRRT was completely entranced by, the re-forging of the sword of the fallen father by the heroic son is essential to the character of the hero, and it is supposed to be a material representation of the resumption of the father's quest.

But Arwen of the books is definitely too weak to compete with Eowyn of the books in this post-Xena, post-Mists of Avalon fantasy viewing audience.

Can you, instead of shooting down other people's work, come up with a better idea of how to strengthen Arwen as a viable future Queen of Gondor? She helps to rescue Frodo (which Frodo does himself in the books), summons the waters to protect him (which Gandalf and Elrond do in the books), and now instead of making a banner she will re-forge the sword (?) (which Aragorn is supposed to have done before leaving Elvenhome).

What about the plain fact that they're in love with each other. Or doesn't that work in "modern" society? I always thought that love - TRUE love - was the strongest thing in the world.

I don't see why she has to go rushing into battle to have Aragorn notice her - if they are truly in love. Which it seems as if she does - since there is a picture of her weilding a sword in Fantasy World's Collector edition Magazine - it has Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter on the cover.

[Kalimac]

Spoilers from Lights Out Entertainment movie review regarding Arwen's role in The Two Towers:


1. Does Arwen look into Galadriel's mirror? What does she see?

This doesn't happen in The Two Towers. The only thing that happens that alludes to the future of the story is a a sort of flash forward dream sequence in which Arwen sees herself next to Aragorn's graveside, grieving for Aragorn's mortality, and her immortality.

2. Is Arwen among the elves that come to the aid of Rohan or is she never *physically* present in the main movie plot?

As mentioned before, Arwen is never physically in the movie. Arwen only appears in flash backs, flash forwards, and dream like sequences. The only time she might even be considered physically part of the movie is when Aragorn awakes by the river bed after plunging into the water in the battle with the Warg riding Orcs. A mist-like Arwen appears and kisses Aragorn on the lips which eventually wakes him from slumber.

Another scene, in which I'm not too sure if it was meant as a flashback or a present situation is a scene that commences with Arwen and her father, Elrond. Elrond tries to convince Arwen that their love would never work with Aragorn being mortal and Arwen being immortal. This is when we get to see the aforementioned sequence of seeing Arwen grieving by Aragorn's graveside in the future.

No, Arwen does not make her way to Helm's Deep with the other elves in the movie. Arwen's main presence in the movie is to show the strong loving bind her and Aragorn and, and nothing more.

3. I heard they added a sex scene between Arwen and Aragorn, please tell me this is not true!

Nope. Not true at all. The only thing we see between Aragorn and Arwen is some light romantic kissing.

Other reviews confirm the above spoiler. Here's a link to LO very heavy SPOILERS . . caution here since these spoilers essentially give the entire plot away:

FAQ 1 (http://www.lightsoutentertainment.com/news/news.php?id=598)

FAQ 2 (http://www.lightsoutentertainment.com/news/news.php?id=592)

FAQ 3 (http://www.lightsoutentertainment.com/news/news.php?id=614)

Lights Out Entertainment:Two Towers SPOILER review (http://www.lightsoutentertainment.com/movies/reviews.php?filmID=2&reviewID=31)

[jerseydevil]

I see my sex rumour got spread around. :)

[olsonm]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I see my sex rumour got spread around. :) You sneaky devil you! :D

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I see my sex rumour got spread around. :)

Aha! So you admit it was just a rumour then? ;)

[Elfhelm]

Then there is this:

No reforging takes place in The Two Towers. The sword is not even mentioned in the movie. Arwen DOES NOT bring the sword to him, and Aragorn goes through this movie without the sword in hand. Looks like Peter Jackson is leaving this be dealt with in Return of The King.

So it looks like the rumors of that one are false as well. About Arwen they said:

Arwen is never physically in the movie.

Which pretty much makes this whole thread a reaction to rumors. Ah, well... we are all so anxious to see it. can you blame us? :)

[Elfhelm]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
What about the plain fact that they're in love with each other. Or doesn't that work in "modern" society? I always thought that love - TRUE love - was the strongest thing in the world.

I don't see why she has to go rushing into battle to have Aragorn notice her - if they are truly in love.

I agree! How would you depict that in a movie where you must show, not tell?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
I agree! How would you depict that in a movie where you must show, not tell?
I think the scene on the bridge in FotR did that perfectly. Having several flashbacks of Aragorn thinking about Arwen in TT and RotK would have been fine. Her - carrying off Frodo through the ford was completely unnecessary. If she is in battles - as is indicated in the magazine I mentioned - then that is unnecessary too.