MasterKiller, this ROTK review is for you.

Why not just admit that you don’t like the genre? It’s okay not to like something for no other reason than that it doesn’t appeal to you. Why does you not liking the films have to be justified by flaws in the films themselves? From your criticisms, it is clear that these movies could not have been made in a way that would have allowed you to enjoy them. Clearly, they are not to your tastes, so why not just admit that instead of denigrating (by implication) anyone who happened to enjoy them?
Where did I denigrate anyone for liking them? Did I call someone gay? Did I call someone a hick? Please, point out where I made a personal attack in regards to someone liking the movies?

I never said I don’t like the genre. There are several fantasy films I do like. Perhaps, if the movies were less bloated, I would like them, and perhaps the bloat is in part due to the text from which it originates; which I have tried to read, but alas, found the material bloated and sappy and couldn’t get into it. I find good story-telling to be more than just how many Orcs one can fit on the screen. Sure, the movies look good (except for the cheesy Ent effects), but when you leave the theatre, what are you thinking? What is the message? What conversations can you have about it EXCEPT that it looked good and made your @ss hurt while watching it?

I said power is ONE ONE LEVEL what the films are about. They’re also about the disappearance of wonder and faith. Elves and Wizards and Magic Rings and Walking Trees and all that wacky romantic nonsense holds Middle Earth in a state of arrested development - they literally can’t progress past a medieval/feudal state. Saruman starts playing with industrial revolution stuff, but he’s nuts and enthralled by magical powers (Sauron) and so can’t do it gently and wisely, so he ****es the forces of Nature off, as well as ****ing of his neighbors, since he’s threatening them with his new powers. (This stuff is better elaborated in the books, but it is still in the movies)

By the end of the books, all the elves and wizards and **** are gone, and all that’s left are men, dwarves (who have no magic) and hobbits (ditto.) And they’ve got to deal with everyday sh!t. In the person of Saruman, who, stripped of his magical power is using his technological power to make a play for a coup d’etat in the Shire. (This is why the Scouring of the Shire is so important.) But the non-magical hobbits go and kick his ass for him using the skills they’ve learned fighting Sauron. They’ve gone from being happy little rustic butterballs to hardass rennaissance men.

There’s more subtext than that, too, MK. Look, I respect your intellect and your education and your accomplishments, but you’ve obviously got a blind spot for these kinds of genre pictures and a soft spot for other kinds of genre pictures. So do we all - I think the Matrix stuff is a shallow, solipsistic, druggy excuse for navel gaving. You disagree.

And don’t wag your lit degree at us anymore - I don’t have one, but at least I managed to finish Moby-Dick and I’m not giving up on Ulysses. Again, not meaning to be insulting, it’s just that there are different strokes for different folks.

edit - crossposted with MK, so I didn’t see his last post before I wrote this. Anyway, see above for more discussion you can have about the flicks.

Originally posted by Judge Pen
:slight_smile: BTW, MK, what are the underlying themes of Star Wars? Why does it take 6 films to convey those themes completely? Can you glean those themes within 1 or 2 of the films? If so, are the rest superfluous?
I have several issues with the prequels, so I will try to limit this discussion to the original Holy triliogy. Star Wars, in of itself, is about how Luke must suffer for his father’s sins, and ultimatley, must redeem his father because Anakin is unable to do so.

Taken in context, the dark father (Darth Vader is Swedish, I believe, for Dark Father), figure in European oral tradition is a very old concept, seen even in the likes of stories about King Arthur, Beowulf, etc…

The concept is, of course, that a male child can only become a Man by ridding himself of his father’s sins. The father passes his sins off to his son, and is unable to train the child into manhood because he sees his own failures inherent in the child. The male child can only be initiated by an older, non-realative (Obi-Wan Kenobi, in Arthur’s case, Merlin), after the child is removed from the birth home and taken into the wilderness. This is a social function prevelent in MOST cultures, and is not foriegn to our ow. In modern times, the soccer coach or even Martial Arts instructor serves this purpose to an extent.

After the training, which usually involves a quest, the male son returns to the father and expunges his sins by returning the birth wounds to him. I.E. Luke must pay Vader back for the injuries he suffered at the hands of his father—visually, this is accomplished when Luke cuts off Vader’s hand, ultimately leading to Vader’s death. When Luke returns the wound, but then refuses to obey the Emperor, he becomes a man, and in doing so, redeems Vader by not following the same path of fear. Luke rebukes Vader’s decisions and sheds himself of the sins Anakin was unable to aviod himself.

So, in essence, those original 3 films are about male initiation and rites of manhood.

The Star Wars story entertains you (probably for nostalgic reasons and not objective reasons). It is no less geeky then LOTR. It is not made better than LOTR (for this point, I’m holding them as equally well done; I’m sure we could disagree). For reasons understood by you, they are more entertaining. Fine, but I submit that Lucas drew much influence from Tolkien. There are parallels to be made in the themes and characterizations.
Objectively, I see more intrinsic value in the need for male initiation and rites of passage, especially in a modern world where boys do not have someone showing them how to become men. This is especially apparent in the new trilogy, where Obi-Wan pretty much fails to teach Anakin properly, and we see the ****ing consequences.

I do believe Lucas’ big mistake was convincing himself that he is making kid’s movies, when his message was originally far from childish.

The fallacy Tolkien fans make is that Lucas drew from him; when the truth is, in fact, they were both drawing from the same source materials, hence the parallels.

I think DWID was refering to this comment …you to understand the subtleties in these boring, and ultimately empty, films which I cannot possibly fathom. … which seems to imply that anyone who likes this film must not have noticed that it was “boring & ultimately empty”

To which, of course, I’ll completely disagree.

In terms of the Prequels:
I find myself wondering how Yoda (a glorified GREEN HOBBIT) hopping around like a frog with a glowing sword (sting perhaps?) against count Dookie (who made a much better Saruman) granted episode II any substance?

In terms of the original 3
I loved them as a kid. Made quite an impression. Upon viewing them now I still enjoy the nostalgic rush but here read this…
[url=http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=51_0_2_0][SIZE=3]Star Wars:[/SIZE]
A Penetrating Analysis

Phallic light sabers. X-Wing penetration. A dominatrix father. Ugh. Sounds like a tale of impotence.

but y’know whatever… it’s only a movies right?

btw MK:
When will one of your 2 novels be hitting the big screen? :stuck_out_tongue:

Some novels should remain novels - literature and film have a lot in common, but not everything. I shudder to think at what would be lost in a movie version of Ulysses, for example.

Oh, and I dislike the Star Wars movies from Return of the Jedi on because they’re really badly made, not because they’re thematically empty.

And don’t wag your lit degree at us anymore - I don’t have one, but at least I managed to finish Moby-**** and I’m not giving up on Ulysses. Again, not meaning to be insulting, it’s just that there are different strokes for different folks.
For the record, I finished Moby Dlck but didn’t like it. Just because something is popular doesn’t mean it’s good. In fact, I would argue the inverse is true in most cases. If everyone agrees on something, it generally means it appealed to the lowest common denomenator in that population sample.

I was responding to the “hick” remark when I mentioned my degree. So I’ll quit wagging my training when you quit wagging your art training, tough guy. I don’t see a shortage of your posts on threads concerning anything art related or even comics related. On a thread concerned with thematic content of a story, I believe I have the credentials to add my $.02 as well.

When will one of your 2 novels be hitting the big screen?
I suppose when people actually start reading what I write.
:wink:

I suppose when people actually start reading what I write.

I was gonna comment on your post about Star was but I only skimmed it . . .

but do let me know when the comic adaptation comes out!!! :smiley:

Hey, I’m perfectly happy to listen to other people’s ideas about art. It looked to me like you were using your lit degree as an excuse to dismiss other people’s ideas about lit. That’s the logical fallacy of appeal to authority. All I’m saying is that making your argument serves you better than letting your credentials be your argument.

But, since you brought up art -

Any of you cats have a chance to see that “Rivers and Tides” movie I posted on a few months ago? Andy Goldsworthy totally owns!

Also, if you haven’t seen it - Neill Cumpston’s review!

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=16641

HOBBIT-MAN: THE KING RETURNS
Whenever cool movie series get to the third movie they suck dicks like they’re trying to become Emperor of Dicksuck-ylvania. George Lucas had Star Wars, and then Empire Kicks Ass, and then all of a sudden it’s Planet of Furry faggoty Fuckheads. Then he had to make two more to feed the Suck Demon that was holding his children hostage, and those movies went beyond gay to where they’re paying old people to take a dump on them.

Even this summer, with MATRIX: SUDDENLY GAY and TERMINATOR: I LOVE COCK, the Rule of the Suck-y Third Movie got re-proven. If the third X-Men movie had come out this summer it probably would have been some crippled crock of crap where Wheelchair Charlie traps Fuck Yeah Wolverine in an illusion mind-trap where Wolverine thinks he’s a time traveler from a hundred years ago romancing Meg Ryan in right-now New York. Of course, the X-Men movie would try to redeem itself in the third act by having Wolverine realize it’s a mind-illusion and cut Meg’s head off and play dodgeball with it, but it would be too late and here comes my extra large Sprite at the screen.

But guess what? One movie series turned that rule on its head. One 3-movie series said, “Wait a minute, we’re going to make the 3rd movie SO tits it will make the FIRST two movies look gay.”

I just saw HOBBIT-MAN: THE KING RETURNS and that’s the movie I was talking about in the last paragraph. This movie will make you forget that if you stick a knife in your belly you’ll bleed to death so do not bring a knife to this movie.

It’s also, thank fucking God, LOUD. Even if you bring an iPod so you can listen to VH during the Elf parts you’ll take it off because I swear to fucking Roth you do NOT know where the next big bang is going to come from, or when something big is going to crunch someone’s skull while you picture that person getting their skull crushed is really your neighbor upstairs that plays Dido all day or that dude at the Starbucks who’s always reading and looking all smart.

Oh yeah, the movie is also 3 hours and 20 minutes, and I think it’s almost four hours if you sit through all the credits (it was all pencil sketches of the characters, which I think means they ran out of money). So if you bring some chick who’s all like, “I have a spinning class tomorrow” or “I’m thirsty” tell her to go home and watch Gay Dudes and the Straight Guy because this movie takes fucking commitment. I saw the one dude in front of me who was with this girl, and the President of Warner Brothers came out and said, “This movie is three hours and twenty minutes,” and before I could say, “So what, gaylord” the chick says to the dude she’s with that she has to GO. And he LET her go because this movie kicks so much ass you can SENSE it even before it starts. And this chick was a stone fox, and he probably could have made out with her, but he was like, “I’m going make out with this movie,” that’s how good it is. See ya, hottie.

This movie starts with the origin of Golem – that creepy guy who looks like Iggy Pop and wears Tarzan pants and wants the invisible-ring. He’s still on a quest with the two hobbits - Rudy from the film RUDY and Fredo - to throw the ring into a volcano (this is like a serious version of JOE VERSUS THE VOLCANO). The ring is also evil but you keep thinking, while you watch it, that someone should put it on and check out some boobs. I have a feeling those scenes will be in the DVDs.

At the same time, the two other midget-men and the giant hippies have seriously fucked up that one evil guy’s tower (he was Count Duke in Star Wars: Every Cock in the Universe Up My Ass Part II), and they hook back up with Magneto, and also that chick with the bow and arrows and finally the Giant Midget with the Axe. Oh, and also that I Don’t Want to be the King/I Am Destined to Be the King Dude is with them, and he has this whole other story where he pretty much decides to be the King because, I mean, pussy for miles. This is where I started getting really confused, though, because they start talking about kingdoms and alliances and there’s a lot of lines like, “Rohan shall ride!” and “Gondor still stands!” and “Flabadan Son of Rectum must wear the mantle of Bloggith!” and also there’s some shit with the elves that’s like being in a fucking candle store for twenty minutes.

But the movie is only doing this to set up the BATTLE OF SHIT-YOUR-PANTS, which isn’t the actual name of the battle but SHOULD be because you will shit stuff you did not eat when you see it.

It all has to do with the fact that one of the midget-men takes this orb from the bad guy and he looks into it and sees the glowing eye’s plan (or part of it – something about a tree dying and Enya music playing). So he and Magneto go to this huge white city where the king is being a dick and just eating dinner while every puke-ugly bad-ass on the planet starts surrounding it, ready to open a Wal-Mart that only sells ball-stomp. There’s this one medium-sized battle in a city that is like the last line of defense for the Big-Ass White City and it’s pretty cool, with a lot of head-crunching and these huge flying bat demon things that I swear to God grab horses and the dudes riding them and fuck them up from the floor up. They’re really loud, too, and a lot of chicks and older people were covering their ears.

cont.

part 2

Meanwhile, Rudy and Fredo and Golem are getting closer to the volcano, and Golem makes Fredo hate Rudy, and then tricks Fredo into a cave where there’s a giant spider and FUCK that was really scary because even in real life giant spiders are bad news.

Someone told me that all of the spider stuff actually happens in the second book in the series, and that they had to tweak some of the stuff that happens in the books to make the movies work. You know what? Good. Books suck. They used to be good back when people didn’t have movies and TV and dressed like Davey Crockett. People also used to ride horses and drink tea, but now we have cars and Sprite. Move the fuck on. Peter Jackson did an amazing job adapting these books, and now the movies are so kick-ass that some people are going to go back and READ the books, which wouldn’t have happened if he’d just filmed the books exactly as they are. Happy now, smarty?

Let me give you an example of how NOT to make books into movies:

This summer a huge bucket of farts came out called LEAGUE OF ADVENTURE GENTLEMEN. It was about how a bunch of characters from old-timey books got together and fucked up bad guys. And NO ONE SAW IT. Why?

First, they picked a bunch of characters like Invisible Man and Mr. Hyde and Dracula-Woman and Huck Finn. These are all characters from books that were written five hundred years ago. Huck Finn was actually written before writing. These are the kind of books they make you read in summer school but you’re all like, “fuck you, I’m going to play Sonic on my Sega” and you totally complete all the levels by August. So who the fuck is going to go see a movie about characters and people they’ve never heard of (the movie acts like you’re supposed to know who these people are)? Like I said before, MOVIES are the new books, so how about this for a movie (I even thought of a good title):


TEAM 1970’S FOOT-TO-ASSERS

The movie opens: A cult killer tries to assassinate Chauncey Gardiner, the President of the United States. Before the brainwashed assassin dies he gasps the word, “Cyrus” and takes a poison pill.

Senator John “Bluto” Blutarsky forms a super-team to infiltrate New York and take down the “Cyrus” cult. This team is made up of “Bruce” (from ENTER THE DRAGON), “Dirty” Harry Callahan, a now-teenaged Regan MacNeill (who is a stone boner machine and also has devil powers), “Quint” from JAWS, who’s upper torso washed ashore after the shark attacked him, and who has now been made bionic by Oscar Goldman and OSI, and finally Beau “The Bandit” Durville, who’s driving his Trans Am.

They enter New York with the Bandit driving like a fucking maniac, and Dirty Harry shooting people out the window and Regan making people’s heads explode and shit. Wow!

They get to the center of the Cyrus Cult headquarters in the middle of Central Park and confront Cyrus. He’s controlling his subjects with a glowing Chevy Malibu. Bruce goes totally Jackie Chan on everyone while Harry and the Bandit battle their way to the car. Quint dies bringing down all the cult killers, and they drive off with the Malibu. They also find out that Cyrus was trained by the Parallax Corporation.

Back at the White House, they get their next assignment. They must take down the Parallax Corporation, which is being run by Gregory Marmalarde. They are creating an Army of brainwashed super-killers at their facility at Crystal Lake. These new killers are indestructible and a step above the cult killers of Cyrus. For this phase of the mission they are joined by CIA agent Vincent J. Ricardo (from THE IN-LAWS) and off they go.

They blast their way into Parallax Headquarters, only to find their way blocked by the new generation of super-killers – hockey-mask wearing motherfuckers who have all undergone the “Vorhees treatment”. Bruce and Regan take on the killers, while Harry and Vincent go for Marmalarde. That’s when he reveals his newest, greatest killer – New York taxi driver Travis Bickle, who’s undergone the “Vorhees treatment” and is a virtual arsenal of different guns, knives – all of which appear from his wrists, chest, even eyes. Bickle killed Marmalarde’s frat brother Douglas Neidermeyer in Vietnam. Harry dies fighting Bickle, but not before killing Marmalarde. Ricardo searches the Parallax files, only to find that Parallax is only a tiny part of a much bigger, much more evil power – the Thorne Corporation, run by Damien Thorne. He has a huge facility in the Nevada desert, near Area 51.

Their final mission is to deliver the Chevy Malibu to Area 51. The Chevy contains a weapon which can defeat Thorne’s final plan.

Thorne’s compound is patrolled and protected by driverless trucks from DUEL and a bunch of those devil limousines from THE CAR. Two teams are sent in – The Bandit, driving his Trans Am with Regan and Bruce, and another driver named “Kowalski”, who will drive the Malibu along with Ricardo.

They battle their way through the devil trucks and demon limos until they penetrate Thorne’s headquarters. He’s got every character from every boring-ass indie film in the last twenty years strapped to posts in this huge chamber full of leather-y ALIEN eggs. The eggs are hatching and putting face huggers on the douche bags from WALKING AND TALKING and SEX, LIES AND VIDEOTAPES and CHASING AMY and everyone from every Henry Jaglom film ever made and killing them.

There’s nothing anyone can do – they have to stand and watch while all of these characters are slowly and horrible killed before our eyes, and they hatch into Aliens. That’s when “Kowalski” opens the trunk of the Malibu to reveal: ROY NEARY, JR. This is the half-human/half-alien offspring of Roy Neary from CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND and he starts going outer space whup-ass on the aliens along with Bruce Lee. The Bandit looks at the camera, winks, and smiles. (There can be a lot of shots during the closing credits of The Bandit cracking up).

Ricardo and Regan work their way to Thorne’s headquarters where there’s this huge demon battle between Regan MacNeill and Damien Thorne that will make the audience go, “We need new words for ‘HOLY FUCKING SHIT’”.


See? Use characters from movies thirty years ago, instead of from books five hundred years ago. And by the way, that’s only using characters from 70’s films. I also have plans for an 80’s team of ass-kickers and a 90’s team. Everyone who was into movies from before 1969 is dead, and we’d actually better hurry with the 70’s thing, now that I think of it. Also, I totally copy-wrote this with the Writer’s Society, and I also know a 400 pound man who will man-rape anyone who makes this movie without me.

Okay, back to HOBBIT-MAN, although at this point it’s just wall-to-wall awesome. The Battle for the White Mountain City has trolls and elephants and catapults and a battering ram that looks like a dragon head on fire. Also, earlier Gandalf scares off the flying bats-things with his glowing staff. In the battle for the White Mountain City Gandalf just runs around giving orders. How about turning the bad guys into babies or something with his staff? But that would actually cut down on the ass-kicking so, actually, fine.

The I Don’t Want to Be The King Guy gets a bunch of ghost warriors to fight, and that’s just awesome when it happens, and also the elf chick with the bow takes down an elephant all by herself, and the Giant Midget keeps killing people with his axe.

Then when THAT battle’s over and you’re thinking, “Just air comes out when I spooge now” they stage a whole OTHER battle at Evil Town to distract the orks so Golem and Rudy and Fredo can get to the volcano. And I won’t reveal what happens in the volcano except to say it involves Fredo and Rudy getting right to the very edge, but at the last second Fredo turns evil and decides not to throw the ring in, and puts it on instead so he turns invisible, buy Iggy shows up and bites off Fredo’s finger and Iggy falls with the ring into the lava and Evil Town is completely destroyed. You will have to find out the rest for yourselves. I hate spoilers.

You can totally leave at this point but there’s an extra half hour of everyone relaxing and going home and being happy and I guess they put that in so you can realize your pants are choked with poop from all the battle scenes, so thanks.

There’s also an Annie Lennox song over the closing credits. ??? How about Led Zeppelin’s “Ramble On”, which is where they got the name Golem, or “Ain’t Talking ‘Bout Love” by Van Halen?

Peter Jackson has proved with these films that he is the man to bring A-TEAM to the screen. Five stars. Best movie of the next four years.

Sure, the movies look good (except for the cheesy Ent effects), but when you leave the theatre, what are you thinking? What is the message? What conversations can you have about it EXCEPT that it looked good and made your @ss hurt while watching it?

Film is a visual medium. If you don’t like what you’re looking at, I think it’s highly unlikely that you’ll pay attention long enough to appreciate the thematic content so you can have conversations about it later. The underlying themes in film are, to me, easiest to appreciate when they maintain subtlety. It’s why the 2nd and 3rd Matrix films were increasingly irritating, they beat you over the head with the themes until it reached the point somewhere around midway through the 3rd film that the story no longer had any appreciable life apart from the subtext. Further, the subtext had become so muddled that even on that level, the story would have been better served by stopping after the first film.

Anyway, movies can be good for different reasons. I like the LOTR movies because they are visually beautiful and because they are accurate depictions of stories I already liked. I’m not looking for subtext. If I want a launchpad for interesting avenues of thought, I’ll pick up a book.

I thought that the return of the king was seriously disappointing. I thought that the battle for Minas Tirith was seriously lightweight and didn’t hold a candle to the battle of Helm’s deep. Some of the CGI was seriously ropy, whole storylines were dealt with in 10 minutes, and much of the editing was sloppy. Ironically I thought the Two Towers was the worst book and the best film (and that’s with one of the major fights shifted to the end of Fellowship for a more dramatic ending).

Denethor/faramir is a dark father element: Denethor, who dislikes faramir despite the younger son being closest to him in foresight and virtue, sends his son to certain doom at osgiliath, where the son is poisoned by an arrow of Sauron’s servants. But the wound was truly inflicted by denethor’s choice, and the wound is a fever, a burning fever.

Yet Faramir refuses to die, showing his character to be superior to his father’s, who has given up before even coming face to face with the enemy, and this refusal forces denethor, in his madness, to try to burn alive himself and his son, ultimately only burning himself alive, because of his son’s choice to survive and the hobbit’s awareness of it.

I don’t think a comparison of the story elements of star wars and LOTR can yield much, because ultimately, Lucas does not have the understanding of the elements MK has described, as can be seen by his lack of awareness of their total absence in every other work of his that the original trilogy, whereas Tolkein was well versed on them, consistent, and merely way too detail oriented and verbose, which is fortunate, because those details have made the movies simpler to make. Both writers had their place, but where Tolkein’s carreer is made up of books that support the central thesis of LOTR if nothing else, Lucas’ only notable work is the original trilogy, and the followups largely unravel that work if accepted as canon.

As for the story, much of it also has to do with free will, and here we fall into tolkein’s back story, the silmarillian. Eru(god) begets angels who take part in the song of creation, but a group of angels rebels. The world is made for man, but faithful angels make the elves and dwarves and seek to have them born before man, against Eru’s wishes. The fallen angels descend upon the world and turn middle earth to turmoil, and the war between the angels ultimately lays waste to the world of mortals, and Eru reshapes the world and casts down the lord of the fallen. His second in command, Sauron, takes up where his master left off, ruining the world by seeking power over it.

To counter this, Eru sends a small number of minor angels to middle earth in the guise of old men who are sworn to avoid using their power in combatting Sauron. These are the wizards, and they are the same order of angels that Sauron is, though in truth, Sauron is diminished by the loss of his corporeal form, so one could assume that five like him could easily dispatch him, given permission. But then, the balrog would still have lay hidden in moria to be found later, and dragons, and such.

All of those wizards fail in their task save one, gandalf. Yet, he does virtually nothing himself, save inspire mortals to rise to the occasion. Saruman, who acts most directly, becomes enamored of his ability to act, and falls to corruption.

The point being, the world was sundered by the fall, and normalcy could only be attained by the valour of normal men, no matter how short. Every problem in middle earth could find its root in the meddling of great powers, whereas the solution, the salvation of valinor’s sins, came from the willing sacrifice of a little man who had never slept with woman, as MK points out.

As for the end and the ommission of the scourge of the shire, I can survive this. However, they were weak on showing that Frodo had been ruined by the quest. Galadriel, earlier in the second movie, states to Elrond “The quest will destroy him, you have seen this”. The book makes it clear at the end, the movie has him hold his shoulder once and that’s about it.

Thanks KC.

I’m not a Tolkienite and the back story was never clear to me. Your brief background explains some problems that I had in the story (like why Gandolf never does much). The movie implied that Sauron was more powerful than any of the Wizards, though. Plus, don’t the 5 Wizards drive Sauron out of his stronghold in Mirkwood and back into Mordo around the time of the events in the Hobbit? someone told me that as well.

whereas the solution, the salvation of valinor’s sins, came from the willing sacrifice of a little man who had never slept with woman, as MK points out
I haven’t seen ROTK, so forgive me if I’m wrong, but I’m under the impression that Frodo eventually succumbs to the ring, and it is only destroyed because Golem bites his finger off and falls into the lava with it.

Now, from a purely archetypical viewpoint, Frodo is not a hero, or even an anti-hero, because he does not conquer the ring (or himself). He does nothing really, except resist it long enough to get it to Mt. Doom. I suppose you could argue that, in light of KC’s recent post, he sacrifices his soul or something, but sacrifice in of itself is more suited for saviours than heros. Frodo isn’t aware of the sacrifice (at least I don’t see him being aware. Maybe in the books this is more clearly explained). He doesn’t know that the quest will destroy him until it already has, which means his sacrifice is an empty gesture, something he stumbled upon.

Who would you say then, is the hero of ROTK? The guy who doesn’t want to be king? He doesn’t follow the archetype, either. From a Campbellian stand-point, what was his quest?

Who would you say then, is the hero of ROTK?

well… I would say it’s Samwise who prettymuch follows the ah… Campellian arch.

He’s a sort of fool who is called onto a journey far greater than he ever imagined. leaving his innocence and home behind.

He derives strength from a devotion to something beyond himself… both his loyalty to frodo as well as the ideal that the little good that there is still in the world is worth fighting for…

Even after Frodo sucumbs to the manipulations of Golem and sends Samwise away he eventually rededicates himself to the the greater quest.

Finnally after the ring is distroyed he personally sees to Frodo’s salvation and eventually returns home, wiser, stronger & braver.

So while Frodo is a failed hero and a sort of savior. I’d say the hero’s journey belongs to Samwise.
This same thing can be said to different degree of the other hobbits as well.

I think there is a major theme being played out in the films. No one individual functions as the Savior of Middle Earth. It is through the collective efforts of the most unlikely of beings (golem included) that bring about a sort of mid-wifing of Middle Earth’s 4th age rather than “doom” at the end of its 3rd age.

The original Star Wars trilogy plays to a similar tune with the diverse efforts of charactors and ewoks. :rolleyes: But does not do so as elegantly (IMO).

JP,

The wizards have diminished powers due to their oath. In the contexts of the story, they are weaker, but in terms of their actual nature, they may not be. Considering that diminished in power, gandalf destroyed a balrog, which is another form of “angel” of the same echelon as sauron and gandalf, if lower in that echelon, suggests that gandalf and saruman were likely very powerful beings.

Also, I believe Elrond was also in on the seige in mirkwood, which infers elf forces were there as well.

MK,

I agree, that one element makes the story elusive. Looking at it from that perspective, I would say that Frodo is the hero because he knows the cost of the ring, and thus, aside from Sam’s brief time with the ring, he is the only ring bearer who knowingly accepts his doom. Nonetheless, the end is a strange one, but I do not believe that any one definition of hero defines what a story can be, but merely gives a guideline one may work from, or escape if one can justify it to the reader.

DS,

That view does apply to Sam, but I can’t think of him as the chief hero. It is The Lord of the Rings, and Frodo is its lord more than Sauron in the stories, while Sam is not even tested by it in comparison.

I think of Frodo as the chief hero because he is the one who takes compassion on Gollum even though he knows gollum may kill him, and he gets the ring there, and when he is found too weak at the end, the fruit of his compassion is what destroys the ring. He sees clearest the ring’s power, and he says Sam would be destroyed by it, so we must take his view as fact in that case. Even when he cannot destroy the ring, he recognizes his failure. He cannot be truly like smeagol/gollum and rejoice in ignorance. And so, his spirit, lessened though it is by the experience, can stand uncorrupted, which Boromir could not achieve, nor smeagol, nor aragorn’s forefather Isulder, nor faramir, nor Gandalf or Galadriel or Elrond. Only Frodo in the entire story achieves this, and it is the battle for his spirit that he is the hero of, which was Eru’s(God’s) original intention to be the whole point of middle earth.

My take.

Yeah, whatever.

But the Battle of Shit Your Pants will make you shit stuff you didn’t eat when you see it.

Seriously, KC - nice posts.

Thanks CSN.

As far as the movie popcorn eating aspect goes, I liked the battle of minas tirith, especially the fall of the Witch King, and thought Mordor was nicely done. I also liked the beginning of the movie, though I suspect that’s what your purist friend didn’t like about the second one: although the story and details are remarkably similar for a book transition into movie, the second book itself is made up of the events that lead to the battle for helm’s deep in the first half of the book, and the second half is devoted to the journey of Sam, Frodo, Gllum and Smeagal, whereas the movie interspersed the two halves between each other roughly evenly. Same story, different organization, that’s all.

I’m pretty much of a similar mind to MK on certain things with this movie, but I still feel it is a good story, and at times even better as a movie, imho.

Actually, the main thing I disagree with in ROTK is the palantir being in contact with Sauron himself. In the book, it was the witch king, and this I felt was more consistent with the story’s approach to Sauron: an unspeakable evil beyond definition. If that were fixed, and the end conveying Frodo’s doom better, I’d immediatey require fresh underpants.