Glorfindel instead of Haldir?

[Thorin]

Okay. Here's what I don't get. All the hoopla about cutting out Glorfindel was because he was a minor character and wasn't in the rest of it anyway, plus they needed to introduce Arwen.

Why did they beef up Haldir's role? He virtually did squat (or at least as much as Gildor and Glorfindel) in the book and yet he's all over the place like dirt on a white sheet. Where the heck's the logic in that??

Seeing as PJ pretty much butchered and fabricated some of the characters anyway, why didn't they keep the Fords as it was with Glorfindel, and give him more beefed up roles throughout the FoTR and TTT like Haldir? (i.e. have him lead the elves to Helm's Deep) Then they could have given Arwen more fabricated roles in character to familiarize the audience with her.

We could have avoided the major travesty at the Fords and made alot more people happy.

Cutting out a minor character at a crucial part and then distort another minor character who really doesn't need to be where he is half the time undermines the reasons for the changes to begin with.

 

[Kiroshar]

It would be logical to do so if there had been the time.

PJ and the other writers likely did not want to introduce another character, and both Arwen and Haldir were in other planned scenes. It made sense to expand their roles rather than make yet another introduction.

 

[joxy]

Originally posted by Kiroshar
PJ and the other writers likely did not want to introduce another character....

OK, than why not let Legolas take over Glorfindel? He does in Bakshi, and PJ is happy enough to copy other ideas from there!
But the real point remains that there was no good reason for not leaving Glorfindel where he was - and the idea of expanding HIS role later, as just suggested, makes a lot more sense than the crazy substitute he was actually given.

 

[aragil]

In the Books Glorfindel is an extremely powerful, and extremely active Elf. The fact that he is not chosen to accompany the Fellowship (either replacing Legolas or by increasing the Fellowship's size to 10) defies explanation. In order to avoid this bit, it does make sense to leave him out, and have him replaced with another Elf who will figure in the role. Bakshi chose Legolas, who doesn't make much sense as he is supposed to be a wood-elf from Mirkwood- why would Aragorn be so excited to see that? PJ chose Arwen, which does make some sense, as Arwen is described by Tolkien as being like Luthien, and Luthien performed such heroics to help Beren. Beyond that, Arwen fits in better than Legolas because she is an Elf of Rivendell, who Aragorn would be truly excited to meet. That being said, I would have rather their meeting occured with Aragorn running out to greet her, rather than getting the sword to the throat. Then again, nothing's perfect (having Glorfindel at the Ford, for instance).

 

[Odo Proudfoot]

There are so many ways to skin an Elf!

Odo

 

[joxy]

Originally posted by aragil
In the Books Glorfindel is an extremely powerful, and extremely active Elf....
The fact that he is not chosen to accompany the Fellowship defies explanation.
I would have rather their meeting occured with Aragorn running out to greet her, rather than getting the sword to the throat.
Then again, nothing's perfect (having Glorfindel at the Ford, for instance).

Is he? I don't see strong evidence for that.
He is at the Council, but doesn't say anything. That alone easily explains him not being chosen.
So would I. So would anyone, except PJ.
Glorfindel at the Ford would hardly be perfect. Frodo should be AT the Ford, alone.

 

[aragil]

Originally posted by joxy
Is he? I don't see strong evidence for that.

Splendid. Let me Joxy your memory:
1) Glorfindel can kill a Balrog, and has been sent back by the powers that be to help contest Sauron, much as the Istari. This not only makes him powerful, but also makes it sort of his job to help the Ringbearer.
2) Glorfindel chases away the Witch King following the destruction of Arthedain. Considering that even at the Gates of Minas Tirith the Witch King isn't impressed by Gandalf the White, this is saying something.
3) Glorfindel goes out of Rivendell because he can ride against all nine Nazgul (as he says). This is active. This is powerful. Sorry you missed it in the books.

Originally posted by joxy
He is at the Council, but doesn't say anything. That alone easily explains him not being chosen.

Except that Elrond later goes on and says he is considering sending an Elf Lord, and Gandalf mentions Glorfindel. According to Elrond's policy of affirmitive action, there needed to be an Elf in the Fellowship. Why not the most powerful Elf of the Third Age, who has already shown himself willing to aid the Ringbearer? His name is even suggested as a possible member, so why doesn't he go?[/b][/quote]

Originally posted by joxy
Glorfindel at the Ford would hardly be perfect. Frodo should be AT the Ford, alone.

I have a problem here. In my opinon, in the books Frodo's strength in matters such as this seemed to be a little inconsistent. At home in the Shire, he can't even bring himself to throw the Ring into the fire. At Weathertop he has no power to resist the Nazgul, who are urging him to put on the Ring. We are then told that he does not have the strength to ride, but it is through the skill of Asfolath that he even manages to stay on the horse. Yet he still has the strength to defy the Nazgul? In my opinion this is a little out of character. The strength of Frodo is in compassion and his resolve to do the right thing, not in his ability to defy the Nazgul, which even the warriors of Gondor can't do.

 

[Talimon]

Glorfindel being cut, Thorin, is only in part due to his extremely minor role. Were that the only reason they had cut him then they could have just as easily come up with some solution not involving anyone extra. At least half the reason that Arwen is there is for Arwens sake, not simplification. Yes, it does simplify things, but I have never claimed that is the reason they changed it up. I just think it makes for a more dramatic and cinematic scene, and is a great way to introduce what has become a big charachter in the films (like her or not). Introducing Arwen in Rivendell would require a lot more time, which would in turn slow things down even further. After the horse scene, everyone has a clear mental picture of her, and can make a good guess about her relationship with Aragorn (they have a little moment between them before Arwen sets off). This moment between them before the horse chase is very quick, but due to the circumstances of the moment it works out (since they can't waste time due to Frodos condition).

It is important that we separate what are two completely different issues here: 1) Arwen riding to the Ford and 2) Frodo not resisting the Nazgul. I believe that most folks have more of an issue with the latter then the former. And I believe that Frodo not resisting the Nazgul is a completely different issue that can be attributed to how PJ views the charachter in the film. I believe PJ wants to establish the relationship between Frodo and Sam in a very specific way. That is, Frodo is having an internal struggle, but physically the ring has made him extremely weak. Sam, on the other hand, is there to help Frodos journey from a physical standpoint. For example: At Wheathertop, Frodo doesn't resist the Nazgul (as he does in the book). Sam, on the other hand, is the first one to challenge them. In Faramirs case, when Faramir is being tempted by the ring, Frodo runs off to the corner. Sam, on the other hand, stands up and defends Frodo. There are a number of other examples. My point is, to establish this dynamic between them, PJ has chosen to make Frodo a "weaker" charachter, in the physical sense. It would go directly against this if Frodo opposed the Nazgul. It would make him into a much more physicaly active charachter then PJ wants him to be.

Is this true to the book? Yes and no. In the book, Frodo is still relatively couragious and lively in FotR. He opposes the Nazgul twice (Wheathertop and the Ford), and even stabs what is arguably a cave-troll in Moria. However, this Frodo/Sam dynamic is very true if you look at TTT and even moreso RotK. Frodo becomes extremely withdrawn and quiet, hardly speaking unless spoken to. He is fighting inner demons, fighting with himself, with the ring. His courage is almost in the "sub-concious" of the tale. Sam is in the more "concious" realms, so to speak. At least that is how I see it. As such I think PJ has just started what takes place in TTT and RotK earlier on in FotR. The ring begins affecting Frodo much earlier then it does in the books. I don't see this as a "major" alteration of Frodo's charachter, though I'm sure some do.

 

[aragil]

Originally posted by Talimon
The ring begins affecting Frodo much earlier then it does in the books. I don't see this as a "major" alteration of Frodo's charachter, though I'm sure some do.

But remember Talimon, even in the books the 100% healthy Frodo can not bring himself to throw the Ring into the fire in Bag End. This is a little unnerving, given that he is then appointed/elected/volunteered to go to Mordor to try and do the same thing under much less favorable circumstances. In any case, the ring is affecting him early on.

 

[Talimon]

Originally posted by aragil
But remember Talimon, even in the books the 100% healthy Frodo can not bring himself to throw the Ring into the fire in Bag End. This is a little unnerving, given that he is then appointed/elected/volunteered to go to Mordor to try and do the same thing under much less favorable circumstances. In any case, the ring is affecting him early on.

That fine point (Frodo not having the will to even throw his ring into fire) has always struck me. It is more then a little unnerving that Gandalf agrees to send him knowing this, but remember that Gandalf had forsight others did not. He knew Gollum had some part to play, for good or evil. He ended up playing both parts, but ultimately it worked out in Gandalfs favor.

 

[Confusticated]

I agree with Thorin in that in light of Haldir's expanded role and the reason offered as to why Glorfindel was cut indicate that Glorfindel could have been included.
I do not think Arwen needed to be introduced the way that she was.

Also, this whole topic about there being no sufficient reason that Glorfindel was not included in the Fellowship (I disagree with it, by the way) can apply to Arwen considering the role she played in the movie.

PS: All the money being made because of girls liking Legolas would be even more so had Glorfindel been included.
May not be the best reason (in and of it's self I think it would be pathetic), but I'm sure the folks making money wouldn't mind it at all.

 

[aragil]

Originally posted by Nóm
Also, this whole topic about there being no sufficient reason that Glorfindel was not included in the Fellowship (I disagree with it, by the way) can apply to Arwen considering the role she played in the movie.

1) In the movie membership in the Fellowship was strictly based on volunteering, unlike in the books where Elrond had some power in appointing the members. Arwen wasn't invited to the Council, and hence never had the opportunity to volunteer.
2) Arwen in the movie only appeared to be a very fast horse rider- there is no indication that she could openly oppose the nine as there is with Glorfindel in the books. She did say that she didn't fear the nine, but she didn't exactly turn to fight them, either.
3) Arwen in the movie had a date with the Havens, and was not available for Fellowshiping duty.
4) If Arwen had been included in the Fellowship, poor Thorin would have had an aneurism. PJ being the kind soul that he is, wisely decided to avoid this tragedy by keeping Arwen at home.

Originally posted by Nóm
PS: All the money being made because of girls liking Legolas would be even more so had Glorfindel been included.
May not be the best reason (in and of it's self I think it would be pathetic), but I'm sure the folks making money wouldn't mind it at all.

But think of all the lustful teenage boy $$ they'd be losing by giving Arwen a less active role. Girls have both Aragorn and Legolas, this way boys have both Arwen and Galadriel. Got's to keep things even, you know.

 

[Confusticated]

Originally posted by aragil
1) In the movie membership in the Fellowship was strictly based on volunteering, unlike in the books where Elrond had some power in appointing the members. Arwen wasn't invited to the Council, and hence never had the opportunity to volunteer.

Glorfindel could have not been at the council. Makes as much sence to a non-reader as Arwen not being there. Or, movie Elrond could have chose the fellowship.

Originally posted by aragil
2) Arwen in the movie only appeared to be a very fast horse rider- there is no indication that she could openly oppose the nine as there is with Glorfindel in the books. She did say that she didn't fear the nine, but she didn't exactly turn to fight them, either.

She did oppose the nine though. Had Glorfindel been in the movie we would see him waving fire around to drive them into the water... isn't much different than Arwen waving her sword to bait them into the water.
The thing I had in mind is her causing the flood. This isn't something that just anyone could do (so it seems by watching the movie). Movie Arwen seems powerful.

Originally posted by aragil
3) Arwen in the movie had a date with the Havens, and was not available for Fellowshiping duty.

We see that now, but it was not so in the first movie. We find out later about this, so we could have even found out later about Glorfindel. Or, we could never get any explaination at all for why Glorfindel doesn't join the Fellowship. Besides, why didn't Elrond go?

Originally posted by aragil
4) If Arwen had been included in the Fellowship, poor Thorin would have had an aneurism. PJ being the kind soul that he is, wisely decided to avoid this tragedy by keeping Arwen at home.

Why wasn't she at the council? She goes out into the wild alone with Nazgul about.

...this way boys have both Arwen and Galadriel. Got's to keep things even, you know. [/B]

Lusting for Galadriel? .. blasphemy!

 

[aragil]

Originally posted by Nóm
Glorfindel could have not been at the council. Makes as much sence to a non-reader as Arwen not being there.

Are you saying that in the book Glorfindel could have skipped the council, or that in the movie the newly introduced Glorfindel could have skipped the council? If the latter, then I'm still not convinced that this would make sense to the movie audience. With Arwen, there is at least the very chauvanistic excuse that the Council was an all-male gig (at least that was the excuse I used in my head). There is no corresponding excuse for Glorfindel- if his movie role was the same as his book role (i.e. Glorfindel, Elf Lord of Rivendell) then he would need to be at the council.

Originally posted by Nóm
Or, movie Elrond could have chose the fellowship.

Eek no! I think that this was one of the subtle improvements of the movie over the book. In fact, the idea of a selection for the Fellowship goes back to the initial draftings, which were retained throughout. Had Tolkien rewritten this part I'm sure he would have had the members choose to come along, as they did in the movie. The matter of personal choice is one of the larger themes in the works, and is reflected nicely in the speech by Sam which in the movie is given to Frodo in Osgiliath-

But I expect they had lots of chances, like us, of turning back, only they didn't. And if they had, we shouldn't know, because they'd have been forgotten. We hear about those as just went on

What this suggests to me is that the heroic tales are chiefly concerned with the heroes choosing to go on. For this reason I think the Fellowship should have been allowed to choose themselves, but maybe that's just my personal preference.

Originally posted by Nóm
She did oppose the nine though. Had Glorfindel been in the movie we would see him waving fire around to drive them into the water... isn't much different than Arwen waving her sword to bait them into the water.
The thing I had in mind is her causing the flood. This isn't something that just anyone could do (so it seems by watching the movie). Movie Arwen seems powerful.

I'd argue with this. Merry and Pippin were able to bait the Uruk-hai into following them. This does not make them as strong as someone who drives the Uruk-hai before them with fear. The same thing could be said for Arwen- baiting in that case definitely showed clever thinking and a degree of resolve to wait there while the Nazgul charged, but it is nowhere near the level of inherent power that would be required to drive the Nazgul before you.
As for Arwen's calling the flood, that is somewhat mysterious. She could have been using the family's good name to beseech Ulmo- Frodo and Sam pull similar (though definitely less destructive) moves by calling on the name of Elbereth later on in the books. I don't know exactly what Arwen did there, and I don't know how unique it was to either her or that location, so it is difficult to assign this to her as a sign of power.

Originally posted by Nóm
Lusting for Galadriel? .. blasphemy!

Well I didn't say I lusted for Galadriel, just that the teenage boys did. Yeah, that's the ticket. Actually, on the older incarnation of this forum (June/July of 2001) I was on record as saying that I didn't think Cate Blanchett was all that attractive of an actress, but that her acting ability was so good that I was thrilled she had the part. Anybody buying this?

 

[Confusticated]

Originally posted by aragil
Are you saying that in the book Glorfindel could have skipped the council, or that in the movie the newly introduced Glorfindel could have skipped the council? If the latter, then I'm still not convinced that this would make sense to the movie audience. With Arwen, there is at least the very chauvanistic excuse that the Council was an all-male gig (at least that was the excuse I used in my head). There is no corresponding excuse for Glorfindel- if his movie role was the same as his book role (i.e. Glorfindel, Elf Lord of Rivendell) then he would need to be at the council.

The latter. While I know some might question his absense... I don't think it would be that big of a deal. For me at least, I do not look to the movie for any deep meaning or think about the underlying struction of all that happens as a lot of us do with the book.

Originally posted by aragil
Eek no! I think that this was one of the subtle improvements of the movie over the book. In fact, the idea of a selection for the Fellowship goes back to the initial draftings, which were retained throughout. Had Tolkien rewritten this part I'm sure he would have had the members choose to come along, as they did in the movie. The matter of personal choice is one of the larger themes in the works, and is reflected nicely in the speech by Sam which in the movie is given to Frodo in Osgiliath- What this suggests to me is that the heroic tales are chiefly concerned with the heroes choosing to go on. For this reason I think the Fellowship should have been allowed to choose themselves, but maybe that's just my personal preference.

They didn't all volunteer though? Didn't Gandalf suggest Glorfindel and Trotter? I suppose it doesn't matter much though.

This is were the fact that you and I view the movie so differently comes in... it seems to me that you identify it with the book more than I do. You present book (even from old drafts) reasons for PJ's actions. I don't delve deep enough into the film to bother looking for these excuses, so for me... it doesn't matter if PJ forms the fellowship in a way that Tolkien once did. Who can be sure what the majority opinion would have been had PJ formed the fellowship the way it is formed in the final draft of the story?
I agree with you about heros chosing to go on, but even if selected by Elrond, they still chose to go along. Elrond forced no one to go.
Look at what Beren did and why.
Elrond made it clear that no one was under obligation to go furthr than they would.

Originally posted by aragil
I'd argue with this. Merry and Pippin were able to bait the Uruk-hai into following them. This does not make them as strong as someone who drives the Uruk-hai before them with fear. The same thing could be said for Arwen- baiting in that case definitely showed clever thinking and a degree of resolve to wait there while the Nazgul charged, but it is nowhere near the level of inherent power that would be required to drive the Nazgul before you.

Merry and Pippin had no plan to defeat the uruk-hia, in a panic they lured them away from Frodo. Whereas Arwen had a plan... Arwen defeated them.

PS: Arwen was illuminated in the movie through Frodo's eyes as he slipped into the world of shadow, she really should not have been since she was no calaquendi.
So, I figure that in PJ's Middle-earth Arwen would have shown up as a shinning white figure to the nazgul just as Glorfindel did in the book. So PJ's Arwen had everything (as far as being able to intimidate nazgul) that Glorfindel had.

Originally posted by aragil
As for Arwen's calling the flood, that is somewhat mysterious. She could have been using the family's good name to beseech Ulmo- Frodo and Sam pull similar (though definitely less destructive) moves by calling on the name of Elbereth later on in the books. I don't know exactly what Arwen did there, and I don't know how unique it was to either her or that location, so it is difficult to assign this to her as a sign of power.

It doesn't matter that we can figure about Arwen's power based on what we've read in all the books, only what happens in the movie will exlain what happens in the movie to the average viewer.
How does a movie viewer know how Arwen is making that flood? Other "magic words" we see are used by Wizards.
Ulmo is never mentioned in the Lord of the Rings.
The point is:
To the average viewer... wouldn't Arwen look powerful and useful in battle?

Originally posted by aragil
Well I didn't say I lusted for Galadriel, just that the teenage boys did. Yeah, that's the ticket. Actually, on the older incarnation of this forum (June/July of 2001) I was on record as saying that I didn't think Cate Blanchett was all that attractive of an actress, but that her acting ability was so good that I was thrilled she had the part. Anybody buying this?

hehehe... I don't know if you are genuinly selling it or not.
Though I didn't mean to sound like I thought you were into Galadriel, I didn't think that. I was just making a comment about unwholesome attraction to Galadriel in general. It's just that I can not see Galadriel that way (despite Cate), because PJ's Galadriel is so much like Tolkien's for me.
But I wont hold it against anyone - considering Glorfindel.

 

[Seraph]

*Spoiler*
How would people have felt if Glorfindel had died instead of Haldir?

 

[joxy]

Originally posted by aragil
....Glorfindel.... This is active. This is powerful. Sorry you missed it in the books.
....in the books Frodo's strength in matters such as this seemed to be a little inconsistent.

Yes I obviously have missed it - thanks for your sympathy! But you say "the books"; is all your material in LOTR?
I agree it's inconsistent, and I think that is both deliberate and interesting. The point of not throwing the ring into the fire isn't relevant, because who would go throwing any ring into any fire? But the vacillations you list ARE there, and I find they make F a much more "genuine" sort of "person".

 

[joxy]

Originally posted by aragil
....even in the books the 100% healthy Frodo can not bring himself to throw the Ring into the fire in Bag End.

Originally posted by Talimon
That fine point (Frodo not having the will to even throw his ring into fire) has always struck me.

Who goes around happily throwing rings into fires? Frodo's reluctance seems perfectly reasonable!

 

[Kiroshar]

Originally posted by Nóm
It doesn't matter that we can figure about Arwen's power based on what we've read in all the books, only what happens in the movie will exlain what happens in the movie to the average viewer.
How does a movie viewer know how Arwen is making that flood? Other "magic words" we see are used by Wizards.
Ulmo is never mentioned in the Lord of the Rings.
The point is: To the average viewer... wouldn't Arwen look powerful and useful in battle?

Arwen did not use "magic words" to make the flood; she asked the river spirits to help them. This is explained in the EE commentary by the writers.

Of course, the average movie viewer wouldn't know it, so your point is valid.

 

[aragil]

Originally posted by joxy
Yes I obviously have missed it - thanks for your sympathy! But you say "the books"; is all your material in LOTR?

Not all- the first point about killing the Balrog requires both The Sil for the story and then HoME v. 12 to connect Glorfindel of Gondolin to that of Rivendell. However, in one of the earliest draftings of the Many Meetings chapter, Tolkien wrote a note about Glorfindel telling of his childhood in Gondolin- so we came within a hair's breadth of having this one in tLotR proper. The other two items (chasing off the Witch King and claiming to be able to ride against all nine) come directly from tLotR.

Originally posted by joxy
I agree it's inconsistent, and I think that is both deliberate and interesting. The point of not throwing the ring into the fire isn't relevant, because who would go throwing any ring into any fire? But the vacillations you list ARE there, and I find they make F a much more "genuine" sort of "person".

from the Lord of the Rings, The Shadow of the Past
‘No. But I suppose one could hammer it or melt it.’
‘Try!’ said Gandalf. 'Try now!’
Frodo drew the Ring out of his pocket again and looked at it. It now appeared plain and smooth, without mark or device that he could see. The gold looked very fair and pure, and Frodo thought how rich and beautiful was its colour, how perfect was its roundness. It was an admirable thing and altogether precious. When he took it out he had intended to fling it from him into the very hottest part of the fire. But he found now that he could not do so, not without a great struggle. He weighed the Ring in his hand, hesitating, and forcing himself to remember all that Gandalf had told him; and then with an effort of will he made a movement, as if to cast it away - but he found that he had put it back in his pocket.

Frodo has been told how evil the Ring is, but does not yet know that his own fire is incapable of melting it. He is here trying to get rid of evil for ever, but is incapable of doing so- apparently a will other than his own causes him to put it in his pocket. A rather alarming failure, IMO.