Problems with Gandalf

habilis

habilis

Ministry of Re-Education
I used to play Advanced Dungeons and Dragons™ and a few other Role Playing dice games. And maybe I'm just old fashioned, but as far as my experience goes, wizards can and always do cast attack spells in battle. In particular, fireballs, lightning bolts, stoneturns, poisons and a host of other elemental attacks. Not to mention summoning demons, spirits, deities, gods, and the undead if need be. Even the most basic unexperienced wizard can cast a fireball.

So what's up with Gandalf? I mean I loved ROTK but in those huge battles the most aggressive attack-magic he conjured was a glorified flashlight. I deducted three quarters of a point for that shortfall. Shame on you Peter Jackson. Instead, we have Gandalf as a hardened front-lines warrior swinging around a 2-handed broadsword, cleaving scores of orcs and trolls with the deftness of an expert swordsman. He should have been holding his staff, turning orcs into stone by the hundred and casting fireballs the size of cars.

Sweet movie, go see it again.
 
I did see it again. And I hated how Gandalf fought. It was very lame. He could have at least taken out more than ten orcs with his stick thingey. Oh well...
 
The problem with Gandalf is that he's Ed's avatar, which makes me think of a certain admin every time I see him on screen. And I mean Scott. ;)
 
Well, Jackson simply translated Gandalf from Tolkien's version (and very well in my opinion). Gandalf never did any of those things in the book, and LotR purists would've been straight onto Jackson if had done so.

Am I right in thinking that Tolkien's work predates D&D? And that D&D wouldn't have been around if it wasn't for him?
 
Okay, so I will give you that D&D (along with most modern fantasy) would not be around had Tolken not written LotR. However, when Pippen has the line "we have the white wizard, that has to count for something" the audience fully expects Gandalf to do some pretty cool magic. Plus all of the LotR buffs that I know are also fans of some other fantasy literature (i.e. D&D, Dragonlance, Wheel of Time, etc), and I am pretty sure that they would have been more upset about Jackson not having Tom Bombadil in the movie than they would have been for enhancing Gandalf's magical ability.
 
Yes, Bombadil should've at least made it onto the extended DVD! However, the fact is that Gandalf spent most of his time in the house of healing in the final book (which didn't make it into the film)... and even his confrontation with the Witch King was cut short (in the book, will be in the extended DVD though, since it was part of the film's trailer!) I was more upset with the way Aragorn wasn't portrayed in the final film (didn't show him challenging Sauron with the Palantir, didn't express the Paths of the Dead as the petrifying evil that is was, didn't show the journey after leaving the paths of the dead, no house of healing, no indication that he wouldn't enter the city as king until Sauron was defeated.)
 
you folks need to realize that the majority of the people who are lotr fans aren't d&d fans. to them (myself included) the lack of wizard magic is explained by the nonexistance of it throughout.

if he had been kicking off bad-ass spells the whole time and then opted not to in the battles it would have been weird. over-analysis will kill anything.
 
uoba said:
...and even his confrontation with the Witch King was cut short (in the book, will be in the extended DVD though, since it was part of the film's trailer!)
Click to expand...

No it wasn't. It's no where in the trailer. I just watched through the whole thing and there is no part where Gandalf confronts the Witch King.
 
I'm afraid there is... the Nazgul swoops down behind the gates into Minas Tirith's court as Gandalf rushes in on his horse (his horse rears up).
 
Ah, but there's more than one trailer (quite a few, for TV, Cinema, special events etc.) The one knocking about prior to the release Dec 19th had it in.
 
Trip said:
I know there are more, I just couldn't find any other than the ones at Apple.com
Click to expand...

I think it was on the RotK xbox game as well... in fact, there's loads more stuff in that game that wasn't in the film (such as the confrontation with The Mouth of Sauron... this may also be in the Extended Edition).
 
What fun is a wizard who can solve everything with a wave of his staff, anyway? Then they'd have no tension, drama, or even story. :)
 
One of the best things about LOTR is that the magic is subtle and usually indirect, eg. the ring's power over the people who hold the other rings. It doesn't send bolts of lightening from the finger of the person who wears it! The story is the better for it, the focus is on good vs. evil and as Arden said it does add to the drama and tension. The subtle role of magic is probably one of the things that sets LOTR apart from other fantasy books. Also, someone mentioned Tom Bombadil earlier in this thread, was this part of the story even filmed? I heard somewhere that it wasn't, it's a shame but I suppose sacrifices had to be made somewhere.
 
It would've been great to have him in... the only guy able to hold the ring without any effect. I think Jackson claimed that he would have confused the audience since he doesn't appear anywhere else. Not sure whether he was filmed though, I doubt it, we would probably got to see him in the extended version if so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top