Blame it on Orlando Bloom.;)

I really like Sam's character, Tolkien does a wonderful job of making him in the image of the ordinary man. In some sense, Sam is the true hero of Lord of the Rings.

++Sam

Movie Legolas may be annoying but book Legolas is something worse, he's boring. Having lived for millennia he still has no stories to tell and no advice to give. Sam on the other hand is a well crafted character through and through, one of Tolkien's best. His puppy love for Frodo annoys me a bit too but that's okay, I still love him.

++Sam

Since they both annoy me, I will have to vote

++Legolas

(dark haired, not blond :D) because I like his poetry better. It was fun setting it to music, especially the Song of Nimrodel. :)

And skip, I don't think it's so much that we have active imaginations as that we listened to old Bill Cosby routines too much. This "lo and behold" thing was doubtless inspired by one of his childhood reminisces about his mother's use of "sick and tired" and how he got smacked for finishing the phrase for her at the wrong time. :)

I feel like voting for Legolas just to counter all the anti-legolism, because I think (and I see that on myself, at least!) people started to dislike Legolas really after the movies: most people won't mind that much, probably, if there had not been for the movies. (What does it mean? Yes, of course! Another proof that PJ and all the deed of his blasphemy must be erased from the face of this earth!)

Legolas indeed tends to be boring, in a similar way like Gimli: sometimes, you get the impression that they are there just to "fit in the number of nine". However, his dreams, behavior; sometimes his sayings, songs and poetry, as Ibri said, are actually quite interesting. But Sam, of course, is great character and we see lot of his development, I think it's unnecessary to go on lengths about him here.

Hmm. I will re-think it yet before I vote.

Let's see Legolas go to Mordor.

++Sam

++Legolas

Boring? No way. He's funny. And Gimli is not boring either. After Frodo, Aragorn and Gandalf, they must be the funniest members of the fellowship. I won't talk about Gimli here, but Legolas, he's so amusing. His criticism of Aragorn's deductions from Merry & Pippin's track always amuses me, especially the part about growing wings and flying. It's exactly like I feel when someone presents a theory I don't understand. :D

Besides, there is some great sadness and ambiguosity in Legolas' character - even androgynism, I always pause when he refers to Éowyn as a maiden because to me it's always a point of thinking: "oh, he's a man". :D (This is not to say that I would assume him to be a woman or anything as silly, but simply, I see him as rather genderless. Which is very interesting, if you ask me.)

Sam, on the other hand... I used to like him and I still think he's rather sympathetic, and I love his song in Cirith Ungol... But I think I'm currently living a phase when I'm looking at the values behind LotR rather critically, and Sam as a character makes me rather sad and a little angry. Such a dog-like servant, really. Brave, good-natured, a little slow-witted and incredibly loyal. Blah.

Sam is a direct reflection of Tolkien's own philosophy on society. I put the bits I thought relevant to Sam in bold font.

Taken from J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography, by Humphrey Carpenter, pg 133.

Rune! How could you! You have a chance to vote for one of the proletariat and you vote for one of the landed gentry? :eek:

;)

I love Sam, he's no mindless servant of Frodo, but a family friend, someone younger who looks up to Frodo. He's an idealist and he goes off on this journey both because he's Frodo's young friend and because he's entirely overawed by the prospect of seeing things straight out of Faerie. Sam is just like every single reader of Lord of the Rings, blindly giving his trust to the older, 'wiser' friend (i.e. Tolkien in our case) and willing to be led off on this mad quest to who-knows-where.

Plus he likes a beer.

++Sam

While Legolas can skateboard down fortresses
steps Sam does a terrific impression of a great elf warrior,
so + + Samwise

That's interesting and I partly sympathise with the prof's opinions - the problem with democracy truly is that people are morons who don't know what's good for themselves (and won't agree with me more importantly). Then again, the alternatives are so much worse; Churchill's famous words on the subject immediately come too mind. To say that every man should be content with his lot is easy to do for an Oxford professor too, eh? But I don't want to steer this too far off-topic here. Care to vote, sir?

A true feminist now aren't you? ;)

As for Legolas's androgynity, I think I had read Lotr twice before I realised he was actually a man (the problem of a language with no separate pronouns for sexes ;)).

++Sam

Because I sympathize with the working class rather than the ruling one. :cool:

Also, because I have a friend who is very much like Sam and right now I feel our relationship to be pretty much like that of Frodo & Sam's.

I had a chance to vote for a conservative idea of the ideal servant and I chose not to take it.

When you read Tolkiens work you have to look past class devide, otherwise I would be going on and on about how almost all his heroes are aristocrats.

Exactly my stance, but also because I just symphatize with my first experiences with the LotR.

In a way I do dislike Sam being the kind of trusted servant - filling a role predetermined for him - as I read him nowadays, but still he outshines Legolas by a mile.

With Sam you have a rustic, down to earth -character who struggles to become what he will be, but with Legolas you have only a guy trying to fill the boots of someone you need to be there.

And the way PJ handled his character didn't do any good to his character. The skateboarding Legolas is a disgrace - as well as the original one competing with the number of kills with Gimli.

So Legolas clearly is a side-character, mainly made to fill a role in the company (even if there could have been chances to make him a real character) but Sam is flesh and blood in the end even if his role on the fellowship could be interpreted as a forced character as well.

And you can see how Tolkien loved Sam.

++Samvais

++Samwise Gamgee the noble, brave and true.

Quite frankly he is the true hero of LOTR. Not Frodo, the glory hog, or Gandalf the uncloaked, or even Gorn the stinky. It's Samwise. He's the best.

I'm seriously thinking of starting a thread analysing the text from a Marxist point of view and then we can argue about Sam's class status to our hearts content. ;)

It has been so long since I have actually engaged in that sort of activity. . .I am probably a bit rusty.

*graps Gert Petersen's Introduction to Fundamental Marxist Consepts*

It was only orcs. It's not like he and Gimli were killing Ents or Hobbits.

Hey now, Orcs are also people you know. In any case, it's tasteless to have a killing-competition of sentient creatures, be they beast or man.

In the Cup, Sam has defeated Legolas with the emphatic score of 9 votes to 3.

Match 15 of Round 1:

Next up is Gimli, the winner of the mentoned killing-competition, versus another accomplished killer, the strapping heart-throb Túrin Turambar. Was he really cursed or did he just make very poor decisions?

Gimli vs. Túrin

Gimli vs. Túrin?

Hmmm...I don't rightly care for either character. So I just think I'll sit this one out for now.

Sorry. Orcs showed no redeeming qualities in 10,000 years of Middle Earth history, so I see them as vermin, sentient or not. There's probably a good reason that a being as noble, wise, and long-lived as Legolas hunted them for sport.

As for the next competition, I'll take ++Gimli: loyal, good-hearted, and steadfast, without all of the anguish and curses of Turin.

Turin makes for a good story but he's not as nice as the Dwarf, so....

++Gimli

Skip, how can you do this in an opening round? I love Gimli but look at my namesake? Bah! Lal, what say we unite and overthrow this madman that pits some of the best against each other so early on in the competition?

++Turin

I'm not one of those LotR purists who went raving mad with every alteration PJ and his team made to the book - some of them were okay, some were understandable and many were just bad. But one thing that really got my blood boiling was the way they reduced Gimli, son of Glóin, into a piece of mere comic relief - which even wasn't so funny. That I was really mad about.

But that said I think there is no competition here.

++ Túrin

It's an age old Finnish folk-story about Kullervo son of Kalervo which took my imagination already when I was very small and heard the story (the Finnish version that is) the first time. It's just one of the most tragic mythical stories there is, comparable in many ways to the story of Oedipus.

There's so much in there!

And one doesn't have to love the mythical hero as a person to see their literary, symbolic or philosophical greatness and deepness. :)

By Andsigil
Except for my two favorite orcs, Rosenkrantz and Gildenstern
(that is, Gorbag and Shagrat ) :) Granted, those two did have issues.

The most interesting bit with Turin was the question of free will.
It seems to me somewhat ambiguous in the story versions (Probably leaning
toward a form of Morgoth dominance of the issue vis-a-vis Hurin
and his kids).

Of course Gimli did win the competition with Leggy. Picture Stephen Colbert
leading The Nation in chants of "We did it!" with balloons falling down.

So + + Gimli son of Gloin . Oh, and Gimli's father, while
initially dismissive of Bilbo at The Unexpected Party, was quite
polite to Bilbo's nephew.

Gimli isn't as tragic a character as Turin is, and he doesn't get you mad like Turin sometimes does. I love the way that Tolkien made Gimli so poetic in his books, we see this when he describes the Glittering Caves to Legolas and when he asks for three of Galadriel's hairs. It certainly refutes the arguments that dwarves are just a bunch of selfish brutes that hide in their mines all day. You have got to admire a dwarf that can rise above his own pride and admire the beauty of Galadriel and to become a friend with the son of Thrandiul.

++Gimli

Good point, especially when you consider how Thorin and Company, including
his father, were treated by Thranduil + the elf's interest in the hoard of
Smaug.

Oooh, I was clenching my Hobbit book so tight that I left my hand imprint on it. I was so mad at how Thranduil haughtily handled Thorin and his company, and then having the nerve to show up afterwards with an army at Erebor after Smaug was killed and say, "hey, where are my jewels?" But that's another topic for another time.:) The point is: Gimli is no ordinary dwarf.:D

Bet the history would look different from the Orcs' perspective, Andsigil. But as much as I love discussing Orcs potential to become outstanding citizens this is hardly the place for that. :)

I'm going with ++Turin, no doubt about that. Although not very likeable, he certainly is interesting and much better looking too. Don't have time to go into detail about it but I hope to do so in later rounds. Because frankly, to quote Homer J. Simpson, Gimli is booooring

Turin... poor guy. Dad captured, Mom sends him away, bad luck with Saeros, accidentally kills best friend, and marries his sister.

Yeesh. He deserves some compensation for having to go through that. I wish Tolkien would've told us what Turin would have been without Morgoth's curse and Glaurung's webs.

++ Turin

Because he scared orcs out of their wits, and he killed the father of dragons, his story is perhaps my favorite of all Tolkien's tales, and I feel bad about the way things turned out for him.

++Gimli

Because Turin has always reminded me, very strongly, of Michael Moorcock's Elric of Melnibone, only more depressing, and I'm trying to get into a holiday mood, what with the snow falling outside and all. :)

Also, because I liked the Song of Durin Gimli sang in Moria. It was the second of Tolkien's poems I set to music, and I've always liked it -- and the fact that in such a dark and dangerous place, Gimli, of all people, decided to sing. I was also touched by Gimli's (book, that is) understated but nonetheless open grief at the loss of Balin, as well as his willingness to set aside a long-engrained grudge against Elves for a rather chivalrous love of Galadriel. And I liked that he, like some of the hobbits, was not too proud to show fear in dreadful circumstances (like the Paths of the Dead). Though I wouldn't call him one of my favorite characters, I would consider him more "accessible" than some others.

Hey, and what about the noble, charismatic and surely also long-lived (had it not been for the unfortunate Éomer incident, but: respect!) Uglúk? For one, I don't have any problem with the Legolas-Gimli competition (only with the disgraceful joke they made out of it in the movie!!!), Orcs are often seen just as "dark horde" and I accept them as they are portrayed. But the other point of view is also possible, and some of the Orc individuals are indeed remarkable! In fact, all of them.

Anyway, as to the voting at hand, I am going to vote for

++Túrin

for he is indeed a very complex character and while I did not start to like him rightaway, lately, when reading his tale (before it was possible to read in CoH, which is even better, yay!), I started to like his character. Wow, imagine a guy like that in Saruman's ranks... (okay, I see I am starting to follow a strange pattern of thoughts...)
Nothing against Gimli (he is a Dwarf, but an Elf-friend, so no hard feelings ;) :p ), but he just is not as interesting, to say it simply without tons of unnecessary words :)

I love Gimli, but how anyone vote him over Turin? The tallest of all men, the first to slay a dragon, the Dragon-Helm, the son of Hurin, greatest of the warriors of men? Unquestionably,

++Turin Turambar

A Túrin Turambar turún' ambartanen, verily.

++Gimli

++Gimli

I love Túrin's tale, I think it's my favourite of the great tales. But I don't like him as a character particularily much. Yes, I pity him and even understand (almost) all of his stupid deeds but he's still a jerk if you ask me. (A fascinating jerk, though. ;))

Gimli, on the other hand, is lovely. And herr Spence, no, he's not boring at all. I love him because he's really quite a many-sided character full of contradictions: he's a tough warrior but really rather sensitive (awww :)), a hopeless pessimist but still courageous and in a way, full of faith and hope.

What I like him the best, though, is that he's not afraid to show his emotions. He cries when he grieves, he rages when he's angry, smiles and laughs and sings when he's happy and admits it when he's afraid. I think that's bravery of the bravest sort.

Also, his friendship with Elves has been mentioned but there's one thing that remains unsaid that I like about him: his sense of humour. He always makes me smile with his jokes which are rather pessimistic or grumbling, whch is kind of cute. (Yes, I think I just said that Gimli is cute. :eek: Hahahahaa.)

Granted about the venue. But, do we really care about their viewpoint? I don't think Tolkien had strange concepts like moral relativism in mind when he created this universe. Oh, well. I, too, would be happy to discuss this in another thread.

++ Sigurd Faf. . . .sorry wrong name!

++Turin

No matte who would make the Silmarilion movie, they would never make Turin comical relief.

Are we to judge Gimli on Peter Jackson's portrayal of him in the movies?:eek: Shame on you, Rune! You disgrace the name of Gimli by comparing him to John R. Davis.

While Gimli may be rabelaisian, Turin is downright melodramatic.

I'll take rabelaisian any day.

I've a feeling this topic is a can of worms (never quite understood that expression though, what's so bad about a can of worms? You open it and there are worms inside, so what? I can think of much worse can-contents) but here's a fairly recent thread where we discussed these issues:
Are Orcs That Bad?
Okay, I'll give you that, he's not afraid to show his emotions. It's just that I don't really buy it. What's his motivation, his inner desires and struggles? Who is Gimli? To me he is just a sideshow, just like Legolas; a character not crafted out well enough to care for. And Cute? :eek: :p

Edit: I suppose PJ felt the fellowship could use some comic relief, and I actually agree: you can't have nine stern and solemn walkers in a Hollywood blockbuster. From there, the step to use Gimli (and Pip and Merry of curse) seems rather natural, as he already is used for this purpose on occasion by Tolkien, if to a much lesser degree. Furthermore, in The Hobbit, the Dwarwes are used almost exclusively as comic relief, or for plain comedy I should say. Okay, maybe that's an exageration but you get my point. Sure, the Gimli-jokes weren't always handled in the best way, but some gave me a chuckle too. All and all, I didn't mind movie Gimli at all.

That was not what I did. . . I just said that it would be impossible to do it to Turin. I voted Turin because he goes through the same troubles as many beloved folk-lore hero. Nogrod mentioned one, in Norse/Germanic tales you have Sigurd/Siegfried.

It is a cool charachter