Yes, Jolt, I do believe that if Gandalf is (as you admit) Ainur, then since the Ainur are neither men nor mortals, but are in fact immortal, therefore Gandalf is neither a man, nor mortal. What is confusing to you about that conclusion? And incidentally, immortals
can die, although they do not age. The true difference between a mortal and an immortal may be that a mortal knows that someday he
must die. An immortal does not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eönwë
Obviously, Peter Jackson wants us to think otherwise- that Gandalf and the Witch King are evenly matched, or that the Witch King is even more powerful than Gandalf. But I don't think it makes sense even from a purely "movies" perspective.
|
It may not make sense if you are a Tolkien purist, but Jackson was always willing to deviate somewhat to make the cinematic release more effective. In this case he clearly made a conscious decision to give the climactic scenes of the War of the Ring more punch by magnifying Aragorn to be the clear "hero" so that when he became king, got the girl, etc. it would prove more emotionally satisfying by all the traditional cinematic storytelling criteria. So he did what he had to do to make it so.
The fact is, most of the moviegoing public are not Tolkien fanatics. Even I am willing to dismiss problems like wimpy-Gandalf from my mind in order to enjoy the movies, which I think are magnificent (all of them). Yes, the cinematic version is not exactly true to the book. You are correct, it is
the movie Gandalf, and in order to appreciate the movie you just have to dismiss from your mind questions about why Gandalf suddenly became so much less powerful and less wise than he was before.