Sauron versus Aragorn

[Belegorn]

I know the way he had Elendil go out was so dumb. I mean, the Númenóreans were like the strongest force in Middle Earth and he basically had Sauron b-slap Elendil to death. I suppose he wanted to represent Elendil in Aragorn with that one on one fight because the way Elendil went out was weak.

[malickfan]

This thread has been hillarious, and that clip was rather sickening, ignoring its non canon appearance, cliched screwriting 101 feeling, and god awful further cheapening of Frodo, I've got to say...I know it was left unfinished but that 14 fot Sauron suit looked ridiculous-and how did Sauron as a floating eyeball put it back together?

It's little wonder Phillpa Boyens hasn't read The Silmarillion in 25 years, obviously the material is too complicted for them to understand.

[Mornorngûr]

I agree with this 100%. can you imagine the nonsense that would come of it.

[Sarumian]

I totally agree that shooting one-to-one fight would have been in sharp contrast with what Tolkien had written about the demise of poor Sauron. On the other hand I don't see this particular amendment a grave matter. Aragorn and Gandalf (with essential aid on behalf of Pippin) had done everything to make Sauron believe that Aragorn bore The Ring. Thus, it had not contradict everything else in the plot if Sauron, desperate to have his Ring back, would have gone to Morannon Gates and duelled Aragorn.

What I tend to agree is that Sauron's character was left without any proper development, and an attempt to replace it with some rapid change of images during the last minutes of his screen presence is a very poor substitute. Moreover, transforming him into virtually the Eye left PJ without an opportunity to show him, for instance, present at Gollum's torture as it happens in the book. Apart from PJ's tendency to opt on occasion for more eye-catching (sorry for the pun) but superficial solutions, I have to admit that Tolkien's manner to show Sauron indirectly makes an awful lot of difficulties for any director. One would have to re-create this paranoid feel about Hitler's bunker/Stalin's ever lit window out there, where something had been always going on, that no-one could see but it would define everyone's life no-one could hide; and an almost 'physical' presence of fear and admiration. Honestly, I believe, PJ managed to catch this feel here and there in the movie but it is rather in the horror of Nazgul, or in Gandalf's concerns, or in Galadriel's sorrow than simply in the image of the Eye on the top of the Tower.

[popo]

Originally Posted by Belegorn

I know the way he had Elendil go out was so dumb. I mean, the Númenóreans were like the strongest force in Middle Earth and he basically had Sauron b-slap Elendil to death. I suppose he wanted to represent Elendil in Aragorn with that one on one fight because the way Elendil went out was weak.

Agreed. I thought Jackson botched the flashback scene. I always read the text as the two great champions of Men and Elves (Elendil & Gil Galad) facing off against Sauron, and killing him. They were mortally wounded in the process. Isildur (who was with Elrond as a sort of corner man) then picks up his father's broken sword and slices off the ring as his father's "wereguild".
Felt like the movie made Isildur out to be a lucky, and he immediately came off as sullen and evil right away.

[Mithalwen]

And Gilgalad who actually wrestled Sauron in one account doesn't get a look in..poor guy's credit was longer than his appearance.

[Belegorn]

I guess Gil-galad is seen as a shadowy figure, but that was his moment.

[Zigûr]

Then again if we'd seen Peter Jackson's interpretation of Gil-Galad's canonical death by the "heat of Sauron's hand" presumably he would have exploded into a twenty-foot pillar of fire and run screaming off a cliff-top flailing his arms, thus foreshadowing Denethor's championship-title earning Marathon Man whilst-on-fire run in the third film.

Perhaps then Elrond could have ridden to the summit of Minas Tirith all the way from Rivendell (having just returned there after delivering Andúril) to deliver an arch comment about how back in his day Elves died in flames better than Men.

[Belegorn]

I don't get the feeling that Gil-galad ran, even though he was burned to death, in any sense. haha

[Calacirya]

The movie couldn't have been the same as the book for a myriad of reasons. Most of which would be absolutely undeniably boring on screen.
Another thing, those movies got millions interested in the works of Tolkien. These two facts combined, I can't believe a person actually took on the task of bringing something so incredible onscreen. What a daunting task. He did the best he could and if any one of you tried to make a film adaptation the same number or even more would be upset with your version for various reasons. He's a director, not a literary master. He did what he could with what he felt and what he knew and, you know, I couldn't imagine the courage.

As far as the eyeball thing goes, he's right. In the books it was very situational evil that had the fellowship and other allies on their toes, rarely was it ever specifically Sauron. It's even been said by fans that the books didn't do much of a job at conveying the pain (mental or, later, physical) Frodo is in from the ring during the books aside from Frodo siding with Gollum increasingly as their relationship develops.

Jackson thought that Aragorn, as the pointedly heroic protagonist of the story, should fight Sauron as a way of retribution not only for the evil he's caused, but because Aragorn may have felt the need to conquer the history of his bloodline that haunted his thoughts about being able to rule Gondor.
Obviously, in the end he decided to leave it out because, and according to Jackson's logic which I thought was very considerate, it doesn't take a battle to prove you're a hero, as we see with Frodo. He acknowledged that Aragorn was not our true hero, as the Hollywood stereotype would argue, but Frodo, the character that drew his sword as little as possible during his battle, because it was inward.

The books are the books, and the movies are the movies. I just think they should be judged on their own merit instead of comparing the two. That's the only reason I defend Jackson. Of COURSE I wish it was more like the books I've loved and adored for years, but that's not what I got. I don't know, I just think it's cool in it's own way, and the works of Tolkien can never be devalued by any work by another whether by film, literature, or any other kind of media. Tolkien is ultimately untouchable.