The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/index.php)
-   The Movies (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/forumdisplay.php?f=12)
-   -   Radagast in The Hobbit Film (SPOILERS) (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=18218)

Rhod the Red 01-06-2013 06:37 PM

Quote:

Is it possible, Gandalf just didn't want to bad-mouth someone he would view as a friend, a colleague?
He was willing to badmouth his own superior, Saruman, both to Frodo & at the Council of Elrond (a public dissing). His restraint from criticism wasn't 100%.

Boromir88 01-06-2013 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhod the Red (Post 679178)
He was willing to badmouth his own superior, Saruman, both to Frodo & at the Council of Elrond (a public dissing). His restraint from criticism wasn't 100%.

By that time though Saruman was a revealed traitor and kept Gandalf imprisoned on Orthanc...I can't imagine Gandalf had viewed Saruman as a friend. Yet he still shows regard for Saruman as a powerful wizard whose designs drove Sauron out of Dol Guldur.

Rhod the Red 01-06-2013 07:21 PM

He hasn't been imprisoned in the Shadow of the Past chapter. That's later, and Saruman was still head of the Order in the War of the Ring

Rhod the Red 01-06-2013 07:45 PM

Quote:

he is just not like that at all
We know next to nothing about him, certainly nothing about his private life. Two wizards are portrayed in having private lives that included smoking, how do you know he wouldn't do the same thing?

Morthoron 01-06-2013 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cellurdur (Post 679177)
This is where we disagree. Sauron had control of virtually the entire world. The fact that he could not mobilise his forces as quickly or as many as would be expected indicates something was holding him back. It would make sense if he was having trouble in the East and had to divert some of his attention there.

Even if we keep the account in LOTR that they all arrived in the 3rd Age it does not mean the Blue Wizards should not have played their part.

Gondor was a shadow of what it was in it's glory. I think it's Imrahil, who says the Gondor Vanguard was around 8,000 in it's pomp. Sauron had the strength to overrun Gondor at it's height; when it had great technology, a much bigger army and better soldiers. In the War of the Ring it appears he could not muster forces even as great as in the Last Alliance let alone earlier on in the Second Age. Something must have been holding him back and this was probably the Blue Wizards.

That would all depend on which text you wish to believe. In his letters, Tolkien speculated on their failure:

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #211
I really do not know anything clearly about the other two [the Blue Wizards, Alatar and Pallando ] I think they went as emissaries to distant regions, East and South, far out of N˙menorian range. What success they had I do not know ; but I fear that they failed, as Saruman did, though doubtless in different ways; and I suspect they were founders of or beginners of secret cults and "magic" traditions that outlasted the fall of Sauron.

Sauron was certainly strong enough to unleash an eastern legion against Dale and Erebor, and also came with strength against Galadriel and Thranduil. He had an incredibly huge army of reserves waiting at the Morannon to face the Captains of the West. Had the ring not been destroyed, had Frodo not been bitten by Gollum after he claimed the Ring, had the Nazgul returned in triumph to Barad-dur with the Ring in their grasp and Frodo their prisoner, Aragorn's little army would have been annihilated and the West would have been utterly destroyed. I don't see much help from the Blue Wizards, given these circumstances. Conjecture is fun, but the facts dictate that the fate of the West rested totally with the destruction of the Ring at that precise moment.

Boromir88 01-07-2013 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhod the Red (Post 679180)
He hasn't been imprisoned in the Shadow of the Past chapter. That's later, and Saruman was still head of the Order in the War of the Ring

I'm sorry, I still have no idea what you're referring too...some help?

I haven't come across anything to say Gandalf was disrespecting Saruman's power or standing/worthiness as head of the Istari and the White Council. Even when Gandalf is clearly more powerful and breaks Saruman's staff, Gandalf believes Saruman still has power left in Orthanc. Once Gandalf knows Saruman is a traitor, he obviously blows the lid on Saruman's betrayal, but he's not disrespecting Saruman by telling the Council of his treachery.

The only moment that comes to mind is in Unfinished Tales when Gandalf blows the smoke rings to mock Saruman's scolding that Gandalf should not be dallying with his childish toys when there are great matters being discussed. But this is a private statement made by Gandalf to Saruman, that his study into the Rings of Power is dangerous, not disrespect towards Saruman's worthiness as a wizard nor being his superior.

Rhod the Red 01-08-2013 05:24 AM

Quote:

I haven't come across anything to say Gandalf was disrespecting Saruman's power or standing/worthiness as head of the Istari and the White Council.
He did in Shadow of the Past to Frodo.

Mithalwen 01-08-2013 06:12 AM

Gandalf acknowledges Saruman's lore, power and seniority but comments that he has grown proud and disikes interference in his sphere. Gandalf says that Bilbo's behaviour didn't tally with Saruman's assurances. Then the ring is shown to be the One which proves Saruman wrong and it is in that context that Gandalf speaks of an earlier time when he still trusted Saruman.

Is having doubts about someone being right who is then shown to be wrong on that matter disrespectful? He doesn't express himself disrespectfully , but if Saruman is the sort of leader who is still right when he is wrong then Gandalf could be described as disrespectful but I think it is a stretch.

Boromir88 01-08-2013 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mithalwen (Post 679236)
Gandalf acknowledges Saruman's lore, power and seniority but comments that he has grown proud and disikes interference in his sphere. Gandalf says that Bilbo's behaviour didn't tally with Saruman's assurances. Then the ring is shown to be the One which proves Saruman wrong and it is in that context that Gandalf speaks of an earlier time when he still trusted Saruman.

Is having doubts about someone being right who is then shown to be wrong on that matter disrespectful? He doesn't express himself disrespectfully , but if Saruman is the sort of leader who is still right when he is wrong then Gandalf could be described as disrespectful but I think it is a stretch.

Ok, that makes sense now, thanks.

Mainly I wanted to make the argument, as slight as the information, we can learn about Radagast's character based on what other characters say about him. So, Gandalf and Saruman.

I think after An Unexpected Journey too many saw an over the top, eccentric, socially awkward fool, thinking this wasn't Radagast at all. His appearance and the bird crap is too ridiculous for me, but I don't think it was a bad route to show Radagast as a wizard not up to Saruman's nobility, nor Gandalf's wisdom. Someone may read Gandalf's "Radagast is a worthy wizard" and decide Jackson got it all wrong. How is a stuttering, eccentric hermit a "worthy wizard?" But Gandalf would have no reason to speak poorly of Radagast, nor disrepsect him, especially considering Radagast as a friend. It fits Gandalf's character, because he is extremely humble. So, while he's speaking true about Radagast's worth, as a wizard, it doesn't mean it's the full picture on Radagast, considering Gandalf would have no reason to speak disrespectfully about a friend.

Saruman has no respect towards Radagast, and he's a liar who became a mimic of Sauron. However, it doesn't mean what he says about Radagast is wholly untrue. So, I don't think it was a wrong decision to blend the two wizards' opinions of Radagast together. To show not only Radagast's knowledge and worth in the nature realm, but to also get the visualisation of why Saruman had little respect for him.

I actually think what Gandalf says about Saruman in Shadow of the Past is further sign of his respect for Saruman's knowledge and authority. Saruman is able to convince Gandalf that his misgivings Bilbo might have the One Ring is wrong for a period of time. Gandalf puts aside the matter of Bilbo's ring based on Saruman's information, and it's not until it's abundantly clear in the Shadow of the Past that Saruman's information was wrong. I would agree, this is a stretch to say Gandalf was disrespecting Saruman's worth and authority.

Rhod the Red 01-08-2013 07:25 AM

Quote:

Gandalf puts aside the matter of Bilbo's ring based on Saruman's information
Not just that, but also because of Bilbo's bloodline.

Mithalwen 01-08-2013 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boromir88 (Post 67924)

I actually think what Gandalf says about Saruman in Shadow of the Past is further sign of his respect for Saruman's knowledge and authority. Saruman is able to convince Gandalf that his misgivings Bilbo might have the One Ring is wrong for a period of time. Gandalf puts aside the matter of Bilbo's ring based on Saruman's information, and it's not until it's abundantly clear in the Shadow of the Past that Saruman's information was wrong. I would agree, this is a stretch to say Gandalf was disrespecting Saruman's worth and authority.

Yes and I get the feeling that Gandalf blames Saruman giving bad advice on his pride raather than on a lack of knowledgww nor ulterior motive in the circumstances it is giving him the benefit of the doubt almost. A mistake as it happens. He may have thought his reluctance to confide in Saruman aa a reluctance to challenge his superior.

LalwendŰ 01-08-2013 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boro
I think after An Unexpected Journey too many saw an over the top, eccentric, socially awkward fool, thinking this wasn't Radagast at all. His appearance and the bird crap is too ridiculous for me, but I don't think it was a bad route to show Radagast as a wizard not up to Saruman's nobility, nor Gandalf's wisdom. Someone may read Gandalf's "Radagast is a worthy wizard" and decide Jackson got it all wrong. How is a stuttering, eccentric hermit a "worthy wizard?" But Gandalf would have no reason to speak poorly of Radagast, nor disrepsect him, especially considering Radagast as a friend. It fits Gandalf's character, because he is extremely humble. So, while he's speaking true about Radagast's worth, as a wizard, it doesn't mean it's the full picture on Radagast, considering Gandalf would have no reason to speak disrespectfully about a friend.

Very well said, I haven't really thought about how both Gandalf and Saruman would obviously have very different opinions on Radagast. And the truth lies somewhere in between.

Of course, we may read the term 'worthy' differently to Gandalf. To him, a worthy wizard might simply mean one who acts with the best intentions or uses his skill in a kindly way. While 'worthy' to a modern reader may mean something very different - I've heard it used in reference to people high up in society's hierarchy as well as in reference to great humanitarians, neither of which would fit with Radagast, in either film or books.

Sarumian 01-08-2013 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LalwendŰ (Post 679262)
Very well said, I haven't really thought about how both Gandalf and Saruman would obviously have very different opinions on Radagast. And the truth lies somewhere in between.

Of course, we may read the term 'worthy' differently to Gandalf. To him, a worthy wizard might simply mean one who acts with the best intentions or uses his skill in a kindly way. While 'worthy' to a modern reader may mean something very different - I've heard it used in reference to people high up in society's hierarchy as well as in reference to great humanitarians, neither of which would fit with Radagast, in either film or books.

I also liked Boro's view on PJ's Radagast. He is rather different from the wizard in the LoTR but there he makes such a brief appearance that I don't really mind an 'invented' wizard for The Hobbit. In the movie he is so strange that it is difficult to take him seriously, however, Gandalf treats him with respect and is quite right. That mirrors the situation of Bilbo himself - dwarves don't see him worthy but Gandalf can see why they might need him.

Rhod the Red 01-08-2013 07:24 PM

He's like the Fourth Doctor in Doctor Who; "the keen mind, the powerful, the dominant personality under that flamboyant exterior. There was obviously far more to him than met the eye." - The Robot, pg 38.

Ulvenok 01-08-2013 07:32 PM

He is a bit Tom Bombadilish yet has no reason to be, because as seen when he walks into Dol Guldur and later runs away, he is not much of a wizard. At least not in the movie. It'd be nicer if he was an old silent man with a little bird at his shoulder, remote unconcerned and when speaking to Gandalf he had his eyes fixed on his bird that he was feeding.

Instead of this bumbling obnoxious buffon that is being pulled around by rabbits. Silly and stupid...

Rhod the Red 01-08-2013 08:23 PM

He didn't leave empty handed, he managed to snag a relic and then ran. Why stay and fight?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:53 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.