My View of the Lord of the Rings

[Oba-rai]

First of all, I want to say that LOTR is an AWESOME FILM! Peter Jackson, Fran something, and Philippa Something did excellent jobs at putting a Book into a Movie.

My only misgiving about the LOTR was the fact that

A) There is magic in it, and God specifically warns against magic, witchcraft, and wizardry and sorcery.

B) 90% of the actors had been in at least 1 R-rated movie, in which they did things that were definitely against God's will.

Now, I have to say that I developed a VERY high liking for the LOTR. The above are the only reasons LOTR is my favorite movie, but that the Chronicles of Narnia: Lion Witch and the Wardrobe is going to be my FIRST favorite, once it comes out.

The LOTR is a rich, deep, and meaningful film that made me want to cry at the end...(I miss Frodo!! honestly, just the character of Frodo [not Elijah Wood, who has been in 2 R-rated movies] made me be happy!) and has MANY themes that made me think over my beliefs.

Sam's loyalty, Arwen's love, Frodo's struggle, and Gollum's obsession with the Ring were only a few of the genuine and classic characters that made me want to watch the movie over and over. I found many parallels to our Christian life, in this movie, despite Tolkien's insistence it was NOT an allegory.

A) the Ring. The Ring, I believe, wasn't necessarily MADE to represent Sin. But you can see it. It's evil wrapped in a seductive cloak... Sin. People are obsessed with it. They want to do it, and yet HATE what it does to them.

C) the Hobbit. I think that Frodo is somehow tied with mankind, and yet how Jesus came, chose the Cross, and carried it all the way to Calvary. Frodo didn't WANT to, but Someone had to. So he did. I admired his determination, yet the struggle of carrying the Ring. But unlike Jesus, he found himself unconsciously 'playing with the Ring'. In the end, though, something had to 'jolt' him from taking the Ring for himself.

C) the King. Aragorn must choose to be the King, even though it was hard. He knew that he was weak as a human, but realized that it was most important to Middle Earth to be the King.

D) Sam's loyalty!! I AM SUCH A FAN OF SAM! My favorite line is always 'I can't carry the Ring, Mr. Frodo, but I CAN carry you!' His sheer bravery in the face of danger and harm is my hero.

E) I hesitate to talk about Legolas...he was played by Orlando Bloom, who is famous now. I don't like famous celebrities!!!! :great big sigh: But I know that the friendship forged between Legolas and Gimli is very admirable. Instead of the prejudice and pride shown in the Fellowship, their friendship turns into a strong one through all that had happened.

Finally, I would like to mention that I do defend the presence of 'magic' in the Movies. in the LOTR, there is no central 'God-figure'. There is an Evil-figure, Sauron, and two 'Savior-figures' (Frodo as the struggling humble person, and Aragorn as the Returning King) But NO good God-figure. All the questions about this made my head spin, especially when Frodo asked (while in ...um...that city where Frodo almost gives the Ring to the ''WitchKing'' on the Nazgul, after that deep, personal struggle after Sam saves Middle Earth by knocking him to the ground):
(something to this element, I can't remember EXACTLY)

F: I can't do it, Sam, I can't.

S: (talks about how the stories and the tales were most important when they couldn't, but they did)

F: Well then, what ARE we fighting for?

That was the most thought-provoking scene about WHY they did that, that I saw. I really realized that since they didn't have a God-figure, they had to have some way of showing that there was a lot of power on both sides. The evil power was in the Ring and in Sauron, but the good power seemed to be in Gandalf and whoever HE answered to. so the magic (''good'' magic) was how they portrayed the POWER of Good.

All in all, I give it a 98%, A + !! Rock on, LOTR people!

[The Top Crusader]

B) 90% of the actors had been in at least 1 R-rated movie, in which they did things that were definitely against God's will.

Okay, I'm curious about this one... I'm not sure what difference this makes, really. Many of the great men of God in the Bible led "R-rated" lives prior to their conversions, or during their lives in some cases. Peter Jackson himself made what is widely considered "the goriest movie ever" *points to my Peter Jackson film with lawn mower used as a weapon topic* So anyway, as long as their role in the film is decent, I don't see what their past roles has to do with it.

[Sarah]

Also, I don't mean for this to sound rude, but have you read the books? It seems like you're basing quite a bit of your information soley on the movies and the content in them. Now if you have, please don't be offended, I'm just wondering... (edit: oh, heh, read over your post again. I feel dumb. Feel free to ignore this comment. )

B) 90% of the actors had been in at least 1 R-rated movie, in which they did things that were definitely against God's will.

Okay, I'm curious about this one... I'm not sure what difference this makes, really. Many of the great men of God in the Bible led "R-rated" lives prior to their conversions, or during their lives in some cases. Peter Jackson himself made what is widely considered "the goriest movie ever" *points to my Peter Jackson film with lawn mower used as a weapon topic* So anyway, as long as their role in the film is decent, I don't see what their past roles has to do with it.

I have to agree with you... Look at the movies that Mel Gibson has been in. And then look at the movie that he directed (The Passion, which, might i add was rated R. ). I agree on the note that it doesn't matter what movies they have been in in the past.

Sarah

[STRYPER]

I thought that was an extremely intellegent post forever_faithful

Just a question (which some people have already hinted to asking )

Do you believe that all R-rated movies are automatically sinful and those who act in R-rated movies should be boycotted?

[Oba-rai]

I do not make my judgement on the actor's lives, but I was extremely disappointed in Elijah Wood, Liv Taylor, (interestingly, not very disappointed in Viggo Mortonson) and Sean Astin. The R-rated movies I mean are not violence. I mean the OTHER type of wrong...perverted and such. Actors have the right to say NO to acting in such a movie, and if I do pursue the kind of career like acting, I would say no to all the movies that compromise my beliefes. Despite what Beyonce Knowles claims, I believe it's more than entertainment. God is NOT okay with compromising your beliefs for the sake of entertainment.

I did read the Trilogy, although it's been a long time since. I believe the best movie ever made was the Passion of the Christ. I'm not looking at the violence, but the actor's lives. I was somewhat enamored with Elijah Wood, but instead of 'liking him', I am praying for him to become a Christian.

[Elrohir]

My only misgiving about the LOTR was the fact that

A) There is magic in it, and God specifically warns against magic, witchcraft, and wizardry and sorcery.

There was no magic used in LotR. Remember that "magic" is just a word some people use to describe supernatural events. All supernatural power comes either from God and his angels or from demons. Gandalf's powers, for example, are the abilities he was given when he was created by Eru(God).

[Oba-rai]

My only misgiving about the LOTR was the fact that

A) There is magic in it, and God specifically warns against magic, witchcraft, and wizardry and sorcery.

There was no magic used in LotR. Remember that "magic" is just a word some people use to describe supernatural events. All supernatural power comes either from God and his angels or from demons. Gandalf's powers, for example, are the abilities he was given when he was created by Eru(God).

First...I just want to say that no mention of 'Eru' at all, is in the movie. I haven't read the books in a long time, but I do not specifically remember an 'Eru'. As far as I could see, there was no specific God-figure. The closest to one, I saw, was Gandalf. Even he was weaker than Saruman.

Magic..when you start talking about magic, it is important to have the same definition. My definition of magic is the use of spiritual forces, be they good or evil, to do certain things such as defend yourself, fight someone else, or to have strength, power, and victory in some case. The LOTR uses that. Galadriel has a 'seeing pool', and that 'power' is helped by 'Nenya', one of the 3 Elven Rings. Gandalf has his staff. Saruman has his crystal ball (portrayed as evil, fortunately), and on the swords of Sting, Glamdhring, and Hadhafang have Elven inscriptions, explained as 'magical' incantations to make the bearer of those swords powerful.

However, I think the reason magic had to be introduced into the LOTR was because there was no God-figure portrayed. There was no BEING personifying absolute good, absolute power. So that's my only problem with the LOTR. Despite all that, I say that it is an AWESOME Trilogy, and has awesome and wonderful messages.

Yay for Hobbits!

[Me]

Then I take it that you haven't read the Silmarillion, in which is explained the origins of Middle Earth?

[Oba-rai]

He..he.. No....

Correction duly noted. I really should read the Appendices as well as that book.. the ...um... Sillymarine?

[Me]

Indeed you should. It would explain a few things.....

[jollyholiday]

My only misgiving about the LOTR was the fact that

A) There is magic in it, and God specifically warns against magic, witchcraft, and wizardry and sorcery.

There was no magic used in LotR. Remember that "magic" is just a word some people use to describe supernatural events. All supernatural power comes either from God and his angels or from demons. Gandalf's powers, for example, are the abilities he was given when he was created by Eru(God).

First...I just want to say that no mention of 'Eru' at all, is in the movie. I haven't read the books in a long time, but I do not specifically remember an 'Eru'. As far as I could see, there was no specific God-figure. The closest to one, I saw, was Gandalf. Even he was weaker than Saruman.

Magic..when you start talking about magic, it is important to have the same definition. My definition of magic is the use of spiritual forces, be they good or evil, to do certain things such as defend yourself, fight someone else, or to have strength, power, and victory in some case. The LOTR uses that. Galadriel has a 'seeing pool', and that 'power' is helped by 'Nenya', one of the 3 Elven Rings. Gandalf has his staff. Saruman has his crystal ball (portrayed as evil, fortunately), and on the swords of Sting, Glamdhring, and Hadhafang have Elven inscriptions, explained as 'magical' incantations to make the bearer of those swords powerful.

However, I think the reason magic had to be introduced into the LOTR was because there was no God-figure portrayed. There was no BEING personifying absolute good, absolute power. So that's my only problem with the LOTR. Despite all that, I say that it is an AWESOME Trilogy, and has awesome and wonderful messages.

Yay for Hobbits!

If I'm not mistaken, there is plenty of magic in the Chronicles of Narnia, used by both protagonists and antagonists.

[STRYPER]

Indeed there was, but what is to stop us from saying that things Jesus did was magic?

If Jesus and Aslan are to be analogous (and I know they weren't intended to but I would argue that have been made to be ), then Aslan performing magic is no more evil than Jesus's use.

[Oba-rai]

I've been reading up, and have learned that Eru Illuvatar or something, is the 'One God'. Note, uppercase G... the next people he made, whose names are unknown and forgotten to me, created others...

The Silmarillion, a book published more than 17 years after the LotR was published, explains more than 6500 years of history (I think, yea, I think so!) and explains all that lead up to the Hobbit. It explains the 7 rings, and the 3 rings, and the 9 rings... and The One Ring.

Now, Stryper, I am not saying that the Chronicles of Narnia is perfect. I say that these are only stories. These are only fantasy, and should be regarded as very GOOD classics. But some of the elements are contributory to understanding the depth to which somethings happened.

Aslan was the CREATOR of Narnia. He has all power. Yet his arch-enemy, otherwise known as the Witch in LWW, has a lot of power too. In the end, Aslan wins.

I have to go, I will continue the post soon...

[Agent Robert Mitchell]

My only misgiving about the LOTR was the fact that

A) There is magic in it, and God specifically warns against magic, witchcraft, and wizardry and sorcery.

There was no magic used in LotR. Remember that "magic" is just a word some people use to describe supernatural events. All supernatural power comes either from God and his angels or from demons. Gandalf's powers, for example, are the abilities he was given when he was created by Eru(God).

First...I just want to say that no mention of 'Eru' at all, is in the movie. I haven't read the books in a long time, but I do not specifically remember an 'Eru'. As far as I could see, there was no specific God-figure. The closest to one, I saw, was Gandalf. Even he was weaker than Saruman.

Magic..when you start talking about magic, it is important to have the same definition. My definition of magic is the use of spiritual forces, be they good or evil, to do certain things such as defend yourself, fight someone else, or to have strength, power, and victory in some case. The LOTR uses that. Galadriel has a 'seeing pool', and that 'power' is helped by 'Nenya', one of the 3 Elven Rings. Gandalf has his staff. Saruman has his crystal ball (portrayed as evil, fortunately), and on the swords of Sting, Glamdhring, and Hadhafang have Elven inscriptions, explained as 'magical' incantations to make the bearer of those swords powerful.

However, I think the reason magic had to be introduced into the LOTR was because there was no God-figure portrayed. There was no BEING personifying absolute good, absolute power. So that's my only problem with the LOTR. Despite all that, I say that it is an AWESOME Trilogy, and has awesome and wonderful messages.

Yay for Hobbits!

If I'm not mistaken, there is plenty of magic in the Chronicles of Narnia, used by both protagonists and antagonists.

But I would say that the magic used in Narnia (the 'white magic') is mainly alloted out by the 'God' figure. In the Lord of the Rings, the magic no matter the source is used for whichever side has the 'power' to wield it. The 'Army of the Dead' comes to mind. In the book I found it a bit weird that the 'dead' (all portrayed as ghoullish in the movie) were used for the good side to fight the bad side. Correct me if I'm wrong (I haven't read the Silmarillion yet.)

[Me]

First of all, the Army of the Dead was not "magic" per-se (sp?). They were cursed several thousand years previous to being used by Aragorn. The army that became the Army of the Dead had sworn alliegance to Gondor or Numenor (can't remember which). When they were needed, the call was sent out, but they refused the summons. They had thrown in their lot with the Dark Lord. At that time, they were cursed by the King to never find rest until they fulfilled their oath. This was not something that they could do on their own. They had to respond to the summons of the King, or one of his hiers. Aragorn is one of those. In fact, he was the only one who could call the Army of the Dead to fulfil their vow in order to lift the curse.

Hope that was coherent enough to understand.

[Thursday Next]

My only misgiving about the LOTR was the fact that

A) There is magic in it, and God specifically warns against magic, witchcraft, and wizardry and sorcery.... My definition of magic is the use of spiritual forces, be they good or evil, to do certain things such as defend yourself, fight someone else, or to have strength, power, and victory in some case. The LOTR uses that. Galadriel has a 'seeing pool', and that 'power' is helped by 'Nenya', one of the 3 Elven Rings. Gandalf has his staff. Saruman has his crystal ball (portrayed as evil, fortunately), and on the swords of Sting, Glamdhring, and Hadhafang have Elven inscriptions, explained as 'magical' incantations to make the bearer of those swords powerful.

Here's the rub that's your definition of magic...not Tolkien's definition magic in LotR and the Chronicles of Narnia is a literary device to help move the story. Even in Narnia in the Lion, the Witch, and The Wardrobe you have Aslan talk not only of deep magic which was put into Narnia from the very beginning, but a magic that goes deeper still that the Emporer formed before the dawn of time. In the Magician's Nephew you have the "magic" rings that gets Polly and Diggory into Narnia and the place where they wake up Jadis. Jadis even talks about the deplorable word that can destroy worlds.
Anyway back to LotR. Here's an excerpt from a letter that can be found in the beginning of the Silmerilian.

This desire is at once wedded to a passionate love of the real primary world, and hence filled with the sense of mortality, and yet unsatisfied by it. It has various opportunities of 'Fall'. It may become possessive, clinging to the things made as its ow, the sub-creator wishes to be the Lord and God of his private creation. He will rebel against the laws of the Creator--especially against mortality. Both of these (alone or together) will lead to the desire for Power, for making the will more quickly effective, --and so the Machine (or Magic). By the last I intend all use of external plans or devices (apparatus) instead of developments of the inherent inner powers or talents or even the use of these talents with the corrupted motive of dominating: bulldozing the real world, or coercing other wills. The Machine is our more obvious modern form thuogh more closely related to Magic then is usually recgonized.
I have not used 'magic' consistently, and indeed the Elven-queen Galadriel is obliged to remonstrate with the Hobbits on their confused use of the word both for the devices and operation of the Enemy, and for those of the Elves. I have not, because there is not a word for the latter (since all human stories have suffered the same confusion). But the Elves are there (in my tales) to demonstrate the difference. Their 'magic' is Ar, delivered from many of its human limitations: more effortless, more quick, more complete (product, and vision in unflawed correspondence). And its object is Art not Power, sub-creation not dimination and tyrannous reforming of Creation. The 'Elves' are 'immortal', at least as far as this world goes: and hence are concerned rather with the griefs and burdens of deathlessness in time and change, than with death. The Enemy in successive forms is always 'naturally' concerned with sheer Dommination, and so the Lord of magic and machines; but the problem: that this firght ful evil can and does arise from an apparently good root, the desire to benefit the world and others --speedilyand according to the benefactors own plans--is a recurrent motive

As for the "crystal ball" they are called planitir (sp?) or seeing stones. Gandalf does warn Saruman about using it because they have not all been accounted for and they don't know who may be watching.

B) 90% of the actors had been in at least 1 R-rated movie, in which they did things that were definitely against God's will.

And what does this have to do with anything. I'm 90% sure one of the actors doing voice work in the Chronicles of Narnia is gay, but that won't stop me from enjoying the movie or any other work he's done for that matter. I know for some that would be enough for them to not see the movie. Also the actor who does doe the voice work for Aslan was in an little R-rated film called Schindler's List.

Now, I have to say that I developed a VERY high liking for the LOTR. The above are the only reasons LOTR is my favorite movie, but that the Chronicles of Narnia: Lion Witch and the Wardrobe is going to be my FIRST favorite, once it comes out.

I'm reserving judgement until I actually see it.

The LOTR is a rich, deep, and meaningful film that made me want to cry at the end...(I miss Frodo!! honestly, just the character of Frodo [not Elijah Wood, who has been in 2 R-rated movies] made me be happy!) and has MANY themes that made me think over my beliefs.

Sam's loyalty, Arwen's love, Frodo's struggle, and Gollum's obsession with the Ring were only a few of the genuine and classic characters that made me want to watch the movie over and over. I found many parallels to our Christian life, in this movie, despite Tolkien's insistence it was NOT an allegory.

Well Tolkien was a Christian and did critisize Lewis for writing Narnia as a blantent allegory. LotR was ment to be more of a mythology for England since, outside of the Arthurian legands there wasn't any. However he couldn't help show those values he thought important to be reflected in his work.

C) the King. Aragorn must choose to be the King, even though it was hard. He knew that he was weak as a human, but realized that it was most important to Middle Earth to be the King.

That and Elrond told him he couldn't marry Arwen if he didn't become king, but anyway.

Finally, I would like to mention that I do defend the presence of 'magic' in the Movies. in the LOTR, there is no central 'God-figure'. There is an Evil-figure, Sauron, and two 'Savior-figures' (Frodo as the struggling humble person, and Aragorn as the Returning King) But NO good God-figure.

I disagree that Frodo and Aragorn are the saviour figures. I believe Gandalf fits that qualification a little better. Manly because he is the guide on this journey until he is (for lack of a better term) killed by the Balrog. He comes back as Gandalf the White it is he who directly fights Saruman and saves Theoden from Saruman's influence. Frodo gives in to the power of the ring and it ends up being Gollum who ultimately destroys the ring as well as himself. Aragorn didn't want to be king, he fought it all the way, it wasn't until Elrond (in the movie) told him to essentially suck it up and become who he was born to be.

All the questions about this made my head spin, especially when Frodo asked (while in ...um...that city where Frodo almost gives the Ring to the ''WitchKing'' on the Nazgul, after that deep, personal struggle after Sam saves Middle Earth by knocking him to the ground):
(something to this element, I can't remember EXACTLY)

F: I can't do it, Sam, I can't.

S: (talks about how the stories and the tales were most important when they couldn't, but they did)

F: Well then, what ARE we fighting for?

That was the most thought-provoking scene about WHY they did that, that I saw. I really realized that since they didn't have a God-figure, they had to have some way of showing that there was a lot of power on both sides. The evil power was in the Ring and in Sauron, but the good power seemed to be in Gandalf and whoever HE answered to. so the magic (''good'' magic) was how they portrayed the POWER of Good.

THIS SCENE NEVER HAPPENED IN THE BOOKS. This was in the Two Towers at the very end when Frodo and Sam had been taken to Osgiliath by Farimir. That never happens, except in the movie because Peter Jackson needed to have Farimir have a journey. In the books Farimir let Frodo and Sam go when he met them in Mordor. As far as I'm concerned that was a blantent protest to the war in Iraq (and it becomes even more obvious when you listen to the actor's commentary).

*ok stepping down from pedistal now*

[Agent Robert Mitchell]

And what does this have to do with anything. I'm 90% sure one of the actors doing voice work in the Chronicles of Narnia is gay, but that won't stop me from enjoying the movie or any other work he's done for that matter. I know for some that would be enough for them to not see the movie. Also the actor who does doe the voice work for Aslan was in an little R-rated film called Schindler's List.

I think that in terms of actors, if you want to just watch the movie, don't necessarilly look to the actors, since they usually just do what the script says for them to do...but if you are going to idolize them off-stage (so to speak) you should make sure that you know what you are going to look to. If they star in a R-rated movie, then you know more about them as a person (i.e. the choices they make) thus telling something about their character. Look before you ape! lol

[The Top Crusader]

Lots of my favorite movies are R-rated... some PG13 movies are a lot more objectionable than R-rated films...

And Liam Neeson "the voice of Aslan" was also in a lovely R-rated film called Dark Man...

[Elrohir]

First of all, the Army of the Dead was not "magic" per-se (sp?). They were cursed several thousand years previous to being used by Aragorn. The army that became the Army of the Dead had sworn alliegance to Gondor or Numenor (can't remember which). When they were needed, the call was sent out, but they refused the summons. They had thrown in their lot with the Dark Lord. At that time, they were cursed by the King to never find rest until they fulfilled their oath. This was not something that they could do on their own. They had to respond to the summons of the King, or one of his hiers. Aragorn is one of those. In fact, he was the only one who could call the Army of the Dead to fulfil their vow in order to lift the curse.

Hope that was coherent enough to understand.

yeah, it's kinda like how the unsaved become saved.

[Danadelfos]

First of all I do think the movies were way worse than the books because first of all the movies did have more magic than the books. I have a question how many times did gandalf use magic? When the bad guys used magic that wasn't bad because they were defeated. And also 90% of the actors acting in R rated films doesn't mean that we should make a big deal about it as long as you don't dwell on it.