Spoilers Rings of Power is back!

[Maxperson]

Honestly I never understood that line in the movie, which is:

"The ring is treacherous; it will hold you to your word".


I mean, isn't the very definition of treacherous is that is WON'T hold you to your word? Honor and oaths don't matter to it preciously because it IS treacherous

That's not precisely how it went down in the book.

"Would you commit your promise to that Smeagol? It will hold you. But it is more treacherous than you are. It may twist your words. Beware!"

Then Smeagol swears by the ring to be very good and never let Sauron have the ring. Later the ring twists that oath into making Smeagol jump to his death(which Smeagol never meant to do) into the lava. If Smeagol had lived with the ring, Sauron would have gotten ahold of it eventually."

 

[Baron Opal II]

Are the blue wizards mentioned at all in the LotR? Or just obliquely in Saruman's comment to Gandalf?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

There aren't many cases I can think of where a cinematic adaptation really surpasses the literature - The Godfather springs to mind. Maybe Blade Runner? Shawshank Redemption?

Jaws.

The original novel is bonkers, with affairs, the Mafia and more.

 

[gban007]

But you would still have a superpowered balrog-slaying elflord sitting on the bench.

And where TF was he during the Last Alliance anyway?

For the movie, I agree - I think book is more nuanced and explains why he didn't go with fellowship (would essentially be a big glowing sign, especially as got nearer to Gondor / Mordor, for Saruman and Sauron) - but potentially was used as one of the false trails given instead to suggest ring was going elsewhere.
Then Glorfindel was likely present for some of the battles that occurred elsewhere during the war of the ring, whether the assaults on Lothlorien, Erebor or other. The movies however don't show sign of these other battles, so I think Glorfindel would have been a bit of a glaring omission there - arguably the elves already are, especially likes of Elrond / Galadriel after the Hobbit movies show them as good fighters.
Looking online, it sounds like he wasn't around during most of the ring forging time at least, but was likely present at war of the last alliance.

 

[MarkB]

During the fight with Sauron he has it in his hand for a while. Long enough to corrupt it being a powerful maia.

He really doesn't. It never leaves Galadriel's possession once Adar returns it to her, and Sauron never touches it.

 

[Maxperson]

He really doesn't. It never leaves Galadriel's possession once Adar returns it to her, and Sauron never touches it.

Huh. I could have sworn I saw that, but I just went back and nope. You are correct.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

While we don't HAVE to interact with him to know these things....its certainly enjoyable to see it in action. Show don't tell as they say.

I wish that the "Show don't tell" mantra had been extended further.

The reason that I brought up the Miltonic Satan, is that I think that it is very hard to distill a character with real, evil gravitas into an - at least semi-relatable - protagonist without diminishing the mythic status. It is an ambitious project.

Milton can execute it because of his perspective: an unconventional personal theology, a deeply poetic and insightful mind, and an encyclopedic knowledge of classical, Judeo-Christian and Gnostic literature; as well as his deeply-held anti-monarchist and disestablishment beliefs. The resulting character demonstrates great pathos but his evil is never really in question. Satan does not emote, or succumb to sentimentality.

I guess I'm saying if I were to try to put Sauron on the screen, and elicit a sympathetic response from the audience, Milton's Satan might be a port of call for inspiration. As might American Psycho, for that matter.

When we examine the various iterations of Sauron in Tolkien's writings, we have:

• The fallen angelic spirit at the beginning of time
• The steadfast lieutenant who maintains Melkor's dominion during his captivity
• The cruel, shapeshifting lord of werewolves who beguiles and deceives with illusions
• The deceiver of the Elves and the forger of the rings
• The warlord who attempts to subdue Middle-Earth
• The corruptor who instigates Numenor's destruction
• A spirit, temporarily banished, who strives to reform
• A necromancer who corrupts the greenwood
• The final iteration, in LotR, who combines many of the previous elements to one degree or another

But at no stage is he personalized, with relatable characteristics; he is always "othered," because of his mythic status - literally, The Enemy. His "role" is always archetypal; as are, arguably, most of Tolkien's other characters.

To invert that, and cast him in the role of protagonist, without jeopardizing the Sauron-gestalt is a very ambitious undertaking.

I reject the notion that "modern audiences" require a morally grey character; I think better of them than that.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Are the blue wizards mentioned at all in the LotR? Or just obliquely in Saruman's comment to Gandalf?

Indirectly. Saruman mentions “the staffs of the five wizards”.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I reject the notion that "modern audiences" require a morally grey character; I think better of them than that.

Modern audiences require a central character to have a personality and motivations. You are the only person talking about “morally grey”. The Sauron in RoP has choices - and chooses evil anyway. This is not a morally grey character. Choosing to be evil matters, always evil by default is no more culpable than a cat who kills a mouse.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Modern audiences require a central character to have a personality and motivations. You are the only person talking about “morally grey”.

A character with sympathetic human behaviours and motivation, who does not act solely in their own interest, is definitionally grey. The shades may differ.

Sauron’s remorse at the death of Celebrimbor - projected through the fourth wall, and not immediately toward the orcs as a means of manipulation - humanizes him, and certainly “greys” him.

Wrt. Sauron’s “love” of Galadriel; well, it might have been more in-character if “he conceived a dark desire” a la Morgoth with Luthien. What we get is an infantilized version of romantic love.