Is this for real?

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:11 pm

Ewww. . . . I just had a thought people won't like.

The second film would be the obvious place to show Aragorn renouncing the path to kingship. In the film story arc, that happens long before FotR.

I wonder how or if they would confront that. They would have to come up with an actual reason for it, for one thing, and that's not going to be easy. Especially if they're also showing the beginning of his love for Arwen. Why would he refuse to pursue the only path that leads to marrying her—not to mention fulfilling his obligation as the heir and, er, saving Middle-earth? What could possibly induce him to do that?

Post by **Holbytla** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:19 pm

It could have something to do with the death of his mother, or some mishap in battle that caused people in his care to die.
More likely some recurring nightmare due to the history and failure of his predecessors.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:35 pm

If they find a way to come close to pulling it off, I'm such a pragmatist that I'll probably buy it.

But it would have to be something that utterly convinced Aragorn that he was unfit to rule—that by refusing to seek the kingship he was protecting Middle-earth.

In other words, one of the central characters of the bridge film has to screw up mortally and end up in a very bad place.

To be honest, I think in this case they decided what they wanted to start FotR with (doubtful Aragorn) without giving much if any thought to what made him that way. That's a mistake, and it may come back to bite them now.

Post by **vison** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:39 pm

Brilliant, Alatar!!!

And not least brilliant, your rendering of that Kiwi accent . . . .

Post by **Frelga** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 6:56 pm

Prim, wasn't it because his mummy wanted to keep him safe? Remember, in the movie there aren't any Dúnedain as such, we are never introduced to Rangers as an ethnic and military group. Éowyn's lines in EE give a hint, but not even that tells the viewer that Aragorn is already a military leader.

While this is all speculation, it is the main reason why I am not excited about the second bridge movie. It will not be Tolkien.

Post by **ToshoftheWuffingas** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 7:36 pm

When I started a provisional LOTR serial on B77 I started off with Sauron returning to Mordor and and the opening of the White Council. It got shouted off for not keeping to the conventional LOTR sequence and I was content to explore other narrative ideas. (No, that's unfair, not shouted off; the consensus of posters whose opinion I trusted.

)
One story arc for the second movie could be be the interplay between Saruman and Sauron. Saruman is important enough in PJ's version to warrant describing his fall. I shall enoy waiting to see a troll carting the flaming eyeball of Sauron in a wheelbarrow from Dol Guldur to Mordor.

Post by **Holbytla** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 7:39 pm

Without being able to use The Sil or Uninished Tales, I am guessing they will be bound to using the Hobbit and LOTR as sources.

That pretty much leaves the Tale of Years, which leaves things pretty wide open.

Post by **WampusCat** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:33 pm

Eyeball flambe' to go!

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:41 pm

Frelga wrote:Prim, wasn't it because his mummy wanted to keep him safe? Remember, in the movie there aren't any Dúnedain as such, we are never introduced to Rangers as an ethnic and military group. Éowyn's lines in EE give a hint, but not even that tells the viewer that Aragorn is already a military leader.

Well, they don't say there are no Dúnedain, so they could probably pull them in to the bridge movie.

As for his mummy keeping him safe, wasn't that her reason for moving to Rivendell even in the book? Once he was no longer a child, she couldn't keep him from being a Ranger.

Post by **Crucifer** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:47 pm

Phillipa: The fans are going to crucify me....

And we did...

Umm... Aragorn might abdicate because he knows that yif he becomen King and Arwen marries him, she will *cue Elrond and the whole fading, passing to the West shtuff*, so he did it to save the one he loved. Then Arwen said "Hey! I'm a liberated womelf! I can marry who I want! I've decided to give Aragorn my love, and nuts to any who stand in my way."

But because Aragorn is Strider and wandering around watching Hobbits from the bushes (suspicious?), he doesn't know about this so doesn't go to Rivendell. Arwen doesn't know where to find him, so they don't see each other again until Fritto has to take some piece of enchanted jewellery to Rivendell and Aragorn accompanies him.

Problem solved, and supporting womens (or elves) rights.

Post by **kams** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 11:08 pm

Crucifer wrote:But because Aragorn is Strider and wandering around watching Hobbits from the bushes (suspicious?), he doesn't know about this so doesn't go to Rivendell. Arwen doesn't know where to find him, so they don't see each other again until Fritto has to take some piece of enchanted jewellery to Rivendell and Aragorn accompanies him.

Well, that will explain Arwen greeting him with a sword at the neck in FOTR

"What's this, a Ranger caught off his guard?"

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Thu Dec 20, 2007 11:37 pm

He never calls, he never writes, and he's surprised she comes looking for him with a sword?

Post by **kams** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:02 am

him her

Perhaps Aragorn dumping Arwen will be the climax of the second film....

[oh, sorry -- that was covered in the EE of FOTR]

Post by **Athrabeth** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:43 am

Prim wrote:As for his mummy keeping him safe, wasn't that her reason for moving to Rivendell even in the book? Once he was no longer a child, she couldn't keep him from being a Ranger.

That's right, Prim. When his father is killed, Aragorn and his mother are brought to Rivendell. He's given the name Estel to conceal his identity because the Wise have perceived that Sauron is out to discover the whereabouts of the Heir of Isildur. It's when he comes of age that he discovers his true lineage and after that, we're told that he goes out "into the Wild", strikes up his friendship with Gandalf, and does his disguised hero bit in Rohan and Gondor. I don't think we're ever told any details about his leadership of the Rangers, or anything specific about how the remaining Dunadain actually structured any aspect of their lives as a people (let alone "the Rangers" themselves). When Aragorn speaks of his past, and even when it's recorded (as in the Book of Years), it always sounds as though he's a complete loner, except for his later travels with Gandalf.

Post by **kams** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:45 am

Another question (now that I know a producer doesn't have to bring the director coffee...

)

Who decides what the second movie's story arc will be? Is it just up to the screenwriters (who I assume will be Peter and Fran and maybe Philippa)? Do New Line execs have a say?

I'm also assuming the director does not have a say.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:24 am

The screenwriters (who probably won't be PJ, Fran, and Philippa, actually, but maybe a subset) write the script—and then hand it over, after which they usually have nothing further to say and no control over what happens to it. Though that may not be true if the director wants to be collaborative, or if, as with LotR, the script is being written, rewritten, and fine-tuned while filming is going on.

The script for the second film may also be based on a "story" by PJ et al., meaning based on Tolkien but the sequence of events assembled by PJ before being passed on to the screenwriters to flesh out.

The studio has to approve the script before committing money, so that gives them power. The executive producer also has to be satisfied with it, from a practical standpoint. The director's influence depends on his contract and the realities of the situation.

I think any director PJ approves (and he does have approval of director and screenwriter) is likely to respect PJ's opinion, and I'm sure that's what the studio wants. They don't just want his name; they want these films to feel like more of PJ's LotR, because that was so enormously successful.

Post by **Lidless** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:30 pm

WampusCat wrote:Eyeball flambe' to go!

Well if that isn't flaming a poster, I don't know what is!

Typical wampus, always harping on...

Post by **WampusCat** » Sun Dec 23, 2007 4:42 pm

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:18 am

An interesting summary with speculation on where things stand:

http://www.kristinthompson.net/blog/?p=159

Post by **Alatar** » Sat Dec 29, 2007 11:55 am

Its a good summary, but it annoys me when someone's personal bias gets involved in reporting facts.

They quote this section of Quints AICN interview with PJ:

If I was doing The Hobbit, I’d try to get as many of the guys back as I could. I mean, there’s actually a role for Legolas in The Hobbit, his father features in it, obviously Gandalf and Saruman should be part of it. There’s things that you can do with The Hobbit to bring in some old friends, for sure. I have thought about it from time to time … Elrond, Galadriel and Arwen could all feature.

Then they state categorically:

By the way, for those who want Viggo Mortensen to appear in The Hobbit, let’s not forget that Aragorn was only ten years old at the time of the Dwarves’ quest.

Fair enough you might say, except that later in the interview is the following quote by PJ:

That's what we talked about this morning. Taking The Hobbit and combining it with all that intigue about Sauron's rise, and the problems that has for Gandalf. It could be cool. That way, it starts feeling more like The Lord of the Rings and less like this kids book. You could even get into Gollum's sneaking into Mordor and Aragorn protecting The Shire. That's what we'd do. Love to work with Viggo again.

So why quote one bit and not the other? Simply because it disagrees with the authors personal desire and speculation. Grrr.

Incidentally, if you leave out the 17 year gap between Bilbos departure and Frodo's which appears to be the case in the FotR Movie, Aragorn is late 20's. No real problem in Movie-verse.