Adapting Lord of the Rings

Pettytyrant101 wrote:No he doesn't declare himself as King, but he declares his lineage and therefore his right to claim it. And he makes it clear he is going to.
Its in how he speaks. Gandalf even heralds him at the doors of Edoras as 'the heir of Kings' and when challenged to leave his sword Aragorn argues his position on the basis his lineage is superior-   'It is not clear to me that the will of Theoden son of Thengel even though he be lord of the Mark, should prevail over the will of Aragorn son of Arathorn, Elendil's heir of Gondor.'

There is nothing reluctant about Tolkiens Aragorn when it comes to his certainty over his right to his claim. The reluctant Aragorn proving himself to himself by his actions, in order to overcome his fear that he will succumb as his ancestors did is PJ's story. Buit that change means removing all the points in the book, like Rohan where he declares himself and acts like an equal to other kings and Lords like Eomer.

no it doesn't.

So where in PJ's does Aragorn give anyone a big role call of is name in Rohan? where is he declared as the heir of Kings? None of its in PJ's- it cant be because it goes against the whole reluctant thing. You cant have both- Pj's version and Tokien's contradict each other. And as its PJ film its Tolkiens version that gets ousted.

the reluctant king thing is all in your head

How so? Seems pretty damn reluctant in FOTR (conversation with Elrond) and ROTK (conversation with Elrond).

Edit: also meant to mention the conversation with Arwen in Rivendell in FOTR.

As well as all those occasions where the script is directly about his reluctance there are a lot of other things too- the complete absence of Aragorn giving his lineage proudly, and as a mark of his worth, doesn't do it in Bree, does in the book, doesn't do it at the Council, he needs Legolas to do it for him in the film and then he is embarrassed by it!
Also lots of looks and close face shots whenever Gondor, or the Kingship or anything relating to it is mentioned.
Its Aragorns entire arc in PJ's films.

I wouldn't call it reluctant. he isn't reluctant. he is wary, he wants to be king with every fibre of his being, he just doesn't think he is good enough. I call it humility, I read it totally differently because I don't have an axe to grind with PJ and I am not looking for any excuse to find problems where there aren't any. unlike a certain Tyrant

If it was humility he would accept it though. He can accept his lineage while being humble. But these movies, he's borderline emo about it.

Its completely different from the book character Figg. I am sorry but there is no denying it.
The tell tale sign here is every scene of reluctant Aragorn is an invention with no counterpart in the books.

ARWEN: Why do you fear the past.  You are Isildur's heir, not Isildur himself.  You are not bound to his fate

ARAGORN: The same blood flows in my veins (he turns to face her) The same weakness.

-------

ELROND: (turns to Gandalf) Isildur kept the Ring. The line of Kings is broken. There's no strength left in the world of men. They're scattered, divided, leaderless

GANDALF: There is one who could unite them. One who could reclaim the throne of Gondor

ELROND: He turned from that path a long time ago. He has chosen exile

---------

BOROMIR: (scathingly) and what would a ranger know of this matter ?

LEGOLAS; (standing up) This is no mere Ranger.  He is Aragorn son of Arathorn You owe him your allegiance

BOROMIR: (looks at Aragorn in disbelief.  Frodo looks at Aragorn amazed) Aragorn! This.. is Isildur's heir

LEGOLAS: and heir to the throne of Gondor

Aragorn holds his hand up

ARAGORN: Havo dad, Legolas (Sit down, Legolas.)

-------

ELROND IN THE BACKGROUND: In her heart your mother knew you'd be hunted all your life

ELROND: (walking through the bushes towards Aragorn) but you'd never escape your fate.  The skill of the elves can reforge the sword of Kings, but only you have the power to wield it.  (Aragorn looks up and pauses)

ARAGORN: I do not want that power, I have never wanted it.


I dont know how much more blatant Aragorn in the films need to be than that last line. I reckon that sounds pretty damn reluctant! It stands in utter contrast to book Aragorn.

{{{Don't worry Petty it's all in your head. }}}

it certainly is. I totally disagree with the reluctant thing. theres no proof he is.

How is he humble instead of reluctant?

this is not a reluctant king

We're talking about BEFORE he accepts it. He clearly accepts his destiny after his conversation with Elrond and takes the paths of the dead.

So...BEFORE he accepts his destiny, how is he humble and not reluctant?

this is no emo wimp, but a proud warrior giving courage to Théoden at the last.

That has nothing to do with accepting his lineage...

theres no proof he is.- Figg

I just gave you four scenes worth of proof including Aragorn directly and plainly stating he does not want to be King-

"I do not want that power, I have never wanted it."

If thats not proof then nothing will be because you are not seeing what's in the film just what you want to. And there is much more, I only covered half of FotR to get those four scenes of hi being reluctant about being King, up to and including saying he doesn't want it and never has.

'this is not a reluctant king'

Duh, obviously not given that's the end of the character arc where he has overcome his reluctance, thats the whole point of it- also what an absolutely appalling speech.
I'd have gone home at the end if I was in his army.
And what is going on with Aragorn's accent in that speech?

this is no emo wimp, but a proud warrior giving courage to Théoden at the last.- Figg

Ask yourself this Figg when they were adapting why in Rohan did they choose to take out every single time Aragorn or anyone else refers to him as the rightful King of Gondor?- why does he not declare himself proudly to Eomer as he does in the book, why does he not pull Kingly rank at the doors of Edoras? Why doesn't Gandalf herald him as the 'heir of Kings'?
The reason none of these are there is because they no longer fit the story PJ is telling- that of an Aragorn having to overcome his own reluctance to take on such power.

you read it as reluctant, I read it as humility, a humble person doesn't have to shout out his titles to all and sundry to accept his lineage, he has always accepted his lineage, he is worried by it, that doesn't mean he denies it, he never refuses his destiny in word or deed. he questions his relationship to isildur, that doesn't mean he doesn't accept his path otherwise he wouldn't be there as leader of the fellowship

a humble person doesn't have to shout out his titles to all and sundry- Figg

Book Aragorn does and the debate here is over how film Aragorn is not like book Aragorn- so that just proves the point they are not alike in this respect at all.

'he never refuses his destiny in word or deed.'

Um....."I do not want that power, I have never wanted it." that sounds like he refused it, and Elrond tells Gandalf he turned from the path of being King long ago and choose exile instead, that sounds like he refused it then too to me.

'he questions his relationship to isildur'

Again book Aragorn never does this. He in fact often proudly declares himself as the Heir of Isildur, there is no hint in the book of any reluctance towards Isuldur, ill feelings or blame from Aragorn.
So again by telling us what film Aragorn does you are only highlighting how different he is from Toklien's version and proving my point for me.

Much of the time I back Figgy up on the movie interpretations, but this is just way too obvious. PJ's Aragorn is a reluctant king, no doubt about it.

The real question is whether there was good reason to do so. I do feel the book Aragorn was perhaps too fully formed to be interesting to someone who wasn't being directly treated to Tolkien's literary gifts; but I think the PJ version took it a bit too far. Not sure I would have done better if choosing to stray from the books, for at least the movie version stayed consistent.

I don't agree he is too fully formed, but I would say for a film you have to bring out to the forefront more aspects of him that are present in the book but Tolkien does no dwell on or puts to the appendices.

So a film Aragorn should be certain of his right to be King but should question his ability to carry it out and be the right sort of King- that is his chief concern in the book as he goes on the quest, not his right, his ability- and its then thrown into dilemma at Parth Galen where he blames himself for the disaster and the splitting of the company, then is torn on the decision of what to do next.

Then you have the Arwen story line, where you can bring in Aragorn being raised by Elrond and how their relationship is father son and the price one or other of them will pay if he succeeds and the pain Aragorn will therefore feel for Elrond even if he is victorious.

And you have Aragorn bit by bit taking on the mantle of his right as is decisions prove to good ones- so you have him stepping up to his role in Rohan building to him challenging Sauron in the Palantir at Isengard and acting independently of Gandalf in the strategy on the war.
There is good character drama to be mined with Aragorn, good solid emotional stuff for film, but PJ rejects all of the above as none of it makes it into his Aragorn.

Instead they went for the simpler single pronged he is reluctant because his ancestor failed to destroy the Ring story. Its a dull cliché: Good man doesn't want to take on being leader out of fear the power will corrupt him, but when he overcomes his fears he turns out to be a great leader after all. Boring.

But in doing so we lost a lot of great moment- like the Rohan stuff with Eomer when they first meet, like him challenging Sauron early in the war as a direct claim on the throne and a rouse to make Sauron suspect a new Ring-Lord had emerged. So much gone to make way for him being reluctant, so many scenes subverted to that story line from their original purpose.

I think the cost of making such a fundamental change to the character was way to high and has lots of detrimental knock on effects, sometimes even indirectly.

I don't get reluctant at all. I wouldn't get reluctant even if I wasn't positive about the films, I seriously don't get it at all.

But he says in the film he doesn't want to be King and never has wanted to be- whats not to get there?
Elrond say Aragoirn turned his back on being King long ago and choose exile instead- whats not to get there?

Its not like they are hiding it away as a plot device- its the main story for Aragorns arc (clumsily entwined with the Arwen one). Its why he doesn't get Narsil till Paths of the Dead instead of when he sets off like in the book- in the film its not given until he accepts is role as King and gets over his reluctance.

Mrs Figg wrote:I don't get reluctant at all. I wouldn't get reluctant even if I wasn't positive about the films, I seriously don't get it at all.

Don't make me pull out the dictionary.

Reluctant - unwilling and hesitant; disinclined.

Humble - having or showing a modest or low estimate of one's own importance.