Any Lord of the Rings/Tolkien fans?

[nessonite1]

Then another 14 years past between the events of the b-day party and when Frodo and Sam set out for Bree.

Really?? Guess that's what I get for not reading the books, eh? I figured, like Gallicus said, that it was a very short amount of time between when Gandalf left and when he came back and send Frodo on his way. There was no reason to emphasize the time lapse for the purpose of the movie but it was certainly something I didn't know.

Okay...I just realized that in my argument I am contrading myself. Gollum would have had to travel around Mt. Doom without the ring because if he used it for invisibility while in there Sauron would have locked onto him and I doubt he would have evaded the Nazgul for long. Would Gollum have known that Sauron could see him when he had the ring on and have known to avoid wearing it? Also he would have had no reason to go there while he had the ring.
So yeah...Im wrong. Poo.
But yeah, I don't think Frodo would have killed Sam. If Sam tried to attack him to take the ring from him as he tried to walk away I think Frodo may have been pushed to it though...or at least to seriously injure him. Smeagol did kill his brother after having had the ring for just a few minutes but Smeagol and Deagol were not hobbits and didn't posses the same ring-resistent qualities so it took him over much more quickly than it did Frodo.
And no, I don't believe Froso would have become another Dark lord or even remotely powerful at all. From what I understand the ring only give Sauron that sort of power...for anyone else it doesn't give them any special abilities. Invisibility, yes...but they're not really invisible, they're sort of on an alternate plane......
Right?

 

[U.N.Owen]

Actually, Tolkien explained in one of his letters exactly what would have happened had Frodo succeeded in seizing the Ring. All true Tolkien fans, check them out: "The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien," ed. by Humphrey Carpenter. Now available in a convenient paperback reissue, complete with excellent expanded index! Loaded with insights available nowhere else! Buy now!

(As near as I can recall without going to look it up, he said Frodo would need time to learn to really control the Ring, that the Nazgul would have come to him and pretended to hail him as Lord, but, still more fully dominated by Sauron, they would have taken Frodo to Sauron, who would still have been able to strike Frodo down and seize the Ring.)

Oh, and incidentally, Smeagol didn't kill Deagol after having the Ring a few minutes... he killed him to GET the Ring in the first place. In other words, he killed someone who came between himself and what he coveted.

 

[gallicus]

Interesting, I was unaware the letters were out. I will have to buy them. I'd agree with Tolkien's assertion on this topic though. My main argument is pretty much the same -- Frodo does not have the knowledge to use the Ring properly. Someone like Gandalf or Saruman, on the other hand, could easily destroy Sauron with the ring, but in turn corrupt themselves.

Also, this is my personal theory, but it is not innate resistance to the Ring that Hobbits have, but rather kind souls that are unaware and undesiring of real power. They like simple, quiet lives and thus the ring has less of a hold on them. The Ring, as it was said a few times in the books, feeds off the cravings of power the bearer has. Since Frodo and hobbits have little of that, the Ring has to work extra hard.

This leads me to one of my main problems with Faramir. I believe Tolkien made an error with him. He, being an ordinary Man.. not even a Numenorean, could not have resisted the power of the ring. Especially not to the extent of "leaving it by the wayside if it lay there". He might have good intentions, but not so much as to resist the ring. And with the ring those good intentions would pave the road to his downfall.

Of course, then again, the Numenoreans did fail twice. The first was the assault upon Aman. The Faithful who survived then failed again with Isildur, who could not resist the ring either. This should only further prove that Faramir should not have been able to resist the ring.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

I'm glad others agree with what I said about hobbits not making proper candidates simply because of their oblivious, ignorant, innocent, and simple lives.

And I'm glad someone (Owen in this case) directly stated that Sauron would take the Ring back, as Frodo wouldn't be able to command it properly. Something that should have been a given but cannot be completely factualized without material saying so or implying so.

What use is it if he can't use it to it's full military and sorcererous potential? Its better off Sauron having it. And the Nazgul can't be commanded by such a simple creature effectively, even if they would have to come to obey him.

And as I said before, it would take a human, elf, or dwarf to actually defeat Sauron if they ever had the Ring and opposed him, which is why I really didn't talk about that in any sort of detail. I felt it was more important to emphasis that Frodo becoming a dark lord would have been a dead end. And if this eventuality was fully realized by the author it makes you wonder why he chose to write it this way.

Or is this just another story about an underdog or one of those "least likelys" saving the day? But then again he didn't save the day, a warped creature did and he didn't save the day since he wanted the Ring, he only fell by accident. The Ring was not destroyed with intent to destroy it.

Perhaps this is what allows us to talk about this single issue, since its not so clear cut as it is before its given a retrospective look. If Frodo had thrown the Ring into the pit, there would be no question to the moral of the story or the purpose, etc. But he didn't, he failed, Gollum failed, and Sam would have failed eventually too.

In this case, if you really think about it, evil did win. It dominated a completely innocent soul, turned a friend into an enemy, and drove an already treacherous creature toward desperate action.

The Ring was destroyed in error and folly. The will was not there to destroy it. Of course though, the fact it was destroyed makes none of this really matter in the end. 😛

 

[U.N.Owen]

Also in the letters, Tolkien discussed Frodo's "failure" at some length. He made it clear that it is not coincidence that causes the Ring's destruction, but rather Providence (i.e., Illuvatar, i.e. God). Thus, as Gandalf effectively predicted, Frodo's mercy to Gollum ultimately leads higher powers to decree his success, despite his final personal failure.

Read the letters. Much is made clear. (Unfinished Tales and the 12 vols. of the History of Middle Earth add a lot, too.)

 

[nessonite1]

Oh, and incidentally, Smeagol didn't kill Deagol after having the Ring a few minutes... he killed him to GET the Ring in the first place.

My mistrake...I didn't think that through. My point that Smeagol was short of being a fine upstanding citizen before the ring even is still true though. 😛
I really must read the damn books...and then take about 3 years to muddle through the Silmarillion and the Tolkien Letters...I have a lot of reading to do...

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

As do I. I've been fortunate to know alot of things without having to read anything. An in a way, I would have prefered to learn it on my own as it is a bit if a spoiler.

Fortunately however I didn't learn alot of the secrets and truths the movie doesn't bring up or talk about until after I had seen all three.

 

[MaxDragon]

Has anyone here ever played the SPI War of the Ring boardgame. It was printed about 20 years ago and can only be acquired on E-bay for a few hundred dollars. I owned it but somehow, somewhere lost my precious. It was excellent fun, though, combining the fellowship quest with a massive army game involving all of the races, including units of hobbits. A friend of mine even managed to win as Saruman by acquiring the ring for himself. Damn, I wish I still had that game.

 

[His Divine Shadow]

I'm a fan. I've own the books, from well known ones such as the obvious LOTR trilogy to lesser known ones like "Unfinished Tales" and "The Lost Road and Other Writings." And I can say that I have read the Silmarillon nearly ten times. -_- I also own the extended editions of all three movies.

Lordy I am pitiful...

 

[gallicus]

Nice. I have procured me just about every book now, from unfinished tales to the histories. Unfortunately I don't have time to read them yet, as I'm quite busy with university. Explains my awayness from this forum too. Just had no time at all. 🙁