I Wish They Had Brought Celeborn In Somewhere, But I Can See Where The Story Elements He Would Bring

I wish they had brought Celeborn in somewhere, but I can see where the story elements he would bring (resentment and distrust of outsiders, for example) might conflict with other key plot threads, such as the relationship the show builds between Durin IV and Elrond. The bigger issue, though, is that he doesn't fit into the character arc created for Galadriel.

In tRoP, the goal of finding Sauron and avenging her family is the compass of Galadriel 's life: she doesn't understand how to live without that purpose driving her. With no one to effectively counterbalance her, she's more vulnerable to Sauron's manipulations, and unwittingly facilitates his return.

In my opinion, tRoP Galadriel seems more like Gil-Galad's headstrong and impetuous niece than his father's cousin. However, if the show had included Celeborn alongside a wiser Galadriel, I would have loved to see the two of them opposing Sauron in Eregion.

Galadriel: Celebrimbor, this Annatar guy is using his charm and his knowledge to manipulate you.

Celeborn: I've seen enough two-faced strangers. Throw this one out the window.

"but Celeborn would add nothing to the plot and would be boring" "he's just galadriel's boring husband" "Celeborn would make Galadriel less interesting she should just marry-"

i am now begging you to please read a book

On the authenticity of movie Faramir

Faramir is one of my favorite characters in the Lord of the Rings. So, when I first saw The Two Towers, I remember being outraged when he appears to claim the Ring. In the books, he stands out for his steadfast determination not to do so, and for helping Frodo and Sam once he learns about the Quest. Jackson's Faramir seemed like a critical misunderstanding of Tolkien's.

More recently, I realized that this isn't the case. We can probably blame the cutting of some of Faramir's scenes for the fact that his character arc isn't as thoroughly sketched, but there are a few key lines that do, in fact, show us the truth. First, in a voice-over, Galadriel tells Elrond/the audience that "the young captain of Gondor has but to extend his hand, take the Ring for his own--and the world will fall."

When we reach the critical scene, and Faramir confronts Frodo about the Ring, he faces the temptation to claim it. And it is here, as in the book, that Faramir passes the test--not later in Osgiliath, where he decides to release Frodo and company (he passes a different test there). Faramir doesn't claim it for himself, as Boromir did ("It could be mine. It should be mine. Give it to me!). Instead, he says, "the Ring will go to Gondor."

...He says he's claiming it for Gondor, which makes sense: both he and his brother are devoted to protecting the kingdom and its people. However, I think Faramir is misleading himself here, because he doesn't truly believe that the Ring will save Gondor*. Boromir did--but both he and Faramir are basing that belief on Denethor's assertions.

This leads into the real struggle for Faramir's character: how his actions right now will affect his relationship with his father. The issue is much clearer in the flashback of Osgiliath. Denethor tasks Boromir with the journey to Rivendell (I will refrain from enumerating book/movie differences here--I'd like to, but I'll restrain myself), and when both his sons protest, he shuts them down. "I trust this mission only to your brother," he says. "The one who will not fail me." He implies that Faramir is worthless to him because he is less capable (he isn't), and less devoted to his father's wishes.

Denethor is partly correct: Faramir will not put his father's orders above his own moral standards, or before the well-being of Gondor. However, he deeply desires his father's regard. He struggles to choose between them until the danger of the Ring is made quite clear. In the movie, Sam angrily reveals that Boromir died because "he tried to take the Ring from Frodo, after swearing an oath to protect him; he tried to kill him! The Ring drove your brother mad!" Almost immediately after this, Frodo starts acting possessed, nearly gets nabbed by the Nazgûl, and almost kills Sam.

Faramir witnesses all of this. He hears how the Ring warped his noble, stalwart brother into a murderous traitor, and gets a bonus demonstration! After that, he (and we) can picture the Ring in the hands of Denethor. Considering Denethor's character, it's terrifying to imagine how his actions in the Return of the King would be compounded by the One Ring.

It's clear now that the Ring absolutely must not go to Gondor. After saving Frodo, Faramir makes what, for him, was the more difficult choice: to countermand his father's will. He lets the Ring go. When the consequences are highlighted--his father may demand his life in forfeit--he accepts them (with a little hesitation...though I think 'my father, who is ill-tempered and likely insane now, may literally kill me for not doing what he wanted' is grounds for queasiness from anyone). Once his goals are set and his mind is made up, he stands steadfast by his decisions.

Considering that, I see now that movie!Faramir is much more true to Tolkien's Faramir than I originally gave him credit for.

As for the fallout in The Return of the King, book!Denethor doesn't actually command a pointless, suicidal charge from Faramir and his soldiers. He does hit him with the customary disdain and comparisons to Boromir, with the latter now colored by bitterness and grief (which appears in another deleted/extended edition scene, I think).

It's tragic how Denethor and his sons struggle to understand and support each other, and to manage their weighty obligations. Denethor's inflexibility and pride (exacerbated by Gondor's dire circumstances) leads one son to his destruction, and alienates the other. Thanks to Faramir, Denethor never obtains the Ring, but Sauron finds another way to undermine him (the palantír). He destroys himself in the end, and nearly takes his remaining son with him.

If you're especially fond of Faramir, Boromir, or Denethor (or if you too want to whack him energetically with a staff), I suggest having a look at the analyses of the characters by Megan N. Fontenot. She talks about how the characters evolved as Tolkien wrote the Lord of the Rings. For example, it seems that at one point, Boromir (and Gandalf) were the only Fellowship members who weren't hobbits (good luck with that)!

*In an extra/extended edition scene, while Faramir regards him uneasily, Frodo assures Faramir that "the Ring will not save Gondor--it has only the power to destroy." At that point, he's still undecided about taking the Ring to Gondor. In the book, however, Faramir asserts that he "would not take [Isildur's Bane], if it lay by the highway. Not were Minas Tirith falling in ruin and I alone could save her, so, using the weapon of the Dark Lord for her good and my glory." When he learns that the weapon Frodo carries is the Ring, he is briefly tempted, but knowing and respecting the inherent peril, he rejects it.

Book!Faramir is more secure in his own identity and values, and less tormented than movie!Faramir by his father's annoyance that he isn't an obedient tool.

I know it's been floating around the web (not HER web, no) for a while, but it's still funny

Hello, I really wanted your opinion on how Harry anger and mildly obssesion with goodness balance out

I mean, our boy spared Peter, but strangled Mundungus. He more often then not uses harmless spells, but I genualy think that he's willing to kill someone if the situation asks for it, like you mentioned before

It is kinda contradictory to me, it woud be nice to know you take on it

Okay, so first thing first, as someone who used to have anger issues, I just want to say that being an angry person ≠ being a bad person. Like, how angry you are is completely separate from how good you are. Emotions aren't necessarily tied to your moral compass.

The thing about anger and anger issues is that it's not something you control oftentimes. When you get really angry, like, properly angry, you become a spectator in your own body. You move and act out of anger, but it's not something you chose to do consciously you didn't plan it or decide upon it at any point. It just kinda happens. And it's a lot of really hard work for it not to happen once the issue is there.

As such, it happens that once you calm down, you might regret things you did in that burst of anger, but it's already done.

Harry's anger is shown like this sometimes, like something not fully under his control:

Harry was not aware of releasing George, all he knew was that a second later both of them were sprinting at Malfoy. He had completely forgotten the fact that all the teachers were watching: All he wanted to do was cause Malfoy as much pain as possible. With no time to draw out his wand, he merely drew back the fist clutching the Snitch and sank it as hard as he could into Malfoy’s stomach — “Harry! HARRY! GEORGE! NO!” He could hear girls’ voices screaming, Malfoy yelling, George swearing, a whistle blowing, and the bellowing of the crowd around him, but he did not care, not until somebody in the vicinity yelled “IMPEDIMENTA!” and only when he was knocked over backward by the force of the spell did he abandon the attempt to punch every inch of Malfoy he could reach. . . .

(OotP)

Anger management issues are issues with emotional regulation at the end of the day. The issue is with management, control, and regulation, where your emotions quite literally take over you. That's where phrases like "seeing red" come from. It's that all-encompassing anger that takes over, and that's the only thing you can see.

But Harry's anger isn't always like this. Sometimes his anger just pushes him to act on something he wants anyway, even when calmer:

Hatred rose in Harry such as he had never known before. He flung himself out from behind the fountain and bellowed “Crucio!” Bellatrix screamed. The spell had knocked her off her feet, but she did not writhe and shriek with pain as Neville had — she was already on her feet again, breathless, no longer laughing. Harry dodged behind the golden fountain again — her counterspell hit the head of the handsome wizard, which was blown off and landed twenty feet away, gouging long scratches into the wooden floor. “Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy?” she yelled. She had abandoned her baby voice now. “You need to mean them, Potter! You need to really want to cause pain — to enjoy it — righteous anger won’t hurt me for long...”

(OotP)

Even when Harry's calm he thinks Bellatrix deserves torture or death. His anger in the above scene is defined well by Bellatrix. It's righteous anger. It's anger that doesn't push him out of control but propels him to act on something he already wanted to do. It's like an injection of nerves and courage, and not that same out-of-control feeling I mentioned earlier.

Now, Harry's "obsession with goodness" is completely separate from his anger.

What's important to note is what is the definition of good. Good is defined by Harry and the HP books as a whole as good = Just. Good in the HP books and according to Harry, is not some vague idea where everyone deserves mercy, it's a good where everyone gets what they deserve. Bad people have bad things happen to them, and good people have good things happen to them. It's about justice and righteousness.

Quirrell helped Voldemort, so he deserved to die in Harry's opinion.

well, unless you count Quirrell, and he got what he deserved seeing as he was working with Voldemort.

(HBP)

Stan Shunpike was under the imperius. He didn't choose to help Voldemort, he was innocent, so he didn't deserve to die in Harry's opinion.

I saw Stan Shunpike. ... You know, the bloke who was the conductor on the Knight Bus? And I tried to Disarm him instead of — well, he doesn’t know what he’s doing, does he? He must be Imperiused!

(DH)

And it makes sense. I mean, is it good that murderers and rapists go to prison? Absolutely. You need to punish bad deeds to stop bad people from hurting people, how that should be done isn't something I want to get into, but righteousness and justice include punishments for evil acts, and that's good. It's good murderers and other criminals can't just walk around and hurt people without consequences. A good person won't let a bad one hurt others, and for that, said good person needs to be willing to fight, and yes, hurt in self-defense or in defense of others.

And Harry believes in this kind of good. A good that is righteous and just. Harry doesn't think everyone deserves the same treatment. He'll treat you well if you deserve it.

“...It’s time you learned some respect!” “It’s time you earned it.” said Harry

(DH)

Harry's respect and kindness need to be earned. You need to deserve it. His scorn and hate, are similarly earned through your actions and what you say.

That being said, most people don't deserve death in Harry's book. His starting point is that you should be kept alive, and helped, and treated well. You need to actively do something to get on Harry's shitlist. Even Snape only got on Harry's shitlist after Snape mocked and ridiculed Harry in that first potions class.

In the scene with Mundungus, Harry is angry. He doesn't actually think Mundungus deserves death, some punishment, yes, but not death. He stole from Sirius, and he did a horrible thing (for Harry he did an awful disrespect to Sirius whom Harry is still grieving at that point), so the good thing would be him getting his comeuppance. But in that scene, I think there is a bit of this out-of-control anger I mentioned earlier, as I don't think a calm Harry would've strangled him in this way. Harry acted in anger and instinct, he wasn't rationalizing anything in that moment.

And regarding Pettigrew, Harry did want to kill him, he wished for him to die, to be punished, but he:

Was calmer by that point, he wasn't angry anymore so he didn't have the push of anger

He is compassionate. While he wants Peter dead, he doesn't want Lupin and Sirius to become killers because he cares about them, he doesn't want them to have to suffer through killing their ex-freind. But he wouldn't mind if Peter died to the dementors.

He is practical. He wants to bring Peter back to the castle and have him sent to Azkaban — which would allow Sirius to be exonerated. It would serve justice, it would be righteous. As Harry mentioned in the following quote, it'll be what he thinks Peter deserves:

“NO!” Harry yelled. He ran forward, placing himself in front of Pettigrew, facing the wands. “You can’t kill him,” he said breathlessly. “You can’t.” Black and Lupin both looked staggered. “Harry, this piece of vermin is the reason you have no parents,” Black snarled. “This cringing bit of filth would have seen you die too, without turning a hair. You heard him. His own stinking skin meant more to him than your whole family.” “I know,” Harry panted. “We’ll take him up to the castle. We’ll hand him over to the dementors. . . . He can go to Azkaban . . . but don’t kill him.” “Harry!” gasped Pettigrew, and he flung his arms around Harry’s knees. “You — thank you — it’s more than I deserve — thank you —” “Get off me,” Harry spat, throwing Pettigrew’s hands off him in disgust. “I’m not doing this for you. I’m doing it because — I don’t reckon my dad would’ve wanted them to become killers — just for you.” No one moved or made a sound except Pettigrew, whose breath was coming in wheezes as he clutched his chest. Black and Lupin were looking at each other. Then, with one movement, they lowered their wands. “You’re the only person who has the right to decide, Harry,” said Black. “But think . . . think what he did. . . .” “He can go to Azkaban,” Harry repeated. “If anyone deserves that place, he does. . . .”

(PoA)

But that good Harry believes in does allow for reform. It allows for forgiveness. Harry is a very forgiving person, he believes people can regret their past actions and change. He doesn't, for the most part, believe people are evil from birth or that someone who did evil would necessarily always be evil. Specifically with Voldemort, Harry feels a connection to him, he understands him and that understanding leads him to deem Voldemort as redeemable. As someone who could be saved. It's sentimentality talking there, as, let's say, I don't see Harry making such offers to Umbridge.