Great villian? He wasn't a great villian, Saruman was the great villian, but Sauron was the freakin' dark lord in this thing, dude you mess with Sauron.....
__________________
Thank you so much Eezy!!
I'm starting over, do not mistake me for my brother - he has left. Eezy has convinced me to come back, give him some credit.
Sauron during the 1st and 2nd age rock, but during the 3rd, he was weak. He waited too long to launch his war. Also, he was never aware that Bilbo had the ring, even though Bilbo wore several times. He wasn't weak just becasue he was an eye, but becasue he was indecisive. Morgoth and Saurumon were better
Sauron in the Third Age? Great villain? No. Intimidating and very powerful? Yes. He is in his own right. Like Kitoky said, Saruman was the great villain because you could really see him doing his thing and acting out and all that. But I'd say Sauron is still very intimidating and very powerful even though he doesn't have his physical form yet. He has a very strong influence over his minions and even though he was just a freaking Eye atop Barad-dur, you could still feel his ever growing power wherever you are in Middle-earth. You want some evidences? Just look at the Nazgul, the Olog-Hai, and the millions of Orcs running, fighting, and killing around coming from Minas Morgul, Mordor, Moria, Dol Guldur, etc. and his holds over the Haradrim, the Easterlings, Wainriders, the Corsairs, the Variags, and all.
But to get to the topic since you are asking about the movie, he was portrayed magnificently in the prologue. Like some people here know already, Sauron is my most favorite villain of all time and I was so looking forward to how he will be portrayed in the movie. I was looking at all the spoiler pics in the net before the movies came out but I reserved myself a bit and I was very careful not to see any spoiler pics of how Sauron will look like, and what do you know, when I first saw him in the prologue, I think I about freakin' died! He was awesome. Especially at the scene where he was in Orodruin and he was forging the Ring. Damn, the memories. Anyway, as I was saying, they portrayed him awesomely in the prologue, and he was still awesome as an Eye in FOTR and TTT, but I'm afraid they messed up a bit with that whole spotlight Eye in ROTK. That wasn't very good at all. But oh well..If you're talking about how they portrayed him when it comes to power and presence and intimidation however, read the first part of my post. It goes for both the book and the movies.
__________________
Last edited by shadowy_blue on Mar 22nd, 2004 at 03:37 AM
Hm, imo he was portrayed great in FoTR (specially in the prologue), still ok in TT but not really that good in RoTK - I mean not only that his eye looked absolutely stupid, the right athmosphere of always being watched is also missing (strangely its present in FoTR though you hardly get to see him there... PJ really tried it in RoTK but somehow didnt work)... and too little of his power, his hidden power that should be released in RoTK, was shown.
Still one of the bestest characters though ^^
... but I like him best in the Second Age
__________________ Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary components.
saruman wasnt beter he was pathetic in his attempts for the ring, he actually went paddling in the rivers of middle earth looking for it.
sauron did not know bilbo had the ring as he wore it when sauron was still in dol guldor and wasnt exactly too strong......then when the white council drove him out (sarumans biggest mistake) he went to mordor, and the orcs you see in the battles of the culmination of the third age, were all his forces, which he had built up in just under 60 years
which imo is an excellent preperation in such a short time
2nd age Sauron rocked. He managed to evaid the might of the Valar, led to the destruction of Numenor (sp) and forged 20 rings. Not bad for someone over 2 thousand years old.
If that's what we're going at, don't you think Sauron is a bit pathetic too? He already has his Nazgul, his Murazor, his Orcs and everything. He was already gaining strength and he's growing very powerful at the latter part of the War of the Ring, yet he didn't manage to catch Frodo, Sam and Gollum even though they were already in his territory? Anyway, I'm not really looking at it that way. I just saw your post and thought of comparing Saruman and Sauron's patheticness (word?) in gaining the Ring. In my opinion like what I've said, Saruman was a great villain because you really see him do everything that he does. From his patheticness as you said by even attempting to look for the Ring in the river, to sending spies, to gathering his armies in Isengard, etc. In short, he's using all his efforts and he's killing his butt off just for the Ring. But also like I've said, Sauron is the greatest overall when it comes to power and presence and greatness.
In the movie, Sauron wasn't a great villian. He never did anything that made me feel angry. Now if he executed innocent people and gloted about, he would be more evil. I felt no connection with Sauron, good or bad. Saurumon was better, but Denaethor was greater. Even though he's not really a villian, I did hate him. Had Sauron had that touch, he would have been the greatest villian ever. (Maeglin might be worse, betraying Gondolin, so sad.)
How could he be more Evil in the movie and kill and chase and cut off innocent people's lives if he doesn't have his physical form yet and was just an Eye atop Barad-dur?
Me too though, I wasn't angry at him. Hell..why would I? I love him. No..but seriously..I wasn't angry at him as in "Sauron" himself but I hate the "influences" and the "effects" that his presence had brought to Middle-earth.
Sauron had no personality. Without it, he's just a floating eye. He about 2 lines in the entire movie. Not much to come up with a personality. That is what the movie lack.
I kinda agree with you that Sauron is lacking personality in the movies. But really, how could they possibly give him a convincing personality if he's just an Eye? I really thought that all the personalities that Sauron should have in the movie were all given to the Ring since Sauron and the Ring are one and the same in a way and the movies are focusing more on the power and might of the Ring..which is..Sauron. If they gave the Eye of Sauron too much personality and frightening appeal, the average movie-goers wouldn't care much about what the Ring could do and what Its importance is to Sauron 'coz he himself could be better off even without it. There wouldn't be much urgency surrounding the Ring itself. The filmmakers have to make it look like Sauron really depends on the Ring with all his life and the Ring's personality really poisons the minds of all of its bearers. I don't deny that the Eye of Sauron was kinda weak in a sense but I'm just trying to look at the Ring to make up for it. We can't deny that the One Ring is so full of personality to the extent that it's like a true person already. The Ring is the character of its own. Heck, The One Ring is one of my favorite characters in the movie and the book.
__________________
Last edited by shadowy_blue on Mar 23rd, 2004 at 12:44 AM
The ring was truely evil. It turned a nice little hobbit into a sociopath. Bad bad there was little room for Sauron to express himself. It would have been cool.
i'm not getting involved in that up there, here's my own opinion
-being an english freako, sauron was great for metaphorical purposes, embodying evil in one eye watching all a top barad-dur, but that's the book, and seeing that i haven't finished the silmarillion i can't say how rocking sauron was during the second age, i think that he was portrayed greatly in the movies, the eye was good, i wasn't sure how they were going to do it, but i liked that, saruman may have been better because he was more tangible but sauron was great because he was nebulous but still able to inflict fear on all... great villian if you ask me
__________________ And a time for every purpose, under heaven
A time to gain, a time to lose
A time to rend, a time to sew
A time to love, a time to hate
A time for peace, I swear it’s not too late
sauron can see all that is going on in middle earth if hes in front of his palantir so he will have SEEN frodo sam and gollum, but not SEEN them.....like when you see a guy on the street, out the corner of your eye, then on the night you see a picture on the TV if a guy whos just been killed, and its him you go 'i saw him today'
sauron will have been focused on gondor and rohan....also isengard and the uruks that had merry and pippin
when the ring was put on sauron immediately looked right at the spot sam was stood....but it is clearly said in the book that the shadows he wraught for defence clouded even his own gaze
and this is a very good topic....
saruman..in my opp...is the beter 'Vilan'' in the MOVIES...cause he went around killin' inocent CHILDREN and WOMEN in rohan...of course sauron...is more powerfull...of cours sauron is more EVIL
but in the movies saruman..was portrayed as a 'vilan' persay....
sauron i enjoyed SOOO much more...his eye looked great in the film...
as so did his body..
HIS BODY is GORGEOUS!! (okay isound like a orli fangirl... )
Sauron presence as i agree wit exa was GREAt in FOTR...
and as for ROTK i loved it...and i think you could tell it was realy seeing everything....but it was aragorns idea (or was it gandalf's?)to distract his gaze so he couldn't see frodo..and it worked...
KMC Community Forums
Mar 22nd, 2004 01:46 AM
He was awesome. Especially at the scene where he was in Orodruin and he was forging the Ring. Damn, the memories. Anyway, as I was saying, they portrayed him awesomely in the prologue, and he was still awesome as an Eye in FOTR and TTT, but I'm afraid they messed up a bit with that whole spotlight Eye in ROTK. That wasn't very good at all. 
But oh well..If you're talking about how they portrayed him when it comes to power and presence and intimidation however, read the first part of my post. 
It goes for both the book and the movies. 
i really dont like these answers
*
)
