Gandalf VS witchking.

this is not an honest "vs" thread its just like a question.

why, in the book, do we see gandalf holding his ground and keeping the witch king at bay, but in the "extended ROTK" movie the witchking smashes his staff and knocks him over?

I was under the impression that gandalf was a match for all 9 at once from lines from the movie and the book. Gandalf also has one of the three elven rings and has been on earth since the sil marilion.

The witch king, according to games/movies/books and stuff, was an ambitious man who tried to own all of the northern lands before the days of gondor, quite a bit after gandalf was brought into existence.

From what I can tell, gandalf has the experience, the power, and the skill to take down the witch king, yet his staff is broken by the witch king in the ext rotk. Why is this? Is i because Peter jackson is a nubass who didnt read the book?

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
A while back I read somewhere about Gandalf's seemingly imminent defeat at the Witch-King's hands in the film to be simple cinematic eye candy. That the the idea that a Maiar, recently reinvigorated by the Vala, would lose to a decrepit shadow-being of a Man (albeit Sauron's chief lieutenant) was unfounded and frankly ridiculous when taking in to account what the Istari (including the Grey) and even weaker Maia were able to do.

Is i because Peter jackson is a nubass who didnt read the book?

typing fail for truth

I gess cuz Jackson is a loser who cant keep true to thje book for like, 5 minutes..........

You try keeping true those books in a reasonable time frame. *whispers* Bombadil was a stupid character.

GO DAI! 😠

*daid*

But seriously. He was useless. And annoying.

By useless you mean plot critical and by annoying you mean badass. *right?*

It's a deleted scene, so forgive me if I'm wrong but doesn't that mean that it doesn't really happen?

Yup. Jackson's LoTR movies and his word are the ultimate canon in Tolkien's work. And Peter said that, like, Tom Bombadil was useless to the overall plot and he, like, didn't contribute much in the way of character development, and stuff.

THE ONLY REASON THE HOBBITS GOT OUT OF THE BARROW DOWNS IS BECAUSE OF TOM!!!! HE IS AWESOME!!!!

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
By useless you mean plot critical and by annoying you mean badass. *right?*

And yes Red is right, he is plot critical and UBER BADASS

Not really. Even the Barrow Downs were ultimately useless. The only notable contribution that I recall from them was that was where Merry obtained the enchanted sword he used to stab the Witch-King, though frankly, receiving that as a gift from the Elves would have made just as much sense.

No they wernt, as they were there to be part of the history of middle earth, how to Witch King unleashed tthe Great Plague upon Arnor and how its effects still lingered. It showed part of the power of Sauron.

It's always the Elves, Supernatural dudes, Numenor and (sometimes) Dwarves that make the magical enchanted badass pwning stuff. Men in LOTR get stuck with plain, simple stuff.

Originally posted by Incanus
No they wernt, as they were there to be part of the history of middle earth, how to Witch King unleashed tthe Great Plague upon Arnor and how its effects still lingered. It showed part of the power of Sauron.

TOM IS VERY PLOT CRITICAL DUDE PETER JACKSON IS SOME GUY WHO HATE LOTR!!!! HE JUST WANTED TO GET MONEY FROM DIRECTING!!!! HE MADE ARWEN RESCUE FRODO NOT GLORFINDEL!!!!

Originally posted by Incanus
No they wernt, as they were there to be part of the history of middle earth, how to Witch King unleashed tthe Great Plague upon Arnor and how its effects still lingered. It showed part of the power of Sauron.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
It's always the Elves, Supernatural dudes, Numenor and (sometimes) Dwarves that make the magical enchanted badass pwning stuff. Men in LOTR get stuck with plain, simple stuff.