First of all Gandalf says Frodo has passed beyond his sight, yet Minas Tirith is like right next door to Mordor, this was like the closest they had ever been to each other since Gandalf fell in Moria.
But then the very next sentence he says that 10,000 Orcs are between him and Mt. Doom.
So which is it? Has Frodo passed beyond his sight yes or no?
???
I think Gandalf was just stating a typical figure for Sauron's forces, not that he's seen them for himself. Or maybe he did, and Sauron was "blocking" any Wizards' "view" of Mordor for his counter-attack, so they couldn't warn the Men?
I'm actually thinking that Gandalf is referring to the Last Alliance, when Men and Elves were in Mordor and could see for themselves the number of estimated Orcs they were fighting.
As for "passed beyond my sight", it's likely that Sauron had, as I said, blocked Gandalf's view as he expanded his own, so he had no idea what was happening to Frodo and Sam and could not assist them in any way.
This is the second post I've tried to respond in a friendly way. Are you keen on bashing this great Trilogy or what?
You can justify this all you want but it’s still a plot hole he contradicts himself within the span of 30 seconds
shareI don't really care, nothing's going to make me change my opinion of this trilogy.
It's not a trilogy
shareIt's not a single book, neither. As I recall, Tolkien's publishers insisted he split it into three books, and he did. So there.
It's a collection of volumes, kind of like how novels in the 1800's were released in pieces. It's not a trilogy and even Tolkein himself didn't consider it a trilogy.
There are two Middle Earth Films: Lord Of The Rings and The Hobbit
Will you stop talking to me about the LOTR books, I don't care about them.
I'm not seeing the contradiction here. He knows that Frodo is beyond his sight because he's in Mordor. He knows there are 10,000 troops in Mordor. That's pretty straight forward.
shareIf he was truly beyond Gandalfs sight then there's no way he could have possibly known there were 10,000 Orcs between him and Mt. Doom, also how was he beyond his sight? Minas Tirith is right next door to Mordor, that's the closest they had been to each other since Moria.
shareHe's beyond his sight because it's Mordor. It's a supernatural effect just like Gandalf's ability to see beyond his line of visual sight is a supernatural effect. If you accept the later you must accept the former. "In the land of Mordor, where the shadows lie."
He got insight into Sauron's plans (and presumably strength) when Pippin was fooling with the Palantír.
So that would mean the whole thing about 10,000 orcs being between him and Mt. Doom was just a guess. He could not say that with any degree of certainty if Frodo truly had passed beyond his sight.
You still didn't explain how he could pass beyond his sight if they are literally right next door to each other
As for what he gathered from Sauron from the Palantir that was information on the attack on Minas Tirith which was already over.
"As for what he gathered from Sauron from the Palantir that was information on the attack on Minas Tirith which was already over."
That's part of what he gained. Or are you one of those people who wonder why a character in a film doesn't die from constipation because they don't show him taking a crap from time to time?
"You still didn't explain how he could pass beyond his sight if they are literally right next door to each other"
AGAIN, "In the land of Mordor, where the shadows lie."
All you're giving me are assumptions and speculation. I'm happy to talk to you but you need to be able to back up your claims.
shareThinking twice about it, you're 100% right. I'm also interested in how all these people teleported everywhere. After all, we didn't see every single step they took so that's a plot hole. Now if we'd have seen Captain Kirk we could be assure there is transporter technology, otherwise they need to show each and every step or it's an assumption that they walked/road horse all the way. Big plot hole.
shareI’m asking how you explain Gandalf’s contradiction and you’re just giving me a bunch of nonsense, if you can’t explain this then just admit it and move on with your life
shareI gave possibilities. You're acting like since you don't know the exact mechanism that it's a plot hole. Far from it. There are ways these are both true. Following your logic we'd get to the exact point I explained. It's just a matter of how deep you're willing to go.
shareIf your "possibilities" aren't supported by anything in the film then yes it's a plot hole.
I mean in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Indy's head so should have been crushed by the conveyor belt based on how the scene is edited but by your logic I could always say that the spirit of Shiva teleported him further back to give Short Round time to get the knife out of the voodoo doll, but since there is nothing in the film to support that then that's not a logical conclusion. It's a random guess which is exactly what you're doing.
You gave good possibilities and an initial explanation that was quite obvious, yes.
shareIt seems pretty obvious to me as well. I was coming here to say that, but you beat me to the punch (by 15 days, no less!)
Gandalf's statement that Frodo is beyond his sight is obvious: Gandalf says he cannot feel, sense, see, or "see" Frodo through magic, or literal, means.
The second statement, that 10,000 orcs are between Frodo and Mt. Doom, is not that Gandalf has literally seen 10,000 orcs between Frodo and Orodruin, but rather that Frodo still (likely) has a long way to go through enemy territory, which is swarming with dangers. He might as well have said, "Yet, Frodo has not reached the cracks of Doom yet, or else Sauron would have been defeated - unless Frodo failed completely and the Enemy possessed now the Ring. In either case, it stands to reason that our brave hobbit friend still seeks the end of the Quest, and logic dictates that many more dangers - including armies of orcs, goblins, trolls, and other horrors, not to mention Haradrim and other men who have sworn fealty to Sauron - lie betwixt Frodo and the cracks of Doom."
But that might have been a bit clunkier. It's almost like the dialogue writers were aiming for brevity and assuming a certain amount of intelligence and insight would be demonstrated by the audience...
estcst delivered a straightforward, logical explanation for this, but it also bears stating that a character contradiction or error is not the same thing as a plot hole.
shareYes it is a plot hole, if Frodo were beyond his sight which was established then Gandalf never would have known they needed to draw the Orcs out of Mordor and therefore the ring never would have been destroyed.
shareGandalf would know to create a diversion regardless of whether or not he knew exactly where Frodo was or was just guessing.
And, again, a character making an error in statement is still character error, not a plot hole.
It's all good, though, exactly what a plot hole is or is not has become muddied in these days of internet lists, so I get why you're mixing it up here.
Let's say that at that time Sam and Frodo were still climbing the steps, that would make Gandalf's entire diversion pointless, because the Orcs would have killed all of them and then gone right back to where they were.
It is a plot hole.
If the orcs killed them all there they would have marched on to Gondor searching for the Ring.
It's not a plot hole.
And then they would have eventually returned to Mordor where they would have stopped Sam and Frodo.
Also Pippin was in the battle, they would have realized he didn't have the ring.
So Sauron would assume more than ever that the Ring had passed to some noble knight or lord in Gondor or Rohan. He'd scour the battlefield of the Black Gates for years, torture orcs assuming they'd stolen it...whatever. It's made abundantly clear that he couldn't conceive of his foes trying to destroy the Ring. If Aragorn, the heir of Isildur, was slain, he'd assume the world was his for the taking and move forward for sure.
shareHe couldn't do that without the ring, when he discovered Pippin didn't have it he would have no reliable leads and therefore the Orcs would have returned to Mordor. It's still a plot hole no matter how hard you try to jam this square peg into a round hole.
shareIt was never a plot hole no matter how much you wish it to be. It was, at most, character error or a discrepancy.
You can say that they would have returned to Mordor all you want, but book and film make it abundantly clear that Sauron saw Aragorn as his chiefest threat and thought that his foes would use the Ring against him, not attempt to destroy it. With Aragorn out of the way, Sauron would have swept over Middle Earth like a dark tide, seeking the Ring, but never guessing he'd need to return the majority of his forces to his own land to defend against the Ring's destruction. Consult the books, this is all laid out very plainly.
Actually it’s very logical he would have the Orcs return to Mordor seeing how Mt Doom is the one way to destroy it. No matter which way you slice it it’s a plot hole and your entire premise is baseless speculation at best.
share"Indeed he is in great fear, not knowing what mighty one may suddenly appear, wielding the Ring, and assailing him with war, seeking to cast him down and take his place. That we should wish to cast him down and have no one in his place is not a thought hat occurs to his mind. That we should try to destroy the Ring itself has not yet entered into his darkest dream."
-Tolkien's baseless speculation.
LOL in order for that to be canon Faramir would have had to have not tried to take the ring nor take Frodo, Sam and Gollum to Osgilliarth. Jackson's movie very much was not based on the novel since so many liberties were taken with the source material. Also there is no indication of that in the movie and I am judging the movie. If you have to deflect to the book then that's proof that the movie can't stand on its own and it proves my point.
shareIt's pretty clear in the movies as well. I thought so, anyway. But, I guess you didn't.
shareWhat's your evidence? (You can only cite the theatrical versions, no novels)
shareLook, I'm not going to go combing through 9-12 hours of script looking for exact quotes, partly because I'm not spending that kind of time on something as frivolous as this.
Fortunately, I don't have to.
There are no armies guarding Mt. Doom. The only logical conclusion is that Sauron does not suspect an attack will penetrate the Black Gate or the pass with Shelob (and Minas Morgul), and he does not consider it to be a threat. Why? Well, obviously because he respects only power. Since he's prideful, he assumes that foes he respects or fears (Aragorn, Gandalf, et al.), or at least thinks of as "great" amongst their own people, would think as he does: ie, power comes first.
The aggregate of information is clear, as long as you're paying attention and understand "human" (Maiar...whatever) nature.
Those are all assumptions and I will not accept them.
shareThose are observations of information being presented by the film. I don't need dialogue to understand that the eagles couldn't be employed due to fell-beasts and other winged horrors and spies (another "plot hole" people bring up), and I likewise don't need direct exposition to explain to me why Sauron doesn't suspect the plans of the Fellowship and the Alliance of men, dwarves, elves, and all free peoples of Middle Earth.
If you don't accept them that says more about you than it does about the movie.
Those are plot holes if you have to rely on assumptions or outside sources for the movie to make any sense.
shareAs I already explained: I'm not.
shareI have yet to see any evidence from the theatrical version, you are just connecting the dots in whatever direction you have to to make sense out of nonsense.
shareI'm observing what's there and drawing conclusions. If you don't see it, fine.
shareNo you're making up your own conclusions.
shareI think we're done. You obviously don't get it, so unless you have something new to contribute to the conversation, I think we've hit an impasse.
shareI know you're done, you can't defend your position with any kind of corroborating evidence from the movie, you just make it up as you go.
shareNope. I'm tired of inane push-and-shove. You never present anything based in logic or reason, you refuse to acknowledge any statement I make, dismissing it with the written equivalent of a handwave, and whether willful obtuseness, or accident, it is a pleasure-drain to continue.
That is the reason for my departure from this particular "conversation", and I need no proofs of that; I am, after all, knowledgeable about my own mind and motives.
If you have a refutation to the contrary, I trust you will bring plenty of evidence and proofs.
I asked you to back up your claims and all you gave me were assumptions and your own personal fan fiction, I am accepting neither. The way you see things doesn't do anything for anyone other than yourself. You cannot explain this obvious contradiction by Gandalf and your efforts are pathetic.
shareSo when you say, Gandalf knowing there's 10,000 orcs between Frodo and Mt. Doom in Mordor, and then draws out an army of approx. 10,000 orcs from Mordor you say that's a plot-hole?
shareNo he said Frodo was beyond his sight (despite literally being the closest he’s ever been to him since Moria) and then contradicting himself literally 10 second later. It’s a plot hole
shareThey must be Shroedinger orcs then. If you can't see them then they don't exist.
shareYour concession is noted
shareSo when Henry Morton Stanley finally met Dr. Livingstone, he did so without encountering a single African person on his journey.
shareI'm talking about Lord of the Rings, stay on topic. If you have to deflect to problems in other works then all you're doing is pointing out problems in other works, it doesn't make the problems of LOTR disappear.
shareI thought Livingstone and Stanley were in Lord of the Rings? Stanley's the innkeeper guy in Bree, right? And then they meet Aragorn, but he's going by a different name, so they're like, "Dr. Livingstone, I presume?" And Aragorn says they presume wrong.
shareThat’s in the book I’m discussing the movie
shareAlso I don’t remember that part , could you please post the exact passage? At that point weren’t we seeing things through the perspective of the hobbits? Tolkien doesn’t seem to like to flip flop between perspectives too often so I find it odd that he would show the events through Aragorns perspective at that point
shareFellowship of the Ring, Chapter 10: Livingstone
Frodo, Pippin, and Sam made their way back to the parlour. There was no light. Merry was not there, and the fire had burned low. It was not until they had puffed up the embers into a blaze and thrown on a couple of faggots that they discovered Livingstone had come with them. There he was calmly sitting in a chair by the door!
'Hallo!' said Pippin. 'Dr. Livingstone, I presume?'
'I am called Strider,' he answered: 'and though he may have forgotten it, your friend promised to have a quiet talk with me.'
What edition are you reading? Chapter 10 is called "Strider" and Pippin clearly says " Hallo, who are you and what do you want?" and then Aragorn introduces himself as "Strider". I just skimmed over the whole chapter and I did not see the name "Livingstone"
shareLivingstone is like Elessar, I think. Another name for Aragorn.
In Elvish, I believe it translates to "Anosognosia".