If this movie had come out in 2023 you would all call this movie “woke” and get stuff like this
>wow why would Hollywood put this power girl moment in my movie?
>it’s forced
>look I get you want to put your messages in the movies but make your own character don’t take Tolkien characters
>how woke is Lotr?
You just know I am right
Why couldn't Shakespeare figure this shit out for Macbeth?
If this topic was made today I would call op a homosexual.
homosexual.
And if I spent all of your life kicking you in the dick you'd tense up if I patted you on your shoulder.
Ever heard of the word "context"?
>Oh no wordplay, my one weakness
i know tolkien had a boner for language and all but was there an actualy explanation for why being a woman let her kill him?
because it wasn't a real power in the first place, any one could've killed him, they just failed to do so until she came around
Without Merry she would have failed.
because the reality is that Pippin's dagger was enchanted to fight against the witch king hundreds of years ago and when he struck at the witch king from behind it expended itself in a fantastic quality to a) break the spell of power on the witch king and b) given eowyn the opening to strike.
the word play is double, as merry was also not of the race of men just as eowyn was not of the gender.
What kind of nerd know about the daggers from Agnmar but can't tell Merry and Pippin apart?
Well, technically it is correct that Pippin's dagger could also accomplish the same but yeah I had this moment of "It's Merry not Pippin" and then write Pippin anyway
That was fricking Merry not Pippin you imbecile. Strictly speaking Pippin did have a magic dagger too though.
they all look the same to me.
This has already been addressed, your complaint will now be closed.
It's not being a woman that made her able to defeat him. It's just that she was always "destined" to be the one to strike the killing blow, so when the elf made the prophecy, he just said that it's not a man that's going to end him. Witch King just thought that "not a man" basically meant any earthly combatant, or at the very least any human one. As for how he could die: Pippin made him vulnerable by using an enchanted dagger, thus making him vulnerable
Shit it was Merry, not Pippin
Does the scene feel like a political statement to you? I don't think it does. Having a strong female character isn't necessarily a political thing, but in contrived feminist shit media it always is.
No we wouldn't have.
If Lord of the Rings had come out today at least half of the board would hate it.
Frick off, glowie.
>glowie
you have schizophrenia or you don't know what that means
Frick off, glowie.
NTA but anyone who says "glowie" instead of "glowBlack person" is safe to dismiss.
Frick off, glowBlack person.
Nope.
Yes. You'd all complain about it being derivative of the books and for turning Tolkien's masterpiece into a big action blockbuster with one liners and quips between Legolas and Gimli.
Nope.
Yes
Nope.
Yes
Nope.
People complained about Legolas snowboarding even then.
This isn't the "win" you think it is, moloch.
true
also true
It would be hated because half the characters would be black.
Yes, because it actually sucks.
if the Lord of the Rings trilogy came out today it would be more like the show than the actual movies were. So if anything about 95% of Cinemaphile would hate it and the rest would be marketers shilling for the movie.
LOTR was never that good to begin with, including the books. It was always the capeshit of british fantasy novels since its inception. Even the critics of the time ragged on it for catering to low IQ newcomers to the genre.
>newcomers to the genre
Everyone?
You are angry miserable little man.
Jokes on you, hated it back then. Fellowship was kino but the other two are pretty shit. This and Legolas surfing the mammoth was pure tripe.
>Legolas surfing the mammoth
by far the worst moment in Return of the King. I know people shit on the ghost army, but it was a convenient way to end the battle and get the story moving along since the movie was already long enough. Meanwhile we take a full minute of screen time for that nonsense.
Even though it's a bit of an asspull, it does make sense because in Tolkien's world words have incredible power.
Pretty much anyone can curse people or even entire bloodlines for thousands of years just by saying something and those curses will come true.
Words are so powerful that if you curse someone you can accidentally make them immortal until they face the fate you put on them.
And like anons pointed out, those daggers were specifically enchanted to fight this guy.
This was like fighting a werewolf and having a sidekick with you who was using an old revolver that has silver bullets in it.
I agree, the first movie was amazing and peak comfy. But that's probably because it was made without too much interference from the suits.
The series got worse as it progressed, clearly trying to appeal to the greater audience as the suits saw the enormous attention it got.
>Hey let's include some action scenes, the masses will love it
>Use more CGI that'll be great
Frick that.
Being comfy and taking it's time with things was what really carried it and what people most remember from the films.
LOTR fame made sense when tvs were rare
now that we all have youtube,netflix and twitch?
LOTR IS FRICKING TRASH!!!!
it would like rings of power so yes
Probably. Lotr reads like a lullaby story for kids.
no it wouldn't because it's in the book
Isn't saying that men an women are different a nazi thing?
I thought this when I watched it 20 years ago, and I was 12. Was the worst part of the 12 hour trilogy.
difference is that it wasn't being forced in EVERY SINGLE THING that was being released at the time so it was bearable.
that cringe did pretty much ruin an otherwise 10/10 scene, but some cringe in a 10/10 scene is far better than cringe being the objective of the entire industry
>refuses to evacuate with the woman and children of rohan
>refuses to sit idly while the men of rohan fight and die for their race
>rides into battle with her father, without any special protection because of her status
>kills the b***h king
I think we can allow her a quip, we should all be so lucky to have a daughter like that
well this is actually what Tolkein wrote in 1954, so no.
Now if Eowen was black, and she pulled off her helmet and a big nappy afro popped out and she said, "NUH UH, HONEY. THE FUTURE IS BLACK AND IT'S BEAUTIFUL!" then yes, people would shun it like Rings of Power and Tolkein would spin in his grave.
>Lord of the Rings reboot (2026)
>Eowen is still white but now...
>she puts her hand on Legolas' chest and says "watch and learn" and then she takes down the oliphant all by herself
>and then she saves Gimli's life by tossing him into a bunch of orcs like he was a bowling ball
>and then when the Witch King showed up instead of cowering in fear and barely dodging his attacks, she does that thing Neo does in the Matrix when he blocks every attack with one hand and doesn't even look at Agent Smith
>and then she summons her own ghost army, and the ghost army is all female, and they represent the lives of women who were heroic but never appreciated by men
>and then Eowen's ghost army is so grateful that she summoned her that they all ask to be called upon to serve such a great female leader
>and then Aragorn decides Eowen should be the king of Gondor
>and Eowen demands all the hobbits get down on their knees and kiss her doc martins
>and the hobbits are so happy they get to grovel at her feet they break down in tears and decide to stay and be her loyal foot stools
this is the "this movie is not meant for you" female character.
The real truth is that you're right, it would be cringe in 2023, but it didn't come out in 2023. It was fresher in 2003. It was even somewhat cringe in 2003, but it hadn't completely worn out it's welcome.
Just like how the 90's Disney Princesses like Mulan and somewhat Jasmine were epic girl power action girls types, but they were fresher. Trying to advertise a cool action girl princess doesn't work now because we've seen it before, now it's just cringe and woke pandering without actually being new. Having an epic girl power moment in 2023 is just pathetic.
I just know you're strawmanning.
Get better material, you Reddit washout frick.
>ackshully everything has always been woke except for Hitler who was beaten by woke people 100 years ago so my entire ideology is utterly pointless
ok? Now what? What is the point of telling me that?
It was cringe back then and it still is now. I hated this instantly, since I was looking forward to seeing the witch king kick some serious ass after a lot of build up. The third movie sucked shit in general, nobody important from the heroes dies, the ghost army was a lame ass-pull and the ending dragged on for 75 minutes
Same, always hated it. Gothmog also gets unceremoniously dispatched at the same time despite being the most memorable bad guy aside from like Saruman. Blink and you miss it.
Im not going to hate the trilogy no matter how hard you try
I thought it was a stupid line then and think it's a stupid line now.
Please continue to pretend that the time in which a film is released is irrelevant. It really helps your argument that annoying ball busting girl bosses weren't being pushed down your throat so hard in the early 2000s.
No because its in the books. If it wasn't in the books and they added that then yes. Prerty sure movie Eowyn still settled down and married Faramir at the end anyway.
people complained about it back then, too. yes it is technically in the books although it's less hollywood and in the movie they cut out the end of her character arc when she realizes that being a soldier sucks and she'd rather be a wife and mother.
god, I hate this israelited weakwilled garbage
jewtube is filled with LOtroony recommendations, even if you remove it for the 1000th time it still pops up
that and nolan midwittery
I WILL NOT WATCH YOUR SATANIC UGLY SHIT MOVIE, kys
you good, bro?
>Bad Faith Argument.
Because films are judged in the greater context. The motivation behind the scene wasn't wokeshit, and it wasn't intended to be scene by the audience as wokeshit. It was about a loophole, not feminine empowerment.
None of that would be true in 2023.
>It was about a loophole
women are not humans?
correct
He was told no man would kill him, she wasn't a man, this isn't hard. Why do you people act like this? I swear you get off on faceless strangers you'll never meet knowing you're a moron, why not hide what you are and try to pass as a functioning and literate person?
Women are not men.
Pretty problematic.
I too get mad at vague online hivemind caricatures over hypothetical scenarios.
Welcome to schizophrenia.
If this were made today, we all know how ~~*they*~~ would write it.
Well she didnt scream the ill fated woke words of "The Patriarchcy".
It passes the non woke test
If this has come out in 2023 it wouldn't be just one line, she would have given the speech, led the charge, and theodin would have done nothing or needed to have been saved.
She was terrified and completely outclassed by the witch king but still stood her ground and fought. That’s a good strong woman character. They established that she had some training in a scene with Aragorn. She had a last second save by Merry and landed just that one stab.
If it were 2023 she would be handspringing through hordes of orcs on her own dual wielding swords leading to a 1 v 1 with the witch king where she effortlessly disposes of him with a smug grin.
Stop making this thread you whiny disingenuous frick. If they made this movie today, you'd be complaining that Aragon isn't black and that hobbits should be played by actual short people, only to turn around and say that's ableist and they should be played by normal sized people instead.
If this were 2023 she wouldn't have been cucked by Aragorn and she would have cucked him.
it's good to have female representation. tolkien was a hack anyway with dancing fairies in the forest or whatever. if you defend tolkien you're a fairy.
Tolkien disliked greatly the cute Lil dancing fairies, he wrote "on faery stories" to let the world how autistically seething he was about the concept, you're basically arguing that Lovecraft loved italians.
This was dumb back then, and we did complain about it. Anyone who read the books could have told you that.
The Witch King was made corporeal by the INCREDIBLY SPECIAL KNIFE that Merry was given by Tom Bombadil.
Tom Bombadil explains that THE INCREDIBLY SPECIAL KNIFE is one of the few weapons that can leave the Witch King vulnerable to attacks.
In the movie we see Merry stab the witch king with THE INCREDIBLY SPECIAL KNIFE, but there's no explanation in the movie to let the audience know that Eowyn is just a complete assclown, and a puppy could have killed the Witch-King at that point.
You are right but only becasue times are different.
We weren't threatened by woman yet, so we didn't care then. Now that they are fricking everything up of course this would bother us. Why is that so hard for you to understand?