Needs more Fingolfin

Honestly, I think there is some serious danger to depicting the pre-Children story of the Valar as straight history. The events of this part of the story are straight out of myth. Yes, the Valar are characters who interact with the elves (and some humans) historically later on. Valinor will be a setting for our elf-based story.

But. There is a *reason* the Ainulindale is so remote. It's supposed to be. Elves had access to eye-witnesses to these events, but the elves in Middle Earth are cut off from that access. By the time these stories make it to the 3rd Age, they are lore, matters of legend - not history.

If I were a producer on this project, I would be very tempted to say, "Great ideas, I like them. But let's start with season 2, and use the material you've developed for season 1 as backstory *as necessary* in the actual story - which is the history of the elves during the First Age."

If we began with the awakening of the elves at Cuivienen, we would get to Fingolfin much faster. :p We would also preserve some of that feeling of 'depth' and there being more stories untold that Tolkien was so good at creating. There are very few unexplored vistas left when we detail the history of the Valar over the entire first season.
 
And at the end of the day, it was useful that we had Season 1 to figure out how this project works before any elves got involved. We're still...waaaaaay behind on any actual script writing, but we are doing a better job of outlining episodes and getting feedback from the core team on what they want. So, Season 2 should be better than Season 1, and Season 3 has the potential to be even better yet.....

There's a lot more happening in these Valinor episodes, and even if they aren't terribly...dramatic....we're laying the groundwork for making people really care about the Kinslaying. It should be devastating. That's the first time we're going to see Fingolfin in battle, and we're going to show a reason for him being enraged enough to kill elves at that point.
 
Well....now we *have* Fingolfin, but he's apparently not who you think he is in his younger years. So....
 
I'm sure we can find a way to preserve his awesomeness; speaking as a middle child, surely being a tad resentful of an older sibling doesn't preclude being awesome in your own way, right?
 
I was surprised to see so much concern about presenting Fingolfin in his younger years as immature. It is only natural for the Children of Iluvatar to grow into their maturity over time. Showing this development does nothing to detract from his kingliness but rather to enhance it by showing the qualities he develops over time.
One thing that bothers me though about Fingolfin is his wisdom, the quality for which he was named by his father. It seems that even when he grows into his full stature and character, many of his decisions are unwise: submitting to Feanor's leadership, probably participating in the kin-slaying, rashly challenging Morgoth to single combat, etc. Perhaps his name was more aspirational than descriptive. It occurs to me that he is more kingly than his younger brother and that Finarfin is more wise though he did end up being a king in the end.
 
One could certainly understand an adolescent Fingolfin not having become the person he will be as an adult. This isn't an adolescent Fingolfin. He has grown children of his own.

This is the same elf who immediately after having his elder brother threaten his life, releases him.

We can (and have) found ways to portray him as proud and angry (just as the text does), but whiny and puerile is another matter and not in keeping with what we do get of him.
 
I'm certainly not defending a whiny whelp approach. Naturally he's already well on his way to his maturity when he has children of his own. I was thinking more of his earlier youth when he's looking up to and to some extent resenting his already much older half-brother who is the bright flame of his people, the apple of his father's eye, and already treating him poorly just for having been born. I was merely speaking in favor of the idea of giving Fingolfin, and others, a more fully-realized development following natural arcs from childhood to the points where they end up in the text; an expansion on persons that are often only given a few scant details in the overview tone of much of the Silmarillion. A task which the hosts, script outliners, and a good portion of the commenters are already doing nicely.
 
Ah. Yes, I don't think anyone is concerned about how teenage Fingolfin comes off. It was more the idea of him being a whiny brat as the father of adult children.
 
Agreed, that would be a tragic misrepresentation. That phase should see more of a mixture of pride and growing wisdom with some residual rashness. I think you guys have it covered.
 
I am all for young!Fingolfin acting like a brat at Fëanor's wedding (back in episode 7). I was a lot less comfortable with letting his 'daddy issues' take front and center in episode 10, where he is (as Nick points out) the father of adult children. Yes, he's no doubt resentful towards Fëanor for many good reasons, and he has no doubt let his displeasure be known over the years. A building antagonism that loses any 'good-natured ribbing' side and becomes intentionally hurtful can lead to an escalating conflict - and he can feed into that. But - and this is where all the film!Faramir comparisons come in - it is important that Fingolfin not be shown as someone who looks to his father for validation or to take care of the problem. He has to fight his own battle here. He is going to have to show a lot of humility in Episode 12 to utter the words 'you will lead, I will follow' after what is possibly a non-apology on the part of Fëanor (not a guy to unsay words). I would hope that we use that as an opportunity to show his maturity and strength, no matter how conflicted his motives might be. It should be a noble gesture on his part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top