The Call for a Female Gandalf

Skanky Vamp

Skanky Vamp

Sniffin' the Slayer
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
26,460
Black Thorn
from stuff

Actor Robyn Malcolm has revealed her top picks for actresses to take on the role of a female Gandalf in Amazon's Lord of the Rings TV series. Malcolm said it's time the perspective in the show was flipped, and should be less male-focussed than its film counterparts, in which Sir Ian McKellen played the wizard.

"Those old legends, those old mystical stories, they're so based within a patriarchal landscape," Malcolm told Stuff. "Why not look at the magic of a matrilineal world where the magical powerhouses are women?"

Since Amazon is working on a new tale of MiddleEarth, what do you think? Should someone try to woken up Tolkien (more than Jackson already did), or should it be left alone?
 
You either need to make it an adaption from the original material or you're making a fanfiction AU show
 
nightshade said:
You either need to make it an adaption from the original material or you're making a fanfiction AU show
Click to expand...
So would you say that Peter Jackson's was a fanfiction? Arwen was way more important in the movies than in the books, if I remember correctly.
 
The Arwen stuff was unnecessary fluff indeed. The Hobbit was definitely fanfiction.

I’ve no need for a female Gandalf, *shrug* but the problem isn’t really the idea of a female Gandalf, it’s that writing ”strong, female characters” now produces flat, uninteresting, Mary-Sue’s who don’t have flaws and who’s entire character arcs are ”strong, female character”. Basically, I feel like a female Gandalf would just be a hammy, girl-power duplicate there to fill an idea more than to tell a good story.

Yup, I could be wrong. But nothing I’ve seen the last couple of years have convinced me it would be different.

Actually, that’s not true. South Korea creates movies with great female leads. Maybe we could get a Korean LOTR with a female Gandalf, that actually sounds pretty good to me!

Though in all honesty, I feel like I have a bit franchise fatigue. LOTR, Star Wars, Marvel... I’m feeling kind of ”over” all of them at the moment. It is hard to produce stories within the same universes and have them stay fresh. They should really focus more on the actual stories they’re telling, not just the cosmetic changes and visual effects now available.
 
Skanky Vamp
Skanky Vamp
Pretty much agree with everything. Especially the idea we don't need anymore strong women characters as leads. Who really wants strong women characters anyway?
HowiMetdaSlayer
HowiMetdaSlayer
franchise fatigue - you should trademark that
I've recently watched LotR:Fellowship and Two Towers movies, still have to watch Return of the King. I'm surprised by how little Arwen is in those movies, cause I remembered her being a bigger part of the movies when I was younger. Miranda Otto's character had a minor big role in Two Towers, but there's not a big female presence in the movies (thus far).

I have not read the books but my bf is a huge Tolkien fan, so maybe I should ask him about female characters. Having seen The Hobbit movies (or first 2) I know that it took a lot of changes from the book. Not great though. But I have no problem with Amazon taking some liberties with adaptations, if you want to true story then read the books again. I don't know about a literal female Gandalf, but a female wizard, or Gandalf like character could be great, or maybe just a female elf character that is wise and all that like Gandalf. I do love Ian McKellan's Gandalf, I was so sad when he "died" in Fellowship and slightly disappointed he wasn't in Two Towers more.

I'm looking forward to this Amazon show though! At some point I'll read the books.
 
DeadlyDuo
DeadlyDuo
Return of the King just won't end. If you ever get round to watching it, you'll see what I mean.
Taake said:
I’ve no need for a female Gandalf, *shrug* but the problem isn’t really the idea of a female Gandalf, it’s that writing ”strong, female characters” now produces flat, uninteresting, Mary-Sue’s who don’t have flaws and who’s entire character arcs are ”strong, female character”.
Click to expand...
Most of the male characters in the books, except the Hobbits, are strong male characters without flaws. The novels are a painfully sincere story about a gang of cardboard fantasy tropes. People complain that Bloom is wooden, but that probably makes him the most faithful to the novel.

Jackson added humour, personality and internal character conflict. Maybe adding a couple women wouldn't be a bad idea either. They couldn't possibly be flatter than the originals.
 
nightshade said:
You either need to make it an adaption from the original material or you're making a fanfiction AU show
Click to expand...

(Slightly off topic, here, but relevant, nonetheless)

As a fan of the great Edgar Rice Burroughs, and his immortal champion, Tarzan, I have seen the Lord of the Jungle (mis)interpreted, "modernized," retrofitted, and, worst of all, downgraded to comply with the actor's abilities and the audience's inability to suspend their disbelief sufficiently. I've seen the same thing with Conan the Barbarian, James Bond, and countless others. I've seen racial swaps, gender swaps, and sexual orientation swaps, and I have come to the conclusion that no actor, no screenwriter, and no studio will ever be able to do justice to a great writer's creation. The only way that I can explain this travesty is to accept the fact that the majority of the movie goers have no idea what the author was trying to present in the first place, and those few of us who do know the difference have the option to either accept the situation or never go to a movie based on any book that we have ever read.

Hopefully, somewhere in either the opening credits, the closing credits, or both, there will be a notice that the current presentation is only INSPIRED by the original material
 
white avenger said:
or never go to a movie based on any book that we have ever read.
Click to expand...

Trainspotting has the author's seal of approval (he even cameoed in it). It's a good movie, you should see it.

I think it says something, and not good, that the idea of a "strong female character" is to take a male character and just change his gender. Can they not come up with strong female characters on their own now? I also think it's wrong to remove male characters all in the name of political correctness.

Indian Jones inspired a lot of people to take an interest in archaeology the same way that Jurassic Park inspired people to take an interest in Paelentology.
 
Sounds like trolling. I couldn't stay awake through the start of the first film though so it makes no odds to me as I won't be watching.

Franchise fatigue is going to catch up with everyone soon.
 
It states quite clearly that the film is based on the book, it does not say it is an accurate depiction of the story the book attempts to make.
In some DVD's there is a part where the authors directors and exec. producers state what they wanted to say. Often I have wondered if they were talking about the film I just watched.
Making the lead a female is up to the people who pay for the rights to make a film. Then will the money men/ women spend the 100's of millions of dollars to make the film.
I liked watching how the individual sections of the film were constructed but watching the film made me very bored.

In trying to get the remake right you'll never get it right, for everyone.
 
@DeadlyDuo Return of the King just won't end. If you ever get round to watching it, you'll see what I mean.

Yes, I saw it in theatres, but had to leave early cause it was like 12am and I was a teenager. lol. But I remember seeing it when it came out on video shortly after and I thought we had only missed like 5mins but apparently we missed like 25mins! lol. Plus, we're watching the extended versions of the movies now, so I'm sure Return of the King is gonna be really long.
DeadlyDuo said:
I think it says something, and not good, that the idea of a "strong female character" is to take a male character and just change his gender. Can they not come up with strong female characters on their own now? I also think it's wrong to remove male characters all in the name of political correctness.
Click to expand...
Yes, we recently saw this with The Doctor being female, and Marvel has gender bent some characters. A great one I love is Tilda Swinton as the Ancient One. But studios/writers/directors should just come up with original female characters, and not all of them have to be "strong" in the sense that they are just male characters played by a female actress. Let women be women.
 
Just one more example, and a lesser one, that if I thought an actual "patriarchy" to "hold the woman" down and promote "toxic masculinity" (though Gandalf is free of that at least) was actual (at least a powerful subconscious drive) that I think they'd brilliantly subverted feminism from within. Instead of saying a woman can do what a man can do, it sends the message that a woman is weak unless she's a man (or a man does it for her and then moves out of the way, kind of the opposite of plenty of men who'd have never become famous/infamous were it not for women working behind the scenes to help make it happen) which sends a more insidious message that women are unnecessary (because a man could've just as easily been here and you all know it). On top of that, it helps confirm that feminism is about taking over rather than standing up to be counted when there are plenty of strong female characters already just waiting to be remade instead of stealing a character...and to be originally cast.

If they want to remake something, the first that comes to my mind is Willow. Yeah it needs a good polish, and ESPECIALLY take out that annoying "female villain throws away everything she achieved over the years and changes sides because a man came to her while she was sleeping and spouted cheesy love poetry at her" cliche. But it should be easier to adapt than to make Gandalf female in any meaningful way, assuming there's actually any creativity left in Hollywood, and once they do that they have various types of strong female and male characters (from the warriors to the schemers to the comforters, all in both genders) without having to swap any genders.

At the very least, it can't be more boring than another too long LOTR movie. Just careful with those twists, and turning Queen Bavmorda male would be as big a mistake as turning Willow female (as tempting as I'm sure the latter would be given the name). As amusing as it would be to me to turn Mad Mardigan into a lesbian (and this time the husband who was cuckolded is angry that MM IS a woman 😀 ), even that should be avoided.



Of course there's a very wide selection of popular shows and movies to remake. Hell, even Man of La Mancha could be remade with an emphasis on a major character from the book who I don't think shows up in the musical or movie at all.

Or just make more like Pride & Prejudice & Zombies. Can't go wrong there. 😀 😛
 
WillowFromBuffy said:
Most of the male characters in the books, except the Hobbits, are strong male characters without flaws. The novels are a painfully sincere story about a gang of cardboard fantasy tropes. People complain that Bloom is wooden, but that probably makes him the most faithful to the novel.

Jackson added humour, personality and internal character conflict. Maybe adding a couple women wouldn't be a bad idea either. They couldn't possibly be flatter than the originals.
Click to expand...

I’d disagree because I mostly thought Jackson made them all cartoonish, and I much prefer the characters in the books. I always found flaws and nuance in them.

But hey, different strokes, one man’s cardboard fantasy tropes is another woman’s heaven.

Adding a couple of women could’ve been a good idea, but as mentioned, I’ve no faith that they’d be more than statement characters that Amazon could give ”strong, female character” lines to and put in the trailer. They’re trying too desperately to please everyone to do anything really interesting.

Articles like this seem mostly intent to drum up interest and outrage for the project, not genuinely about building good characters people will care about.
 
As a female, I call for Gandalf the Gay. That would be much more entertaining and could spur a new fashion line!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Nix
Queen Berúthiel? In any case, the story is set during the Second Age, Gandalf was not around during the second age. If they want female characters, Numenor could be a society where the men spend most of their long lives on the sea, whereas women run the domestic front. This is consistent with the few stories of the age, along with what Plato said of Atlantis. However, this is a story with fear of loss at it's heart, as well as corruption and fall into evil. It should be cast with that story in mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom