Boromir was the only member of the Fellowship who tried to take the ring. He was vain and entitled, believing that he alone, of the Fellowship, was worthy of the ring. He was a thief and a traitor.
Boromir was a Lord of Gondor, and he wanted everyone to know it. “His garments were rich, his cloak was lined with fur, and he had a collar of silver in which a single white stone was set.”
Boromir did not redeem himself. He failed to protect Merry and Pippin from the orcs, who wouldn’t have found the hobbits wandering alone if it weren’t for Boromir’s actions in the first place.
Boromir would not have felt remorse or apologised if he had succeeded in taking the ring; he only did because he was caught. His image was so important to him that his “heroic” death was staged to create sympathy and goodwill so that he would not be remembered through the ages as a thief and a traitor.
Boromir got what he deserved.
No because the writer(s) are clearly on drugs. At least that’s the only way to explain that shit.
I haven’t read The Similarian, but we know from the LotR series that all races were duped into taking the rings and controlled by them. So how do the books differ if you don’t mind explaining. Actually, I don’t want spoilers! I’m going to read it some day. I swear! But do tell me, does the dwarven king not become overwhelmed by the ring’s influence in the books?