Since we are all so eagerly awaiting the release of the final instalment to Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy I thought we might as well do something to pass the time. My hope is to post a new character each day and open up discussion on our thoughts about the quality or lack there of in Peter Jackson's interpretation. As well as the strengths and weaknesses in the Actors ability to play the character.
I figured we'd start with the beginning.
Bilbo Baggins - played by Ian Holme
[ December 15, 2003, 06:44 AM: Message edited by: beatnix19 ]
Posted by msquared (Member # 4484) on :
I thought Ian Holme stole the first movie. He was awsome as Bilbo. The scenes in Bag End where he is talking about Frodo are just perfect. I don't think PJ could have picked a better actor for the part and I think PJ got the characterization just right.
msquared
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
I agree. Ian Holm was the best choice. I can't imagine anyone else doing better. YOu could see his basic good nature, his affection for Frodo and all that, which made the whole Ring-lust thing obvious. I mean, he was not the sort of person who woould get all wacky over possessions, but there was his need for the ring, the fixation just beginning to take hold. And he managed to escape it's hold, which was remarkable since he'd had it for 60 years.
Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
His dialog with gandalf (when the wizard notices that Bilbo don't want to leave the ring behind) is priceless, being one of the films' best moments.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
I'll put in my two cents before I log off for the day. Ian Holme does a wonderful job. He captures the some what hermit like, some what adventerous and somewhat peculiar nature Tolkien describes in the books. His batteling love for Frodo and obsession with the ring are obvious and well performed. If there was anyone better suited for this role I'd be amazed.
Posted by Julie (Member # 5580) on :
I agree that he does a great job. Holme is truely a hobbit-at-heart. (Of course, PJ is also a hobbit, but that's a whole other thread.) He plays Bilbo perfectly and it never feels like he's just acting a part. I can't think of anyone better.
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
I've always loved seeing him in movies, but Bilbo was perfectly suited to him. He plays the slightly addled so well.
It's kind of a shame, though, that he may be a bit too old to play Bilbo in The Hobbit.
Posted by Brenuine (Member # 5891) on :
I loved his performance too. Are they making another version of The Hobbit?
Posted by Julie (Member # 5580) on :
They could always tape his face back like they did in the scene where he finds the ring. Of course, that could get painful a couple weeks into shooting.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Ian Holme is an exceptional actor. I just re-watched Branagh's version of Henry V this past weekend and I love Holme's performance in that.
Holme's portrayal of Bilbo Baggins was, in my opinion, almost perfect. The one exception (which was not his fault at all) was the part where he and Frodo are at Rivendell talking and he grabs for the ring, turning into a monster for a moment. The book handles that scene much more subtly, and Holme is more than good enough to have carried it off as written.
The other problem I have with that scene is that they left out one of my favorite lines in the whole series: "Don't adventures ever have an end?" It's one of the most poignant lines I've ever read, and when I went to see FotR I was waiting to see Holme's delivery, only to be disappointed to discover that it was cut.
But neither of those things are Holme's fault, and I think his performance had exactly the depth that the role required.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Next Character
Frodo Baggins - played by Elijah Wood
I figure to keep the same thread and just change title each day. That way if If you'd like to comment on past characters you can.
I think Elijah has done a very good job so far. He has really transformed as the movies progress. He was very high spirited and hapy and as the ring takes hold you can see him really drop into despair. He has been very believable. The one problem I have had since the very beginning is that Elijah looks like an elf. He has a very fair face and his bright eyes have always screamed elf to me. I never really pictured frodo to be as "pretty" as Elijah is. But the preformance has been strong enough for me to easily overlook that little fact.
[ November 20, 2003, 09:04 AM: Message edited by: beatnix19 ]
Posted by msquared (Member # 4484) on :
He has done a fine job so far, but I don't know if I would have picked him. At first I thought he was too young to play the part, but then I read the book again and Frodo got the ring when he was 33, his coming of age. Comparing the ages of hobbits and men, this would put him in his mid 20's compared to humans. He then stops aging, or showing signs of aging. Gandalf even mentions it when Frodo is closer to 50 when the main action of the book starts. They do not play this up in the movie, but Frodo is, I believe, 10-20 years older then the other hobbits, but looks the same age as they.
As far as Woods job, I like it so far. We will see how he does in the ROTK.
msquared
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Let's try again.
Gandalf - Ian McKellen
Another great choice. McKellen has done an excellent job. I'll probably come back and add more later when I have time.
[ November 21, 2003, 08:32 AM: Message edited by: beatnix19 ]
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Isn't Gandalf spelled with an "f", rather than a "ph"?
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Yea, yea, yea. It's early and I'm tired, but thanks.
Posted by Jenny Gardener (Member # 903) on :
I adore Ian McKellan as Gandalf. He captures the right amount of humor, love, wisdom, and power that I imagined from the books. He hugs the hobbits as if they are family and he is truly fond of them. He seems like a kindly old man but then radiates power when fighting the Balrog. His Gandalf the White is indeed a different character than Gandalf the Grey, just as Tolkien wrote it.
Posted by JaneX (Member # 2026) on :
Ian McKellan IS Gandalf.
~Jane~
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
Ian McKellen makes an excellent Gandalf. I really can't see anyone else in the part...
Posted by Julie (Member # 5580) on :
I missed Frodo, so I'll start with him. Elijah Wood has a very expressive face, especially his eyes. After having seen his performance I think anyone else would seem a bit cold and just like they were missing something. I think he is mature enough and a good enough actor to make up for his young age and besides, he's really cute. (I know that doesn't have anything to do with his acting ability, but you can guess it helped with ticket sales for females ages... well... all ages.)
Gandalf: I think Ian McKellen is a great actor who pulls of this role amazingly well. He looks the part and he uses the magic subtley. He doesn't make Gandalf look like a wizard from Harry Potter, but as wizards are portrayed in the books. He also has a deep understanding and respect for LOTR and I believe I heard that before Tolkien died he gave McKellen permission to play Gandalf if there was ever a movie version.
[ November 21, 2003, 06:39 PM: Message edited by: Julie ]
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Gandalf is awesome! He looks like he would make a cool grandpa, too.
And he's cool because he's a pyro! Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
They offered gandalf to sean connery and he turned it down. Tis a shame.
Sure, turn down lord of the rings but accept league of extraordinary gentlemen, great choice sean.
--ApostleRadio
BTW I think Ian has done a fine job as gandalf, i just really like sean connery, hes the man.
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
Prolix needs to be pushed into a giant blender for suggesting Connery could have pulled off a better Gandalf than McKellen. McKellen gave the character the majesty that Connery just can't do.
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
You wouldn't know majesty if it bit you in the face!
--ApostleRadio
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
quote: I believe I heard that before Tolkien died he gave McKellen permission to play Gandalf if there was ever a movie version
Actually I think you're thinking of Christopher Lee (Saruman). Lee had an ongoing relationship with Tolkien and has read LotR once a year for like the past eon. I think Tolkien sort of gave permission for Lee to play Gandalf, but he ended up as Saruman. Go fig.
Anyway, Ian McKellen is so awesomely awesome as Gandalf. I couldn't imagine anyone else pulling it off as well.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Mercy me!
Bilbo's actor was par excellence - a little stiff leaning out the window before he explained scraped thin like too little butter over bread, but other wise fine. No, wait - I agree - that Rivendell "monster" thing was a bit much.
Frodo - as I recall from the books, he always did have an "elvish air" about him, so I think he looks just fine for the part. Besides, he could be a throwback to Belladonna Took, who supposedly was a fairy of some sort, no? And yes, indeed, the ring slows aging which he received at 33 and held onto for 20 years before the great adventure. However, that means (gasp) Pippin and Merry were also similar ages. Gasp. They all age nicely - which as I recall from the Hobbit, 33 is just considered a legal adult, and it's really not till the 50's that they are expected to settle down and do the responsible life.
I can't imagine any other Gandalf than the Gandalf we have. He's absolutely perfect. Sean Connery, while totally wonderful himself, would not have done the part justice. I can't see Sean Connery fitting into any of the roles, actually. Hmmmm -
Posted by ae (Member # 3291) on :
quote:Besides, he could be a throwback to Belladonna Took, who supposedly was a fairy of some sort, no?
<<suppresses giggle>>
Posted by Maccabeus (Member # 3051) on :
What? Frodo held onto the Ring from 33 to 50!? I don't remember that from the book...
Posted by Julie (Member # 5580) on :
More time definitely elapsed in the book than in the movie. That only makes sense for the movie to skip it because it adds difficulty to the filming without really making much difference to the plot.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
I actually loved the monster thing with Bilbo. I was totally freaked out, and it was over so quickly after it began. Then Bilbo started sobbing afterwards. I though it was great.
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
!7 years.
But at the time of the quest, Frodo is the oldest of the four hobbits and Pippin is the youngest, being in his 20's and not yet an adult by Hobbit reckoning. Funny that the actor who plays Pippin is the oldest of the Hobbit actors. Though he doesn't really look it.
I love Elijah Wood as Frodo. I was glad when I heard he got the part. Tolkien doesn't describe the looks of the individual hobbits much, but he did have Gandalf describe Frodo in a letter to Barliman, using the phrase "fairer than most". That could have a lot of interpretations, But semi-elvishness seems as good as any.
Posted by eslaine (Member # 5433) on :
quote: I think Tolkien sort of gave permission for Lee to play Gandalf, but he ended up as Saruman. Go fig.
No worries for Mr. Lee. This could be his finest role ever. Who wouldn't want to play a big part in their favorite novel? And Christopher Lee has ever been a great heavy. He even drew on Adolph Hitler for his address to the Orcish hoard. His voice, oddly enough, has that Hitler quality. Brilliant. He is the Saruman!
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Next Character
Gollum - Andy Serkis
This rounds out the original, or primary characters, directly effected by the ring. Or maybe a better way to say this is, this finishes the characters that started it all.
What can I say that hasn't already been said? Gollum is amazing. There is very little I could complain about. I think Andy Serkis was unbelievable, especially after seeing his work on TTT EE featureate. If you haven't watched the piece on Gollum on the extended edition you should log out, go get it, and watch it. Now!
By the way, feel free to go back to an old character and comment. I'm glad to see people doing this and having some interest. Just another way to kill the time until RotK.
[ November 24, 2003, 11:14 AM: Message edited by: beatnix19 ]
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
Reading the book, I didn't once feel sorry for Gollum. But when I first saw the conversation with himself, and saying "I hate you," I started crying. It totally made me see him in a new light. I thought Andy was amazing, and should have been nominated for the oscar. He acted in every scene, even if he was CG in the final cut.
[ November 22, 2003, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: sarcasticmuppet ]
Posted by Jexxster (Member # 5293) on :
Wow, jumping in late here.
Gollum: Phenomenal. I, too, was moved by his arguments with himself. I genuinely felt pity for Smeagol. The way he moves, the way he talks, everything was perfect. And the look he tosses Sam in the ROTK trailer gives my goosebumps it is so evil.
Gandalf: Unfortunately I will never, ever be able to see Gandalf as anything other than Ian McKellan, his performance has been so on, so perfect, so inspired. The decision to cast him was fantastic. He has the right mix of majesty and humanity to carry the rest on his shoulders.
Frodo: I wasn't really familiar with Elijah Wood, so I went into FOTR pretty naive. And I have been really impressed with the choice. He does a fine job (though Frodo is hardly one of my favorite characters).
Bilbo: Magnificent. That is all there is to say about that one.
I do feel the need to mention Sam though, as any discussion of those "affected by the ring" would be incomplete without him. Afterall, he was a "Ring Bearer".
I have always thought that Sam was one of, if not the, most important characters in the books. Without him Frodo never would make it. Sam just does so much and embodies the resilient spirit. And Sean Astin has borne that responsibility admirably. He has brought a real sense of freindship and love to the role, things that could have come off as "corny" if not done right.
I can hardly wait for ROTK!
Posted by Maccabeus (Member # 3051) on :
Doesn't Tolkien suggest somewhere in his discussion of hobbit racial lines that the Baggins family has a strong strain of Fallohide, those being the ones who were most friendly with elves and looked something like them?
[ November 22, 2003, 08:42 PM: Message edited by: Maccabeus ]
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Gollum was totally awesome! I loved him in the books, and they did a wonderfull job with him in the movie. I used to think "gollum" was a gulping noise, but that hacking sound works, too. Sounds like an old geezer coughing up a hairball. I nearly died laughing when he argued with himself! It was great, but sad, too.
And it's "Serkis".
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
I don't rightly remember, Macc, but I do know that both Bilbo and Frodo were given the title "Elf-friend" by the elves, which is a big enough deal on it's own.
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
Yeah, I know when I was named elf-friend I went out on the town and celebrated.
That was a fun night.
--ApostleRadio
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
were you making fun of me?
[ November 22, 2003, 09:31 PM: Message edited by: sarcasticmuppet ]
Posted by JaneX (Member # 2026) on :
Andy Serkis should have won Best Supporting Actor at last year's Oscars. (Stupid Academy. ) He is absolutely amazing as Gollum.
Catching up on the ones I missed: Ian Holm is wonderful as Bilbo. And I was a little doubtful about Elijah Wood at first, but he's definitely getting better as the movies progress.
~Jane~
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
Only halfway and all in good fun.
Posted by raphael (Member # 5870) on :
gollum's eyes really disturb me. the're really freaky! and why do they have to be blue???-did anyone notice that EVERYONES EYES ARE BLUE??? (well-not sam's,and legolas has grey...)
Posted by Julie (Member # 5580) on :
Someone's a little paranoid. I like gollum. I think he's incredibly well animated/generated/whatever. Andy Sirkus does a great job with the voice, he's perfect. I love the fact that they actually have him act out all of the scenes so that the movements are realistic and the enviroment reacts back (ie water splashes, grass and bushes move, etc).
Posted by Wussy Actor (Member # 5937) on :
I think this series may be one of the most well cast movies of all time. I can’t really imagine any of the roles being done much better than they were with the exception of Faramir. Okay, I know I’m jumping the gun a little here, but was anyone else disappointed with that guy? I don’t remember Faramir being such a weasel. I was also a little nervous about Viggo Mortenson as Aragorn. I pictured Aragorn as tall and noble, not short and greasy, but He quickly made a believer out of me. Holme, Mackellan, Wood, and most certainly Serkis were brilliant.
Posted by Amka (Member # 690) on :
What the actor did as Faramir and what was written for him are two different things. Anyway, go see the extended edition. It explains Faramir so much better.
I understand why they went in that direction. My love for Tolkien aside, and for how Faramir's character is in the book, I think this is much more dynamic and interesting than it would have been if Faramir had been completely good in the movie. In the end, with even more pressure than any other human as we see in TTT:EE, he still rejects the ring. And it seemed more remarkable than if he'd never been tempted at all.
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
The reason Gollum's eyes are blue is because Andy Serkis' eyes are blue. If you've ever seen him, he has the EXACT SAME EYES AS GOLLUM. It's freaky... I shivered.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
You're all crazy, Gollum's conversation with himself was funny not sad. It was comic relief not a touching moment.
On the other hand, the Bilbo going monster thing was downright scary.
I can't wait until RotK.
Posted by raphael (Member # 5870) on :
about gollum, i got such a better picture of him in the movie. in the book i just hated him and never felt sorry for him at all but the way he acts in TTT is just superb!i realy liked him and felt horrible when his "dark side" takes over him
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
No one else could do Gandalf as well as Ian McKellen has. He's perfect for the part.
I loved Gollum in Two Towers. Andy Serkis did an amazing job of making Gollum look real. I too did not feel any sympathy for Gollum/Smeagol in the book, but in the movie he was so much more sympathetic. I think that's one thing the movie did better than the book. Hats off to the computer animation crew for their work on Gollum. He's even better than I hoped he would be.
Posted by raphael (Member # 5870) on :
yep Posted by Julie (Member # 5580) on :
I don't know if there is a single actor in the movies that you could honestly say did a bad job with his/her role. Even the extras were awesome. I think the movies will sit alongside the books forever as timeless classics.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Next Character
Faramir - David Wenham
I figure since a few people have already talked about him we'll make it official.
At first I was really disapointed with this character. Not so much that David Wenham did a poor job but at the way the character was written. The moral fiber of Faramir was totally missing in the theatrical release. Then I saw the Exteneded Edition. IT WAS MUCH BETTER!!!!! (if you haven't seen it yet, go see it!) But anyways, Faramir has returned, in my mind, to the faramir of the books. The story differs a bit but in the end you see that Faramir is tempted, perhaps greater than any other man, and yet still refuses the ring. David did a fine job in portraying the role.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
The actor for Faramir has a huge shnoz.
Posted by kwsni (Member # 1831) on :
hail captain of the obvious.
You're right, Faramir in the EE is MUCH better than the one in the theatrical. I can't wait to see more interaction between him and Dethenor in Rotk.
edit: an aside on gollum's eyes. Olivet mentioned at wenchcon or at some point that gollum's blue eyes resemble a certain other blue-eyed hobbit's. Gollum's eyes haven't bothered me at all since then, though they did in the beginning.
Ni!
[ November 24, 2003, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: kwsni ]
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
I hear that Faramir's going to be heartbreaking in ROTK when he leads the suicide charge to prove himself to his idiot father. He's supposed to have a much bigger role. Should be fun. And, yeah, in the TT EE he's a lot more understandable. I remember seeing shots in the theatrical edition where he was looking away and thinking and I was like "There really should be a flashback here....." And in the EE there was.
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
Put a spoiler warning there, dude. There are some here who, strange as it may seem, have never read RotK.
Theatrical Faramir: didn't like how it was written, though I must say, he still did a fine job presenting the Faramir that was written for him.
EE Faramir: The extra scenes he is in is where I think he really shines in this movie, not just by what was written, but his acting was great as well. And yes, he has a huge nose. Get over it, you anti-huge nose people! Posted by Sugar+Spice (Member # 5874) on :
I actually find the guy who plays Faramir weirdly attractive - despite the huge nose. But then, maybe that's because he's playing Sean Bean's brother and I find Sean Bean weirdly attractive too. (Though neither of them are a patch on Aragorn). So the moral is, people with big noses - don't despair, some of us don't mind.
Posted by JaneX (Member # 2026) on :
I didn't like the way Faramir was portrayed in the theatrical version, either, and it had nothing to do with the acting. I didn't like it that he was basically Boromir all over again.
But since you all say he was so much better in the EE, I think I'll reserve judgment until I have time to watch mine.
~Jane~
Posted by WheatPuppet (Member # 5142) on :
Boromir was my favorite character in Fellowship, and I was sorta dissapointed that Faramir was so two-dimensional in the Theatrical Release, it was almost like he had PLOT DEVICE written on his forehead. I just saw the Extended Edition a few nights ago (and I indend to watch it again tomorrow night), and he's infinitely better. It posthumously furthers the character of Boromir and Faramir simultaneously, it also shows exactly why the Elves don't have any faith in the strength of Man, it shows a trend in two "normal" Man-types which I think is really cool.
I love watching the movie and reading all the subtleties in the characters. I don't know if Peter Jackson ever thought about this stuff, or if it's Tolkien showing through.
And I hate it when people declare Gollum as comic relief. What he's saying sounds funny, and he's talking in a funny voice, but I didn't think it was funny at all. It really shows how Gollum torments Smeagol and keeps him down, and how weak Gollum's psyche really is. My only wish is that they made Gollum a little better proportioned. The eyes are a little too big and the jaw a little too small.
P.S. Boromir owns your pants.
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
quote: Boromir owns your pants.
But... I thought I was only lending them to him.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Next ...
Samwise Gamgee - Sean Astin
Someone had made the comment earlier that Sam also was one of the Ring Bearers and should be included with the original four (Frodo, Bilbo, Gandalf, and Gollum). I agree that Sam has a very pivital role in the story but I for some reason still hold him on the outside of that group. Perhaps it is because he was a ring bearer for such a short amount of time. The others all had a long history with the ring and this is why I have them lumped together.
So anyways, I really liked Sean Astin as Sam. When I first heard that "Rudy" was going to be a hobbit I was very concerned. I didn't think he was going to be able to pull it off. The only thing I knew about him was his role as Mikey from the "Goonies" and the above mentioned Rudy. But then I saw FotR and I realized he was the best cast of the hobbits. In my opinion he looks just like Sam should look. He looks like I had always pictured hobbits to look. A bit stout, a bit simple (although simple probably isn't the right word) He has played the faithful servant very well.
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
For me, Samwise is THE hero of the Lord of Rings. That will possibly get gasps from some folks, but I have my reasons.
Yes, he was a ring bearer, but that only features into it a bit. The main reason is that when it comes down to it, he went through the worst of everything purely of his own free will.
Frodo had to go, no one else could bear the Ring for the trip. Aragorn was a king-in-waiting, his destiny was tied to the story. Gandalf was the Wizard and the one in the know, it was his job to see this through. Legolas and Gimli, along with Merry and Pippin, while important were assisting characters. Gollum was just the tragic figure who was integral to the back story and the final culmination.
Brave Samwise, though, endured because he believed in and loved Frodo and because he knew that the Ring had to be destroyed, no matter what. Time and time again, he could have walked away. He could have run in Moria, he could have let Frodo take off for Mordor solo, he could have panicked and left Frodo to the Orcs, he could have given up and quit carrying the near lifeless Frodo to Mt. Doom. And he never did. His loyalties, his strength of spirit and his hope for a better day held through when everything else collapsed.
Sean Astin was the perfect choice for Samwise. He has the look and the demeanor for the role, but it is in his work as an actor that it shines through. Barring Rudy and Dish Dogs , Astin has been the ultimate supporting actor, always generous with scenes and providing a solid ground for his co-stars to spring from. How does he do it? By living the character. I was told that from the beginning of filming, he lived the role of Samwise, taking care of Elijah Wood both on and off the set-- brought him his lunch, made sure he was comfortable, helped him with lines, etc... All because he felt that it was the core of his character and that in living it, he wouldn't be acting when he got on screen. It shows in a very delicate, yet powerful, piece of acting.
My biggest worry is that at Oscars time, Astin will be overlooked in favor of McKellan again. McKellan is an excellent actor, but his performance is nowhere as artful as Astin's. On the screen, we marvel at McKellan's rendition of wise and powerful Gandalf. When Astin is on screen, we see only Samwise. Astin's performance, to use a phrase, doesn't show us the zipper down the back of the costume. He isn't portraying a character, he IS the character.
On another strange note, I do feel that Samwise is actually the lead character of ROTK, but I'm betting that the Academy won't see it that way as most readers don't seem to, either.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Hmm, I'd say that Astin's performance is more touching and, yes, powerful than McKellen's, but not as artful. You just love Sam. Everyone loves Sam.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
quote:he went through the worst of everything purely of his own free will.
This is why I have always liked Sam. Although I hold him out of the group I mention above he still has always been the most interesting character for me. I think the scene that demonstares this best ...wait a minute
SPOILERS - for those who have not read and only watched the LotR
... is when Sam picks up Sting and the Ring and leaves Frodo to continue the mission. He has just lost the person whom he cares for more than anyother and yet he is determined to finish the quest. Not because it is his quest but because it was so important to Frodo. Most supporting characters/side kicks would wither and die when the main character is lost, so this also demonstrates how Sam is more than a supporting character.
END SPOILERS
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Yes, everyone loves Sam. He is so adorable.
I have had some discussions with writers about Sam. I believe, and others do too (I think even OSC), that Sam is actually the main character. I suck at explaining things, so just think about it.
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
I agree with Sopwith. Sam is the guy. The guy who does what has to be done, the guy that you can count on, the guy who'd give his last ounce of strength for someone he loves. The guy who would do the decent thing, even if it was hard. The guy who does everything with his whole heart, whether it's gardening, caring for Frodo, or bearing the ring.
He never loses hope, and all the evil he faces doesn't rob him of joy.
Sam is totally a hero. A real hero. Aragorn may be the hero we wish we were, but Sam is the hero that we could all be, if we wanted to.
I loves me Sam.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
quote:Sam is totally a hero. A real hero. Aragorn may be the hero we wish we were, but Sam is the hero that we could all be, if we wanted to.
I think all four of the hobbits function in this capacity. By the third book, all four of them have had deeply heroic moments, and yet they all remain accessible.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Yes, hobbits are very resiliant. Hobbits rock!
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
And that is the real secret to Tolkein's masterworks: it's not about the sweeping epic and armies on the march, it's about the wee folk who don't seem all that important until you realize that they are holding the whole world together.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
No Sam is not the main character. Ultimately, it is not Sam's heroism or anyone elses that saves the world. It is Frodo's mercy. Sam has heart and courage, but he lacks Frodo's wisdom. Sam makes the trip to Mordor out of love and loyalty to Frodo. Frodo goes because he knows it must be done and that no one else can do it.
In the end, it is Frodo who pays the ultimate price, the loss of self. It is Frodo who bares the wound that can not be healed. Frodo is in many ways a metaphor for the end of the third age. I would like to believe that when Frodo and Bilbo sail into the west, there is a magic there that is able to heal them, but in my heart I do not. When the elves leave for the west, there is a magic and beauty lost from middle earth that will never return. When Frodo accepts the burden of the ring, he sets foot on an inevitable path from which he can never fully return.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote: it's about the wee folk who don't seem all that important until you realize that they are holding the whole world together.
Exactly. The forces of evil always fail because they underestimate the power of small and simple things.
This is one of my sources of hope in life.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Has anyone ever noticed that there's always a hobbit in every part of the book? (except the three hunters when they were following Merry and Pippin) Wherever something happens in the book, a hobbit is there. Later they told each other their stories, and Sam wrote it down.
Tolkien was a genius. He was able to make all the bad guys big and scary by using characters who were small, and unnacustomed to the largeness of the world.
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
Sam isn't the "main character", but many people contend that he is the true hero of the story (including our beloved host, and hordes of lit crit folks (the wankers! There but for the grace of whatever...). He was there when Gandalf revealed the truth about the ring, he was at the council of Elrond, he looked in the mirror of Galadriel, etc. Truth is, Frodo wouldn't make it without Sam, mercy or not. Frodo gave his life, or at least all joy of it, but Sam restored the Shire
I'm not saying that Sam is definitively the 'hero' of LotR, just that the case could be made, based on the text. Though Frodo and his severe PTSD and consuming depression always had a certain romantic appeal for me, especially when I first read the books as an angsty teen, the Triumph of the Small holds more and more appeal for me as I age. go figger. Posted by Maccabeus (Member # 3051) on :
PTSD meaning what?
Posted by JaneX (Member # 2026) on :
Sam is the real hero of the story, IMO. He's also my favorite character. And Sean Astin is Sam. I was a bit skeptical at first, but as the story progresses, he's just becoming more and more like the Sam I know and love.
~Jane~
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
I dunno, I always pictured Laurence Fishburne as Sam. That guy just exudes good cheer and warmth.
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Sorry. Sometimes I forget that everyone doesn't have an older sister who's a therapist. I've been listening to psycho babble since I was ten. My sister decided she wanted to be a therapist when she fell for a family counsellor I was sent to when I was six (his conclusion- I was smart and bored with public school. Must've been right, because when I switched schools, I didn't beat anybody else up ). Anyway, from the time my sis took her first psych class, I was her guinea pig. Actually, I guess that explains a lot...
[ November 26, 2003, 09:59 AM: Message edited by: Olivet ]
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Some one else...
ok ladies, Aragorn - Viggo Mortenson
I have liked this choice form the beginning. Viggo Mortenson has played the part very well. I believe that he is torn between embracing and hiding from his destiny. He carries himself with a great sense of power and authority but also is approachable as a man's man.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
mmmm...Viggo Mortensen...
Let me just say that I think Viggo is a great guy. He's incredibly dedicated to everything he does, and he's really talented.
Back to Aragorn. I think he should've picked Eowyn. Ummm...I'm to distracted by how hot he is to think of anything else to say right now...
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
Viggo did a great job with Aragorn. The really hard thing is that its so hard to try to picture someone else in his role, that could have done a better job, which is a great thing to say, really.
Viggo just gives off an Aragorn aura in the movie. Watching the DVD's you can find that he was head on into it and did more than his best.
Also, I just thought that I should give a little nod to Aragorns costume designer, who I think did a great job for his costume.
Posted by JaneX (Member # 2026) on :
Viggo is awesome. He's doing a wonderful job as Aragorn. One of the things I really love about the books is Aragorn's gradual transformation, over the course of the story, from a Ranger who lives in the wilderness to a King of Men. And Viggo is capturing that transformation beautifully.
It also doesn't hurt that he's extremely hot.
~Jane~
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
I remember in FotR Viggo wanted to put all these little touches in the movie, like bringing a deer to the hobbits on their way to Rivindell and making up a melody to the Luthien song and singing it in one of the EE scenes...I thought that was awesome. He really captures Aragorn's spirit. And I must say, he is THE hottest of the fellowship...I'll take a real man over some pansy elf any day.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Orlando Bloom is hot, too; but not as hot as Viggo. Of course, Orlando was hotter in PotC, where he was a real man. I think Billy Boyd is really cute, too; and I just love his accent. He doesn't get enough credit.
Posted by hasdy (Member # 5905) on :
speaking of hot/cute..... Liv Tyler/Arwen... ooooh sooo delicious!!!
and dats all i haves to says about that!! Posted by Argèn†~ (Member # 4528) on :
Ian Holm was also in Greystoke's Tarzan. I'm watching it now. He was good in that, too.
Posted by Tristan (Member # 1670) on :
To me Viggo as Aragorn is just about the only character who doesn't mesh with my image from reading the books. He's not tall enough and he's not dark enough, and most importantly, he does not possess the natural authority that I've always imagined emanating from Aragorn. I have problems seeing him as a leader and thus the scene when the dying Boromir declared him his king did not ring true to me. Sure, they'll probably do their best to portray Aragorn as more kingly the longer he comes on his journey to Gondor, but I think they will have a hard time showing what's not there.
Posted by JaneX (Member # 2026) on :
I think he does have that natural authority. Even though he denies that he wants to be king, he seems to automatically slip into the leadership role in many situations. When Gandalf fell, for example, he took charge and told the Fellowship they needed to move on, just like he did in the books. And at Helm's Deep, too - even though technically Théoden was in charge, Aragorn was right out there giving instructions. And that's only two examples - there are many more.
~Jane~
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
But his taking charge was written into the book.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
One more for the ladies...
Legalos - Orlando Bloom
I really liked Orlando as Legalos. He certainly has a very elvish quality about him. He really plays the part with a lot of depth and sincerity.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Personally, I think Orlando Bloom is one of the most overrated actors of the past three years. I've always found his performances to be utterly wooden and hollow. I firmly believe that if he weren't so attractive no one would have given him a second glance.
Posted by Jenny Gardener (Member # 903) on :
I hate Orlando Bloom's portrayal of Legolas. He takes everything sexy out of the role for me. I expect to see his face alight whenever he is in the forest, and it is not. I expect a more mysterious, yet wise and otherworldly expression. Not this blankness, this vagueness. He looks very "pretty", but the sexual element is not there. I need fire to heat MY blood.
Sean Astin's Sam is so well done that you will never notice. His work is so sincere that you completely believe in Sam. He deserves an award for this part and will probably never get one.
Viggo is undeniably hot. He is playing his role with passion, and it shows. There are places where he comes through rather than Aragorn, but for the most part, a very good job. I like his character portrayal better in Fellowship than in Towers.
Boromir makes me feel tingly every time I see him on screen. It seems like he has a bit part, but his work sings in every scene.
Faramir seems boring to me. Not the intriguing, scholarly fellow I fell in love with when I was 12.
(edit to add: By the way, aren't legalos little building blocks? )
[ December 01, 2003, 01:05 PM: Message edited by: Jenny Gardener ]
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
*runs in thread* *swoons over legolas*
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
I went to see the first LOTR just after a nasty break up - I was in a 'I hate all men' mode.
When I came out I had shifted to a 'I hate all men but I love elves' mode.
I think Orlando Bloom was extremely good, which I admit is a view motivated mostly by his good looks. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Jenny! That's great! Legos - Legolas . . . .
There is a certain element of Elvish passion missing from him, I must admit. Haldir was far more convincing, I though. Ah, what a waste that was. And not even in the book, so sad . . .
Posted by JaneX (Member # 2026) on :
Orlando Bloom is very pretty, but I don't think he's a very good actor. He seems to only have one facial expression, no matter what mood he's supposed to be in.
~Jane~
Posted by kwsni (Member # 1831) on :
Silly Jane, orlando's got at least two facial expressions...Mildly confused, and mildly concerned.
Ni!
Posted by raphael (Member # 5870) on :
ahhhh! I can't bleive you people! I thought he was terrific (and beautiful )I also imagined elves expretions not to change at all (they never get surprised or anything and the don't show emotions ) so i though it was great.but thats just me.
Posted by Maccabeus (Member # 3051) on :
No, Raphael--that's those other people with pointy ears. Posted by raphael (Member # 5870) on :
hehehehe. for all you know my ears may be pointy.
Posted by Anna (Member # 2582) on :
quote: Haldir was far more convincing
Oh, I DO agree with that one Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Shan, Haldir was in the book, he just wasn't in it for very long.
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
He had at least 3 expressions in FotR:
Watchful,
Slight headache, and
BALROG.
In TT it was more like:
Watchful
Slight headache (Or stupid Aragorn, falling off cliffs!)
I'm not going to smack you but I really Want to
and,
Do me
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
I believe Haldir was insterted in order to fulfill the "Well someone has to die in an action movie" field, although why they didn't just beef up Hama's role, and have him die at Helm's Deep like in the book is beyond me. But they said that in the EE they wanted to have elves at Helm's Deep just to sort of please audiences, and that even Tolkein purists liked it and cheered when they came. I don't consider myself a "purist," but I wasn't terrifically pleased by that. Seemed kind've silly to me. But Haldir was their nominee, since they made him sort of like Aragorn's friend in FOTR.
Haldir had at least two more expressions that Legolas: dying, and then dead.
[ December 02, 2003, 01:15 PM: Message edited by: Book ]
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
saxon75 - I know he was in the book (LOTR/Fellowship) - i meant the scenes in TTT he wasn't in in the book - sorry i wasn't clear enough -
and i still think he was more convincing than Legolas
Olivet! "Do Me" What do you call the shield skateboarding scene?
[ December 02, 2003, 09:56 PM: Message edited by: Shan ]
Posted by kwsni (Member # 1831) on :
stupid?
Ni!
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
Shan-- That's one I'd forgotten. I think I'd call it Smug. Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
and what is with the whole stab-someone-with-an-arrow-and-then-shoot-that-same-arrow anyway?
Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
I love the look on his face that makes it seem like he is feeling something SO POWERFUL that it JUST might change his facial expression...but no. He can't let that happen. He must keep the SAME D@#% MEANINGFUL LOOK THROUGH THE WHOLE MOVIE!
Actually though, as much as I raz on him (he's hot) I actually think he quite fits the part (he's hot) in the movie. This is so because when I went back (he's hot) to read the books again, the only characters (he's hot) from the movie that stuck in (he's hot) my mind while I was reading were Sean Astin as Samwise, Ian McKellen as Gandalf, and Orlando Bloom (he's hot) as Legolas. Does that make sense? Posted by fiazko (Member # 5812) on :
narnia,
[edit: make sure you really look at who wrote the post you're responding to]
[ December 03, 2003, 01:27 AM: Message edited by: fiazko ]
Posted by fiazko (Member # 5812) on :
So do I get to be in the drooly club since I wouldn't buy The Two Towers book until I found the one with Legolas on the cover? (It was either him or Eowyn, and well, I'm a girl)
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I think part of the deal with Haldir and his troop in TTT was that PJ not only had to translate the book to film, but each film had to stand alone in case it was the first one of the movies a person saw. Just think of all the kids who will have turned 13 and can finally see it also, so people would know Legolas was part of a group of people and not a really eccentric long haired blond guy. This is also why Sam and Frodo go so far out of their way (I'm told, anyway) so that more screen time can be justified.
Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
Um someone spelled Legolas wrong! Some LOTR fans you guys are!
Posted by Trisha the Severe Hottie (Member # 6000) on :
Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm. That Legolas is tastier than a sweet potato pie.
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
"Spread him on a plate and sop him up with a biscuit"?
Narnia-- You said it, sister.
Actually, at first, I didn't think he was pretty enough to be Legolas. He has funny lips. But okay, I have changed my mind. Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
The only character that really disappointed me in the film was Elrond. He is is simply to ugly to be and elf and he comes across as grumpy rather than wise. He is simply all wrong.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
quote: Actually though, as much as I raz on him (he's hot) I actually think he quite fits the part (he's hot) in the movie. This is so because when I went back (he's hot) to read the books again, the only characters (he's hot) from the movie that stuck in (he's hot) my mind while I was reading were Sean Astin as Samwise, Ian McKellen as Gandalf, and Orlando Bloom (he's hot) as Legolas. Does that make sense?
Makes perfect sense (he's hot) to me.
quote: "Spread him on a plate and sop him up with a biscuit"?
*giggles uncontrollably*
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
I think the changes that Jackson made to the story, as well as some of his interpretations of story elements that he kept, show that 1.) he doesn't understand the story that well, and 2.) he doesn't believe that the story is good enough for people to enjoy it without changing it. I find both of those intolerable.
Still, hypocrite that I am, I'm still going to see RotK when it comes out.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
ok, enough with the drooling ladies...
Lets talk about Merry and Pippin - played by Dominic Monaghan and Billy Boyd
I thought these two guys were great. They definately showed the youthful and playful side Tolkien wrote. My only complaint would be at the end of TTT-EE were they giggled like a couple of stoners over the pipe weed. I don't remember the weed being that similar to "weed". But of course this complaint probably lies in the writing of the scene. Oh, well. Hobbits still rock!
[ December 03, 2003, 03:21 PM: Message edited by: beatnix19 ]
Posted by Jenny Gardener (Member # 903) on :
I saw the giggling as a letting go of stress. I, myself, have been known to act giddy after a very tense time. It's a perfectly human reaction. I honestly don't know why everyone thinks it's a marijuana thing.
And good luck keeping the ladies away! Billy Boyd's Pippin is extremely adorable, and Merry is pretty cool, too.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Wasn't Tobacco a new world contribution? My info is based on the musical Candid so take with a grain of salt.
That said, Tobacco is not without mind altering effects, though they are less publicized than Cannabis (weed weed, if you will).
Most of the people you see "on tobacco" are really used to it. Anyway, I haven't seen TTT EE so maybe you could give more details?
Edit: by the way, I'm not sure which one is the one I'm attracted to. The chiseled girly man one.
[ December 03, 2003, 03:35 PM: Message edited by: pooka ]
Posted by St. Yogi (Member # 5974) on :
Hey!
What about Gimli? You talked about Legaylas so its only proper to mention him. He's only the coolest character in the whole book (and movie).
Anyway, Merry and Pippin are two of my favourite characters(right behind all my other favourite characters, which I might add is basically everyone except Legolas). I think Billy Boyd and Dominique Monaghan were perfect for the roles.
Legolas on the other hand was played by Orlando Bloom. The worst actor ever. I mean: Run, run, run. Stop. Look straight into the camera and say: "They run as if the very whips of their masters were behind them." (look at the cool elf)
Also: Run, run, run. Stop. Look straight into the camera and say: "A red sun rises. Blood has been spilled this night." (I'm so cool)
They made Legolas into an Action Hero and reduced Gimli to a clown, with no other purpose than to provide comic relief. The only parts in which the real Gimli shines through is in the battle at Helm's Deep.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
I thought in the books the award for "Best Adventure" hands down, went to Merry and Pippin. They just did so much cool stuff. Dom and Bill really catch the spirit of Merry and Pippin. I think they're doing a great job. The only problem I have is I can't always tell which actor is Merry and which is Pippin. I think this is also related to the fact bookwise, I can't always tell Merry and Pippin apart. Fortunately, as they go their seperate ways in RotK I look forward to seeing that problem remedied.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
quote: The only problem I have is I can't always tell which actor is Merry and which is Pippin
It's all in the noses. Merry has a larger, sort of crooked nose and a jaw that doesn't exactly line up. Pippin has a thin, turning-up nose. I admit that their characters rarely show individual character traits.
I love Pippin and Merry in the movie. They make the movie for me, because they're so much fun in the face of so much evil and horror that is getting the rest of the characters down. I read an article that said the hobbits were 'filled with joy', and I think that Pippin and Merry (and Domonic M. and Billy B.) embody that perfectly.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
I loved Merry and Pippin in the movie, and I loved them in the book. I think they really brought out their comic side in the movie. And I think Billy Boyd is just too adorable for words. Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
I think he looks sort of like Eric Idle. And I thought their commentary in the EE was hilarious.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
Billy Boyd = "pissy legs" (that was in FotR EE)
Posted by MaydayDesiax (Member # 5012) on :
Pippin and Merry were my favorite characters in the book--always chipper no matter what, extremely mischevious, and standing tall in the face of the danger surrounding them.
Billy Boyd and Dominic Monaghan play these two perfectly, in my opinion. Their faces have the mischevious look to them, and when they're getting into trouble--especially Billy Boyd--their eyes twinkle and shine (case in point: FotR when they steal the fireworks. the look on their faces was priceless). They have the talent to really get into their characters, round them out and make them come alive.
[and I think that Billy Boyd is cuter than Orlando Bloom ]
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
quote: and I think that Billy Boyd is cuter than Orlando Bloom
MaydayDesiax, you are now on my list of cool people. Posted by MaydayDesiax (Member # 5012) on :
Just don't tell Bernard I said that. Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
We need a seperate topic. "LOTR Men and the Women Who Love Them."
Posted by kwsni (Member # 1831) on :
That's what the tavern is for.
Ni!
Posted by Craig Stiles (Member # 6003) on :
First of all I have to second St. Yogi in saying that you can't talk about Legolas wthout talking about Gimli. That has to be tomorrow's character.
Now, since I haevn't posted here before I'll start from the beginning.
Bilbo: Ian Holmes was perfect for that part. He gave the role that perfect balance of being slightly odd but good-hearted. Just what it needed.
Frodo: I was pretty skeptical when I heard Elijah Wood was playing Frodo, but after I saw FOTR I couldn't see anyone else in that part. I like how as the story progresses you can really tell that the ring is gradually wearing him down little by little.
Gandalf: Ian McKellan is Gandalf. That's all there is to it. Powerful, wise, and has a temper, but also compassionate. He's awesome.
Gollum: I don't know how to do this. There are no words to describe what an incredible accomplishment the character of Gollum is. From Andy Serkis' 150% performance of a character that wasn't even going to be him onscreen, to the writing of a wonderfully conflicted being, to the animators' landmark creation of the most visually believable CG character ever (due in grand part to actually putting Serkis' face and expressions into the CG), Gollum is just amazing. In the books Gollum seemed to me to be just a villain, but in the movie, he's an incredibly sympathetic character. You not only understand why Bilbo pitied him, you couldn't see it being any other way. I sure hope he gets an Oscar for ROTK.
Faramir: As far as the actor, David Wendham was a great choice because he really does look like Sean Bean's brother. I think he did a fine job with what he had. Now, when I first saw the movie in the theatre I was upset that they had changed his part so much to make him almost into a villain. However, to anyone who still thinks that about him: go watch the extended edition of Two Towers. It does so much better in explaining things, especially when dealing with Faramir. After seeing the Flashback scene in Osgiliath, I actually think the changes make Faramir more believable. Here he was, the unwanted son, and along comes the opportunity to do some good in his father's eyes that even the beloved Boromir couldn't do. Who wouldn't be tempted? Not to mention that the whole time they've been telling us how evil and seductive the ring is, it would defeat the whole point if he was able to reject it without a moment's thought. And in the end his true nature does come through and he defeats the temptation. I'm really excited to see his performance in ROTK.
Sam: Sam was my favorite character in the books, and Sean Astin has done a great job in bringing his optimism and courage and good old perseverance to life. "I want to hear more about Sam. Frodo wouldn't have gotten far without him."
Aragorn: Viggo Mortensen wasn't really how I pictured Aragorn in my mind, appearance-wise, but by the end of FOTR I couldn't see anyone else playing him. Another solid performance.
Legolas: Well, a lot of people have complained that Orlando Bloom doesn't give Legolas a whole lot of personality, and I agree... but I don't really mind. Because, quite frankly, he didn't have a whole lot of personality in the books, either. He was loyal, and fearless, and could see and hear more than anyone else, and that's pretty much it. I don't think he needs to be anything more than a really cool elf. As far as Orlando Bloom being the worst actor ever, I wouldn't go that far. I certainly don't think he's the best actor in the world, but he really hasn't been given any roles yet in which he actually needed to act. I mean, really, how much can you do when the script says "look around intently and say 'Orcs!'" every ten minutes or so? Give the guy a bit more time and then we can pass judgement on him.
Merry and Pippin: These guys are hilarious! And watching all the extras on the EE, Dominic Monaghan and Billy Boyd are just as funny in real life. Really, they didn't have to act at all. They just did all the same things on camera that they did off, only they were in costume. They really capture the true fun-loving, optimistic nature of hobbits.
Whew, that was a mouthful. Wait til tomorrow for the next character. (Gim-li, Gim-li, Gim-li!)
[ December 03, 2003, 11:03 PM: Message edited by: Craig Stiles ]
Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
quote: Gandalf: Ian McKellan is Gandalf. That's all there is to it. Powerful, wise, and has a temper, but also compassionate. He's awesome.
I completely agree.
My vote for best "I'm really the character in the book" performance would go to Sean Astin. He's truly exactly perfectly how I imagine Samwise to be...and he's also my favorite character in the whole shabang.
I can't wait for this movie!!
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
What was I thnking?
Gimli - played by John Ryhs-Davies
I wasn't really thinking when i skipped Gimli. In my mind he most definately belongs next to Legalos in all things.
I enjoyed John Rhys-Davies. I just don't remember Gimli being quite so humurous. But I thought the humur was fun and well done. He definately protrays the stout and dangerous fighter well also.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
What I didn't like was in the book dwarves were extremely strong and had a lot of stamina, and he's displayed as being quite silly in the movie at certain points in time, as though he's inferior to all the others. I guess I'm just bitching and moaning because I really liked the dwarves in the book... Whatever...
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
I missed talking about Pippin and that other guy while I had computer troubles.
I'd pick Billy Boyd over Orlando Bloom, too, even though that's really off topic.
I found Gimli utterly convincing. Of course, he's played by one of the best character actors around, so why wouldn't he be?
Rent the dungeons and Dragons movie-- it will remind you just how great LotR really is. The dwarf in that was everything Gimli is not (and I don't mean that in a good way).
You get the sense that Gimli is a real guy, with some hang ups and prejudices, to be sure. I just love 'im.
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
John Rhys-Davies has been doing an excellent job with the role of Gimli, but with the man's credentials how could one expect less?
Jackson did well in making Gimli the comic relief for the heroes trio because it was definitely needed between the ever-brooding Aragorn and "Is my hair perfect" Legolas of the endless quiver.
He did make some mistakes, though, mainly in continuity. For some reason, Gimli seems to have this magical ability to pull axes out of nowhere. One moment he has a long-hafted single-headed axe, the next a medium lengthed dual headed one, sometimes a shorter hatchet-like one. They never change during a scene, but between them, even though you never get a good look that he is carrying all three at any one time. Also, I wonder why he doesn't jingle, jangle and clang when he runs or is thrown, what with all of the axes and the armor he wears...
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
I recall him throwing an axe at the cave troll... I simply assumed that he got that off of a dead dwarf in the mines. But I have noticed his axe variations, yes, I thought that was kind've neat.
Also, did anyone notice that many or some of the riders had axes? Just to be a huge dork, I thought Tolkein said that an axe was no weapon for a rider, and by Tolkein, I actually mean Gimli said it, but you know what I'm getting at, here.
Posted by Eaquae Legit (Member # 3063) on :
*some spoliers*
Gollum was wonderful. Any Serkis could not have done a better job. But he always struck me as the most complicated (and pitiful) creature in the series. There's a passage in "The Stairs of Cirith Ungol" that really makes me sad every time I read it. It's where he looks like nothing more than "an old, tired hobbit," and then Sam wakes up and spoils it, permanently. It always struck me as a turning point in Gollum's character, and if Sam hadn't reacted the way he did, maybe Smeagol wouldn't have tried to give them to Shelob.
And Sam is still, I think, my favourite character. Even more than Smeagol, and that's saying something. Sean Astin is so perfect as him. And his characterization is spot on. I just hope they don't ruin him in the third movie the way they did with Faramir. That is my single biggest fear, that they will not let Sam give up the ring of his own free will. I think I might boycott if they mess this one up. But I loved it in TTT when Faramir asked him if he was Frodo's bodyguard and he come back with "His gardener." Just perfect, and totally Sam.
As for Gimli, he's a cool character, but I disliked the way PJ made him the comic relief in TTT. John Rhys-Davies did a wonderful job, and I won't forget my excitememnt three years ago when I saw the first spy-pictures and Gimli was in them.
[ December 05, 2003, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: Eaquae Legit ]
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
You are correct - Gimli was quite clear in the books that axes were not meant to be used in cavalry.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Last of the fellowship
Boromir -
To finish out the fellowship we have boromir. I really liked the character in the movie. He was everything daddy wanted him to be. A strong leader, Courageous, torn at by the ring. I think he did a great job of dying as well. His death scene in FOTR was my favorite scene in the entire movie. His redemption from his atack on Frodo, it was just awsome!
Posted by Beren One Hand (Member # 3403) on :
I have a lot of affection for Boromir's character because I think I would have acted the same way if I were in his position. Using the ring should be the last option, but to send it into Mordor, from a logical point of view, is pure madness.
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
Great character and well cast for the movie. Strong, powerful, a defender (only guy carrying a shield) and uniquely human. His battle and death scene in the movie moved me just as much as it did in the book.
Well done!
Posted by msquared (Member # 4484) on :
I love the extra scenes in TTT that show how close he is to his brother. Even he sees that his father is too hard on Faramir.
If things had been different I can see Boromir as the Steward with Faramir his strong right hand. Boromir, at least in the movies, knows where he is stronger and where his brother is stronger. They would have been one heck of a pair.
msquared
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Sean Bean was the bright, shining star in the performances of FotR, in my opinion. His portrayal of Boromir was the most layered, complex performance of the entire film. Ian McKellen was great, but I've never found the character of Gandalf as interesting, he's seemed flatter than some of the others, to me. Ian Holme was also great, and Bilbo (especially in LotR) is a much more complex character, but Jackson took a lot away from the character with that one scene where he turns into a little Gollum-looking monster. Bean was the only one that had both a truly complex character and a truly layered performance.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
I thought Viggo and Elijah both did well as far as layers go, too. Just can't get more angst-filled than that. Sometimes I wonder if Bean would have made a better Aragorn, though, since that was what he originally tried out for.
Posted by Jenny Gardener (Member # 903) on :
Boromir and Faramir - one heck of a pair!
I think I'll head back to the tavern now.
*fans self*
Posted by kwsni (Member # 1831) on :
I love Boromir, he's like the ultimate well intentioned man. Sean Bean did a beautiful job, he caught all of Boromir's passion for his home and his people. He was amazing in the TTT extended, both in his resentment towards Dethenor, and his love for Faramir.
I agree that Viggo's performance has been as layered as Sean Bean's, but Eliija's has been perhaps TOO angst filled. Frodo is at least a little decisive, and he can stand up for himself, too, instead of falling over everytime something scary happens. I know a lot of that's PJ's directing, but still. A hero can't fall down EVERY time.
Ni!
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
Elijah's just clumsy. He falls down in all his movies.
Um, I never liked Boromir, in the books (at least not until the end). I never saw the depth in the character until I saw Bean's performance. He made what was essentially a paste-board baddie waiting to happen and made a man of him. A likeable, understandable and beautifully flawwed one, at that.
Posted by Jenny Gardener (Member # 903) on :
And don't forget HOT!
Posted by Olivet (Member # 1104) on :
Yeah, yeah. I was trying to only drool in the tavern, though. Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
I've never been a fan of Elijah Wood as Frodo. Wood tends to play up the uncertain, young, vulnerable aspect of Frodo (which he does in all of his films), whereas I would prefer him to be more balanced. Frodo in the novels is uncertain, young and vulnerable, but he is also the eldest of the hobbits, deeply strong and dedicated at the core, and has something of a noble spirit. I don't see any of that in Wood's performance.
Viggo Mortensen was good as far as that goes, but Aragorn as a character has many of the same problems as Gandalf. He's not very complex, not very subtle. He's certainly not an accessible character; the very qualities that make him regal are what keeps us from getting close to him. Add that to the fact that Jackson decided to change the character and it makes for a movie experience that I just can't get excited about.
In general I think Jackson's weakness is the way in which he changed the story. Obviously, it is necessary to make cuts to a story the size of LotR in order to fit it into even 12 hours of film, but cuts and changes are very different. When you cut, you remove things that you can't fit in. It's lamentable, but inevitable. When you change the story, you are saying that you can do it better than the original author, that his story was weak and needs to be different.
You see this in his explanations for what he did with Aragorn, Arwen and Faramir. He made Aragorn less noble, less confident, less of a king in order to make him more accessible to the audience. That's the same reason he made Arwen into a fighting woman, and expanded the presence of her romance with Aragorn (which is relegated to an appendix in the book). And changing Aragorn meant that he had to also change Faramir, since it is crucial that Faramir not seem more noble and fair than Aragorn.
To me, changes like that show a profound disrespect to both the author and the audience. On the one hand, he claims that the author was not a good enough writer to create characters that people will care about. And on the other hand he doesn't think the audience will be patient enough to believe in or want to watch the characters as written. I firmly believe that if he had been more true to the characters, people would have been just as interested and involved, if not more so.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Hmm... Who next?
How about Saruman played by Christopher Lee?
again I really enjoyed his role. I think i like the fact that he is such a huge fan of the novel and is able to live out a dream by playing a roile in the movies. He definately gives his all in the role. Although this has been ranted about in other threads I am definately bummed his scenes were cut from RotK.
Edit: for brain fart (put down sauron instead of saruman)
[ December 10, 2003, 07:15 AM: Message edited by: beatnix19 ]
Posted by Maccabeus (Member # 3051) on :
I was disappointed by the changes in the character of Saruman. In the books, Saruman (apparently rather egomaniacal) believes he can rival Sauron himself. He creates his orcs to be his own army, not the Dark Lord's. He is trying to forge his own One Ring. Though not a good guy, he is by no means on Sauron's side.
But in the movie, Saruman becomes just another lackey cowed by Sauron's power. Though Lee played his role well, the role itself could have been better.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Thank you, Maccabeus.
Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
That one moment where he raises his eyebrowes after talking about the children.
That made me terrified of him.
Posted by Saruman (Member # 2275) on :
*write "Maccabeus" on list of people to kill*
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
Hmmm - as I recall from the books, Saruman (according to Gandalf) thought he was acting on his own, but in actuality had given over to despair at the lies Sauron was telling. So, perhaps unwittingly, he really did work for Sauron - plus, as was pointed out in the books (and I thin the extended version at one brief point) - anything dividing the defenders in their attempts to thwart Sauron was a plus for Sauron.
Saruman? Does that jive with your recollection, baby?
Boromir - sigh. Nummy. What else has he been in? (Stop gasping with shock ) And he definitely brought depth to the character that simply wasn't made plain in the books although much could be inferred.
I, too, was a wee distressed at the re-making of Arwen - and finally passed it off as a filmmaking ploy/necessity.
As far as some of the "unfamiliar" parts that might be considered a remake, read both The Silmarrilion and the ROTK Appendixes. I remember reading somewhere that both Jackson and cast really steeped themselves in the overall picture.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
quote:Hmmm - as I recall from the books, Saruman (according to Gandalf) thought he was acting on his own, but in actuality had given over to despair at the lies Sauron was telling. So, perhaps unwittingly, he really did work for Sauron - plus, as was pointed out in the books (and I thin the extended version at one brief point) - anything dividing the defenders in their attempts to thwart Sauron was a plus for Sauron.
My point is that the character of Saruman in the books is far more complex than the character in the films, and I think that the fact that Jackson "dumbed down" yet another important character is just another example of how little trust he has in either Tolkien or the audience.
quote:As far as some of the "unfamiliar" parts that might be considered a remake, read both The Silmarrilion and the ROTK Appendixes. I remember reading somewhere that both Jackson and cast really steeped themselves in the overall picture.
I've read both multiple times. Are you talking about the Arwen/Aragorn thing? See, to me it seems quite telling that Tolkien did not include that story as part of the main body of LotR, but rather, as an appendix. The Silmarillion was never meant to be published, and in fact was only published after J.R.R. had died. Many Tolkien scholars(?) don't even consider it to be canon, though that's really neither here nor there. The story did exist, insofar as Tolkien had thought it up, but he apparently did not think it, along with quite a lot of backstory, was important enough to include in his published work. I think that's an important point.
Posted by Saruman (Member # 2275) on :
Yeah, Shan, that sounds about right.
Sean Bean (the actor who plays Boromir) has also been in Goldeneye, the first James Bond movie with Pierce Brosnan. I can't think of anything else off the top of my head.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Heheheh.
He's been in a few other things, here and there
One of my favorites is the Sharpe's Rifle series of movies (based on the books by Cornwell).
Hmmm, I wonder where I can get my hands on the version of Anna Karenina he did. He'd make a good Vronsky, I think.
edit to add: he's a very solid actor that keeps close to his classical roots.
[ December 11, 2003, 12:05 PM: Message edited by: fugu13 ]
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Back to Aragorn, Sci Fi Channel just anounced the actor who plays Aragorn is up for a main part in the next Batman movie--as the villian.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
I certainly agree with you saxon, on the "dumbing down" of Saruman's role in the movie - and yes, I know the The Sil was published posthumously (along with numerous other works), but my point on that was that the director/actors were relying heavily on those items to fill in spots for moviegoers not familiar with the written works - whether we take it as gospel truth or not, THEY did and I think you need to take it into account when you critically review (critically meant in the analytical sense, not the negative sense) the movie and the cast/director presentation of various roles! Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Who's the bad guy in the next Batman movie? I heard it was the scarecrow.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
The last march of the ents!
Treebeard and the Ents
I know there are a lot of ent lovers out there and I certainly enjoyed them in the books but... the scenes with treebeard are my least favorite, visually, in the entire movie. I though the voice work done by John Rhys-Davies was good. It was very much as I had imagined it should be but the actually Ents themselves just looked way different then I had thought. The first time I watched TTT and every time since I have thought the Ents just don't flow very well. To me it just looks like blue screene work. I mean you can tell and it bugged me. Plus I was unhappy about the way they moved. I know it would have been very difficult to show the way Tolkien described them, with their legs unbending and stiff but because they don't look that way in the movies they have always just looked wrong. I know I'm kind of nit-picking here but this was one of the very few elements of the movies I didn't like very much.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
I think each of us had in our own mind the way we personally thought Tree-ents "looked" when we read the book. I doubt the movie represented any of our imaginations very well. The book allowed us the freedom to really create that picture in our mind uniquely.
I know my oldest son is especially fond of the Ents part of the story, and although he liked them okay in the movie, he too said they "moved" differently than he had pictured it, etc.
But BEFORE the movie, if you tried to get him to explain him vision of how Tree-Ents should be portrayed, he couldn't put it into words. I think it would be very difficult. We went into the movie having already discussed the fact that as a director, that would be one of the most difficult parts of the book to portray.
FG
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
Word to that.
Posted by kwsni (Member # 1831) on :
I had the same problems with the ents.
I think John Rys Davies did a good job with the voice, but whatever effect they did to it later makes it hard to understand. I would have rather heard it with out a bunch of interference. I always thought Treebeard's voice was like the bass at a concert, so deep you could feel it in your chest. This just didn't do it for me.
Billy and Dom did a great job acting with it, though.
Ni!
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
quote:I think you need to take it into account when you critically review . . . the movie and the cast/director presentation of various roles!
I disagree. The problem here is that there are two very different ways to view Tolkien's work, resulting in two very different ideas of what is important in the work.
On the one hand, the sheer volume of detail Tolkien created for his fantasy world is awe-inspiring. As you may know, Tolkien was a linguist, and LotR grew out of a linguistic experiment. This prompted him to create a whole history and pre-history for Middle-Earth. A lot of people see all of this and think, "Wow, this world is the most fascinating thing I've ever seen." And this is quite clearly how Jackson approached the project. You may not be able to tell from my responses in this thread, but I think that Jackson has done a masterful job at giving us Middle-Earth. I simply cannot imagine the world being brought to the screen in a better way.
On the other hand, the story that Tolkien wrote is moving, exciting, wise, and complex. He created a wide variety of characters, each with a distinct role and personality, giving pretty much everyone someone to be interested in or to identify with. Moreover, he was deeply familiar with the relationships between these characters, and understood how important that was for telling the story. A lot of people see all of this and say, "Wow, this is a well-constructed and important story." And this is much more how I approach the texts. I am very fascinated with the world as a phenomenon of its own, as an object of study. That's why I have bothered to read the Silmarillion and the appendices and several of the History of Middle-Earth books. But what really moves me, what really makes the novels important to me, what keeps bringing me back for more is the story.
Peter Jackson is a world-builder, not a story-teller. He looks at LotR and sees Middle-Earth, and is passionate about showing it to us. But he is so wrapped up in the technical details of the world that he never bothered to really understand the story or the characters in it. That's why he feels justified in making many of the changes he made; as long as we are getting a good sense of Middle-Earth and the sweeping scope of its history, the individual characters or events are not as important.
I strongly disagree with this approach to Tolkien's work. Tolkien knew what he was doing when he wrote LotR; he was writing a story. If all he had wanted to do was give us the world, he would have written an encyclopedia, or a history textbook, or a language reference, or maybe even a series of biographies. He wouldn't have written a novel.
So, I disagree that I need to take into consideration that Jackson and the cast consider the Silmarillion to be primary, because I disagree with the entire viewpoint from which the films were constructed.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
I remember watching something on the LotR website about the making of Fanghorn and ents, and the SFX guys said it was incredibly difficult to create ents because in essence, they are trees. Fantasy creatures like Balrogs or Fell Beasts are easy because it's basically the interpretation of the artists, but EVERYONE knows what a tree looks like, so in order to convince the audience, it HAS to look like a tree. They are already limited in what they can do with it.
That said, I thought the ents were pretty well done. They're not my favorite characters visually, but I thought the voice was well done. I didn't think the actual character development was done enough in the theatrical release, but I started tearing up when Treebeard talked about entlings and enwives in the EE. I thought some parts of it just made the ents look rediculous, but there were some golden moments.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
There is no single hero of LotR. The closest there is is Sam and Frodo, together.
Frodo was the once-in-an-Age hero, who by nature of the time he's in and the sacrifice required, loses the most. He gains the most too, incidentally-essentially gets to visit the Land of the Gods. While he'll never be totally whole and happy, that's not a bad perk, is it?
Sam is the everyday hero, the go-to guy like Olivet mentioned. He's the one we all can or could be, while only one in a million of us could be Frodo. Sam is also the one many of us want to be...while only a fool would *want* to be Frodo.
Posted by JaneX (Member # 2026) on :
quote:I think John Rys Davies did a good job with the voice, but whatever effect they did to it later makes it hard to understand. I would have rather heard it with out a bunch of interference. I always thought Treebeard's voice was like the bass at a concert, so deep you could feel it in your chest. This just didn't do it for me.
ITA.
And I didn't like the way they looked, either. The faces were okay, but the legs were way too long.
~Jane~
Posted by Jenny Gardener (Member # 903) on :
The eyes were wrong. I remember how in love I was with the Ents' eyes from Tolkien's work. Still am.
The eyes were wrong.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
Only three more days!
I'm too excited for Wednesday to think about anyone person or group of people. Or at least too excited to think of one to review so...
Lets review everyone, or anyone, or anything. If I've left out your favorite or you're least favorite, tells us about it. There are far too many characters left and far too few days in which to review them all. I'll just be patiently waiting for Wednesday! Thanks for everyone who wrote in and reiewed these awsome characters with me. In a small way it has helped pass the time for me so my goal was accomplished.
Posted by Anna (Member # 2582) on :
I'm too excited too ! We're going to watch it wednesday night, in original version of course. Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
What about Wormtongue? Did we do Grima Wormtongue yet? *shudders*
Posted by Ryuko (Member # 5125) on :
I'd like to put my vote for best choreography in TTT on the scene in which Faramir and his second spend a ton of time tapping the map. Tap the map!!!!
Map tappin's: 5
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Thursday - with a group of Beautiful People from church. Fun (cute guys), nerve-wracking (harsh girls), and irritating (one extraordinarily snobby long-timer), BUT it should be wonderful.
Friday - with a group of wonderful and geeky friends from work. Yay!
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
) He is absolutely amazing as Gollum.![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)