Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alatar
And Essex (and others), why do you suppose that Aragorn is portrayed thus? I not going to concede 'material' yet. Was Boromir's part enhanced as his was the shortest for the trilogy? Is Sean Bean just 'better' at getting what he wants out of the script/script writers? Or did PJ want to make Boromir a more sympathetic Judas-goat whereas Viggo's one note is to be 'from rags to riches'?
|
I would firstly vote for Seans' superior presence, but would readily admit, that Mr. Bean
had a better-built role with better chances of being credible. So, who knows?
Surely Boromir has been symphatized, a little bit at least. Although I'm not sure, which one has the more sympathetic look on him, Tolkien or Jackson. But a big difference comes with Aragorn - as has been eloquently argued on this discussion. I would just continue with my less eloquent babbling about Aragorns' inwardness in the movie. His real battles are inside him, so what the actor can actually do to express this, is mainly to stare half-focused to somewhere and look serious - shedding an occasional tear every once in a while. Not so much great drama, but succesful idols-posturing? Shouldn't blame Viggo, though. He did his best, I suppose.
A Great Actor might have some other options, at least with a help of
A Great Director, of course, but...