Book vs. Movie characters

[Lyta_Underhill]

Elijah Wood looks like a hobbit and he's a good actor, but I envision someone older for Frodo. Maybe they could have aged him so he looks older than Merry and Pippin. Also the victim image bothers me.

I actually didn't have a problem with how young Elijah Wood made Frodo look. It was how young he ACTED, and also, the structure of the movie was such that he could not have possibly been much older than Merry and Pippin. I can understand why they had to condense things like that and intro Sam and Merry and Pippin at Bilbo's party, but, of necessity, it makes Frodo MUCH younger in fact, rather than only in appearance. I don't see a cinematic way around this, unfortunately, unless you cast an older actor for Frodo, so that he's obviously older than the others. Tolkien's Frodo, however, looked like a young hobbit "just out of his tweens," a good description of Elijah.

Merry should have been more complex and mature than Pippin not tweeledee and tweedledum. Though a bit of that came out with the Ents. I thought Sean Astin's performance as Sam was wonderful.

I did notice a few things with Merry that correlate well with his character. He does seem to know where he's going! I don't have a clear memory of TTT right now, having seen it only once last year, but Fellowship includes Merry guiding them in their mad flight out of the Shire to Bucklebury Ferry and away from the pursuing Ringwraiths. He was, after all, the instigator of the "conspiracy" to help Frodo out in the early parts of FOTR! It would have been interesting to have the part where Merry gets the black breath in Bree included, but of course, there's no good cinematic way to include it IMO. That would have given resonance to the upcoming ROTK encounter with the Witch King at Pelennor Fields, but, alas, resonance is most often in the mind and recollection in the film! I do agree that Sean Astin IS Sam! Sean Astin and Ian McKellen really embody their characters wonderfully!

As for Aragorn, I think there is a definite undercurrent of indecisiveness that I've detected upon repeated readings of LOTR. Perhaps it is just a foreknowledge now; Aragorn prefers to go to Minas Tirith when the Fellowship must choose between the East and West paths in FOTR, but he is conflicted, because he is determined to follow whereever Frodo goes. If Frodo says "I'm going to Mordor," then Aragorn is determined to go that way. He feels a responsibility to the Ringbearer and the Quest, and doesn't grasp the fullness of his own quest and his own responsibility to the line of Elendil and Isildur. If Aragorn had not done things the way he did; if he had taken the road with Frodo, he might have returned to the kingship of Gondor, but it is much less likely the people would have accepted him. Also it is very likely, Minas Tirith would have been in even worse shape and his coming too late and too little. So, yes, I can really see the conflict inherent in Aragorn's position, and it is beautiful the serendipitous way it works out. Aragorn's choice is made for him when Frodo leaves surrepitiously, and his path takes him to Minas Tirith by the Paths of the Dead and helps to drive off the force besieging Gondor. Who could have predicted it would work out that way?

Viggo does a wonderful job of portraying outwardly this conflict, but it is shown more obviously in the movie, as there is less time to unfold the story before the audience. I did wonder about the "I let Frodo go" part, since this was definitely not his spirit in the book and seems to imply more of a decisive attitude than he had at this point in the book. I must also say that Viggo has grown on me (not literally! [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] ) and I watch certain parts of FOTR over and over just to hear him talk!

OK, I suppose this post has turned into a short tome on Aragorn! There are no thoughts left in my head, so I will end the post and retire! Thanks for your indulgence!

Cheers,
Lyta