How much Frodo grew... - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Noxomanus · 07-12-2004, 03:08 AM

In my opinion,movie-Frodo did only grow in one way....he grew into the weakest and wimpest character of all. Everytime something happened he went unconscious or 'couldn't take it anymore'

Eomer of the Rohirrim · 07-12-2004, 05:59 AM

Basically, all he did in the movies was fall over, or faint, or come across like an idiot (Gollum's lembas saga).

I don't think he grew at all. Granted, Frodo is not an easy character to build on film, but he was still a disappointment.

elfwishes999 · 07-12-2004, 09:12 AM

frodo may have been weak but you have to remember he was carrying the ring and its powers were taking hold of him.. that and he was injured about 300 times during the trip to mordor and the climb to mount doom...so just because he passed out a few times doesn't mean he was the weakest character!!

Bêthberry · 07-12-2004, 10:37 AM

How much? Not much, given what Jackson and Wood and the script writers had to work with from the books.

He did diminish, though, didn't he, losing a finger.

The Only Real Estel · 07-12-2004, 01:21 PM

Quote:

In my opinion,movie-Frodo did only grow in one way....he grew into the weakest and wimpest character of all. Everytime something happened he went unconscious or 'couldn't take it anymore'

Sounds more to me like you're describing the side-affects of carrying the Ring farther & farther into Mordor instead of casting it away & sprinting for home like a weak, wimpy character would do who couldn't take it anymore.

I don't think that Frodo came across as growing a whole lot, you can attribute that to PJ or Wood or Phillipa or Fran, whoever you want, but Frodo seemed to grow stronger only minimully. The character who really growed in the movies was Sam, but that not particularily on topic

.

Fordim Hedgethistle · 07-12-2004, 01:24 PM

He grew precisely 2.3 cm.

(I measured.)

Umwë · 07-12-2004, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noxomanus

In my opinion,movie-Frodo did only grow in one way....he grew into the weakest and wimpest character of all. Everytime something happened he went unconscious or 'couldn't take it anymore'

Exactly my opinion too, I think he just grew weaker! After all he had the Ring, the Ring was a burden for him to carry.

Eomer of the Rohirrim · 07-12-2004, 05:32 PM

Exactly, most skilled Archer! It came too late in the day. Frodo could really have used some growth in The Two Towers.

Amanaduial the archer · 07-12-2004, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Exactly, most skilled Archer! It came too late in the day. Frodo could really have used some growth in The Two Towers.

Oh, I don't know about that, Eomer. It could have made it rather more difficult for them to slip past the Watchers later on if he grew any taller...

Umwe - you say you back the idea that Frodo should have been a weak character in the film due to his burden of carrying the ring?

I would actually disagree - the way Frodo came out as so very weak seemed, I thought, to make it less believable that he actually was able to carry the ring: surely if he was so weak he would have broken and given into it? I thought they could have played on his character growing to fight the effects of the ring - the ring must have grown on him with time, to strengthen it's effect, so one would think that he would have to grow accordingly to fight it's effects.

(Also Umwe, apologies for not getting the little dots over the 'e' in your name, I have given up trying to work out how to do them on a laptop - and it's a sort of case of start as you mean to go on)

Umwë · 07-13-2004, 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amanaduial the archer

Umwe - you say you back the idea that Frodo should have been a weak character in the film due to his burden of carrying the ring?

Yes, he is the weaker character, at least in the Return of the King. And that is because of the Ring. He grew weaker during the movies, from the start to the end. Yet he got braver even though the ring made him weaker both mental and physical. That's my point!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amanaduial the archer

(Also Umwe, apologies for not getting the little dots over the 'e' in your name, I have given up trying to work out how to do them on a laptop - and it's a sort of case of start as you mean to go on)

Hehe

That's allright :P

Rimbaud · 07-13-2004, 05:02 AM

..and the Bebe-licious One as well, of course.

I think the filmmakers did not achieve as intended with regard to character development; this is despite, ironically, upsetting Faramir purists, purely for the sake of 'character development'. This idea of 'growth' through a film has become an obsession for many filmmakers and studios, often to the detriment of movies where it isn't an apt element...but I digress. In this case, as I think has been tacitly accepted above, the true measure of personal growth, in the book, is through the hobbit Frodo.

A case can be made for that of Aragorn, yet it is nto half so finely a drawn development through the text.

Yet although a comparison between the film-Frodo of the opening to FOTR and the closing (one of the many endings

) to ROTK will show what would appear a distinct change in the character, that development is not linear through the film in the same way it is in the book.

In the film, from Weathertop, Frodo is essentially a constant sad-eyed victim; this is patently not the case through the remainder of the novel. This is a great pity, for there are many fine things about the films but this was a central tenet that they were obliged to 'get 'right', and rather reluctantly, I posit that the team did not.

Essex · 07-13-2004, 06:49 AM

For me Frodo did not show the same 'growth' as the other 3 hobbits. Remember they were younger than him. Hobbit's coming of age is 33.

When they set out

Frodo was 50
Merry 36
Sam 35
Pippin 28

(Note that Frodo was also older than Boromir, Faramir, Eomer and Eoywn).

Our coming of age is usually set at 18. Who is grown up at this age? VERY FEW. So Sam and Merry were barely adults, and technically Pippin was still a child. No wonder we can see their growth in the books and movies. Frodo was a more mature adult at 50.

So I put it to you, book wise, that Frodo himself had very little 'growing' to do as a character. He seems to me, in the book as well as the film, to be a character that seems fully developed once he leaves Bag End with the Ring.

In the film, I think we see him grow somewhat the second he says 'What must I do'. And the melancholy I always feel during Frodo's last scene in Bag End also shows film-wise to me how he has grown.

PS Amanaduial, copy and paste Umwë and it will work!

07-12-2004, 03:08 AM	#1
Noxomanus Wight Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Netherlands Posts: 233	In my opinion,movie-Frodo did only grow in one way....he grew into the weakest and wimpest character of all. Everytime something happened he went unconscious or 'couldn't take it anymore' __________________ Nothing is evil in the beginning,even Sauron wasn't

07-12-2004, 05:59 AM	#2
Eomer of the Rohirrim Auspicious Wraith Join Date: May 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 4,859	Basically, all he did in the movies was fall over, or faint, or come across like an idiot (Gollum's lembas saga). I don't think he grew at all. Granted, Frodo is not an easy character to build on film, but he was still a disappointment. __________________ Los Ingobernables de Harlond

07-12-2004, 09:12 AM	#3
elfwishes999 Animated Skeleton Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 37	yea but... frodo may have been weak but you have to remember he was carrying the ring and its powers were taking hold of him.. that and he was injured about 300 times during the trip to mordor and the climb to mount doom...so just because he passed out a few times doesn't mean he was the weakest character!!

07-12-2004, 05:32 PM	#8
Eomer of the Rohirrim Auspicious Wraith Join Date: May 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 4,859	Exactly, most skilled Archer! It came too late in the day. Frodo could really have used some growth in The Two Towers. __________________ Los Ingobernables de Harlond

07-13-2004, 05:02 AM	#11
Rimbaud The Perilous Poet Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Heart of the matter Posts: 1,062	With the cynics again... ..and the Bebe-licious One as well, of course. I think the filmmakers did not achieve as intended with regard to character development; this is despite, ironically, upsetting Faramir purists, purely for the sake of 'character development'. This idea of 'growth' through a film has become an obsession for many filmmakers and studios, often to the detriment of movies where it isn't an apt element...but I digress. In this case, as I think has been tacitly accepted above, the true measure of personal growth, in the book, is through the hobbit Frodo. A case can be made for that of Aragorn, yet it is nto half so finely a drawn development through the text. Yet although a comparison between the film-Frodo of the opening to FOTR and the closing (one of the many endings ) to ROTK will show what would appear a distinct change in the character, that development is not linear through the film in the same way it is in the book. In the film, from Weathertop, Frodo is essentially a constant sad-eyed victim; this is patently not the case through the remainder of the novel. This is a great pity, for there are many fine things about the films but this was a central tenet that they were obliged to 'get 'right', and rather reluctantly, I posit that the team did not. __________________ And all the rest is literature

07-12-2004, 10:37 AM	#4
Bêthberry Cryptic Aura Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 6,003	How much? Not much, given what Jackson and Wood and the script writers had to work with from the books. He did diminish, though, didn't he, losing a finger.

07-12-2004, 01:24 PM	#6
Fordim Hedgethistle Gibbering Gibbet Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Beyond cloud nine Posts: 1,844	He grew precisely 2.3 cm. (I measured.)

07-13-2004, 06:49 AM	#12
Essex Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Essex, England Posts: 886	For me Frodo did not show the same 'growth' as the other 3 hobbits. Remember they were younger than him. Hobbit's coming of age is 33. When they set out Frodo was 50 Merry 36 Sam 35 Pippin 28 (Note that Frodo was also older than Boromir, Faramir, Eomer and Eoywn). Our coming of age is usually set at 18. Who is grown up at this age? VERY FEW. So Sam and Merry were barely adults, and technically Pippin was still a child. No wonder we can see their growth in the books and movies. Frodo was a more mature adult at 50. So I put it to you, book wise, that Frodo himself had very little 'growing' to do as a character. He seems to me, in the book as well as the film, to be a character that seems fully developed once he leaves Bag End with the Ring. In the film, I think we see him grow somewhat the second he says 'What must I do'. And the melancholy I always feel during Frodo's last scene in Bag End also shows film-wise to me how he has grown. PS Amanaduial, copy and paste Umwë and it will work!