Huh? Relating To 5 Worst Characters

[Olorin]

I was looking through the "5 Worst Character" thread (by the way, good idea to who ever thought of it) and I saw names that I just didn't understand, or explanations that confused me. I was wondering if any of you could clarify what's so bad about some of these characters:
- Frodo
- Sam
- Legolas
- GANDALF!! (MY FAV!)
- Gaffer
- Tom Bombadil
- Galadriel
- Elrond
- Bilbo

Also, if I missed any that seems like it would go on this list, please go ahead and explain.

This is particularly mind boggling to me because there were a lot of the so-called "good guys" on the list, but not so many bad guys. I saw Gandalf was worse than Sauron or Melkor?! That just doesn't sit right with me. I know it's your prerogative to pick who ever you like, but a little explanation would be appreciated.

[Lëowen]

I think Frodo is on the list because of how annoying he got in RotK. The others I'm not sure of, but they're just opinions. You don't have to agree with them.

[ June 12, 2003: Message edited by: Lëowen ]

[Olorin]

I'm not saying that I need to agree with them, I was just wondering why peopel chose them over some "evil" people.

[Lëowen]

You would have to ask the people who said them. I'm really not sure about Legolas though, as he doesn't have much of a personality in the books.

[Trippo The Hippo]

Here are some of my feelings on why the characters got on there.

Tom Bombadil- I just feel like he is not explained well enough. Even some of our very smart downers don't have all the answers on this fellow.
Galadriel/Elrond- I have only read LotR, (my Silmarillion just came) and in LotR they are set up to be very respected characters, and I didn't feel that it was explained good enough why they were, except that they were old, wise, and owned a forest.

I think its important to remember that some of the reasons these characters are showing up is that they were not explained enough, or where not developed character wise. Also somne of these characters are coming on is they just annoyed people.

[MYyyPreciousSS]

This is particularly mind boggling to me because there were a lot of the so-called "good guys" on the list, but not so many bad guys. I saw Gandalf was worse than Sauron or Melkor?!

I'd just like to point out that whether the characters are "good" or "bad", doesn't really matter. I think it mainly comes down to the connection the reader gets between the character and themselves. Like i've heard people not like Frodo or Eowyn, because they thought they were annoying, but personally I can connect with them, and they are some of my fav characters. And like Trippo The Hippo said, a lot of it also has to do with the characters not being developed well enough.

Personally, I dont understand why these characters would be on the bottom of peoples lists. The only one that I could possible understand would be Tom Bombadil, just because he was a little to "cheery" for my taste, (even though I still found him interesting.)
So until someone that doesn't like one of the characters posts and explains their thoughts, I can't think of any others reasons why these characters would be unliked.

[ June 13, 2003: Message edited by: MYyyPreciousSS ]

[Meela]

Tom Bombadil just terrified me. I've been repulsed by him for as long as I can remember. I hate him for that personal reason, not for a book/movie related reason.

[Aragost]

I never liked Denethor, I thought he whined too much in the books. [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img]

[the guy who be short]

Aragost, tis not wise to say that on a thread with Meela on it.
I always loved Tom Bombadil, but i guess the lack of background is sort of annoying. I understand why people hate movie Frodo - what an idiot! He keeps holding out the ring for no reason!

[Meela]

Aragost, tis not wise to say that on a thread with Meela on it.

You all know me far too well

I didn't think he whined. Did the whole self-pity act a lot. Actually yes, he did whine. Like a petulant, bratty two year old. *aww's and falls in love all over again*

[Maikadilwen]

Sam is on my list and my reason for not liking him is, that he, in my opinion, probably is the most unrealistic character in the books, because he is so overly nice, loyal and faithful that it takes him to the point where he already has crossed the border to obsession.
And that I find very annoying!

[Finwe]

I think that's called love.

[Maikadilwen]

But close to sickening nonetheless, O High King of the Noldor. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

Apart from that, he helped destroy the One Ring and that goes very much against him as well. [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]

[ June 14, 2003: Message edited by: Maikadilwen ]

[Orofaniel]

I never liked Denethor, I thought he whined too much in the books

I totally agree with you!

I also think that he was mad, he burned himself! But I didn't like Boromir and Faramir either, well in other words; I disliked the whole family. I can't really say why, but I think Boromir was weak when he came near the ring. I got the impression that the ring took control easely over him. (I hope I'm not the only one...)

Frodo was alright in the book, but he has never been my favourite character.

I don't understand how people dislike Tom Bombadil, but I understand that people have different opinions.

Tom Bombadil- I just feel like he is not explained well enough. Even some of our very smart downers don't have all the answers on this fellow.

Tolkien wanted to have one characteer that was an "unsolved" mystery. This I found at Barrow Downs, about Tom Bombadi:

'Even in a mythical age there must be some enigmas, as there always are. Tom Bombadil is one (intentionally).' (JRR Tolkien, Letter #144)

And that's one of the reasons, probably the main reason, that I find him interesting. I also like him because of his boots!

[img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] Orofâniel

[Menelhachwen]

Hi everybody!

I don't really think that Tolkien developed any character very deeply, but I don't think it's a mistake or that he didn't know how to do it (as I read somewhere else ), I think he just wanted to show some archetypesand leave the rest to the readers' imagination.

[Trippo The Hippo]

I don't really think that Tolkien developed any character very deeply, but I don't think it's a mistake or that he didn't know how to do it (as I read somewhere else ), I think he just wanted to show some archetypesand leave the rest to the readers' imagination.

Thats your opinion and you are free to have it, but I think that if you look into what he wrote about Sam and Aragorn you see how deeply there character was developed, to the point that some wonder who the main character was in the books.

[Orofaniel]

Thats your opinion and you are free to have it, but I think that if you look into what he wrote about Sam and Aragorn you see how deeply there character was developed, to the point that some wonder who the main character was in the books.

Yeah, I agree with you. Some of the characters are developed to a point where you start wondering about who the main character really is. Then after reading LOTR I don't really see a "clear" main character. They ( the fellowship ) are all "main", I think. Well it was Frodo that was going to be the ring-bearer and cast it into the fire of Mount Doom ,but I feel that in different parts of the book it's discribed more of one character than another. In the Fellowship of the rings, Frodo is the main caharacter, with Sam. But when they start spiltting up, it gets more complicated .( at leats I think so) Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli becomes the main characters in book TTT, first book, because Tolkien only described their situation and their thoughts, we don't know what's happening to the others. When you come to TTT, book four, it's Frodo and Sam again. and so on...

Do anyone understand what I mean?

Well that's my opinion [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

Orofâniel [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

[dancing spawn of ungoliant]

i agree with Trippo The Hippo!
Tolkien spended almost his whole life with making middle-earth history, languanges and characters.
some describes of a few characters or tales are opposition to other describes because he really thought the whole fantasy world he had created.he changed some things but he died before his work was ready [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img]
some respect to his work(that lasted a lifetime...)
ok...a boring lecture? [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
oops!i missed the topic, sorry!!!

[ June 17, 2003: Message edited by: dancing spawn of ungoliant ]

[Galadrie1]

I don't know if I posted on the 5 Worst Characters thread, but if I did I'd have mentioned Sam for sure.

he is so overly nice, loyal and faithful that it takes him to the point where he already has crossed the border to obsession.
And that I find very annoying!

Here here, Maika! I really felt like punching him by the end of TTT and RotK. I also dislike him because he hates Gollum, and Gollum's the best. So there. [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

As for Tom Bombadil, he always kind of irratated me. I don't know why.... Maybe it was the constant singing. Or maybe I'm just insane. [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[ June 17, 2003: Message edited by: Galadrie1 ]

[Trippo The Hippo]

As for Tom Bombadil, he always kind of irratated me. I don't know why.... Maybe it was the constant singing. Or maybe I'm just insane.

Perhaps a little of both [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img] [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

[ June 17, 2003: Message edited by: Trippo The Hippo ]

[dancing spawn of ungoliant]

the most annoying character in the book is probably Ted (a hobbit).he is sooo self-satisfies with his dear Lotho-boss and Saruman [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img]
just can't stand him!

[Baran]

I dislike Sam because of the way he acted against Smeagol. And there was something about his attitude I didn't like.
And good/bad doesn't matter at all, interesting/uninteresting character does.

[Trippo The Hippo]

And good/bad doesn't matter at all, interesting/uninteresting character does.

I was going to say something like that but could not figure out how to put it. I agree.

[Duncariel]

But close to sickening nonetheless

Sam's love surprises me not. What surprises me is that that love is directed at Frodo, who, whenever he picks up his sword manages to drop it, get stabbed by a goblin or a ringwraith, or fall down. Pathetic, dontcha think?

[Idunn]

Duncariel wrote:

What surprises me is that that love is directed at Frodo

Personally speaking, it's not at all surprising. First of all, you don't choose the object of your affection, do you? It's a matter of feeling, not rational delibering after all. Besides, real love is built on ability to loving someone regardless of his or hers mistakes and drawbacks (which everyone has), not because of having some virtues.

And I don't agree with your opinion about Frodo. I believe that he definitely deserved to be loved. Not everyone is born to be a warrior. Frodo agreed to take the Ring to Mordor, which required a lot of courage, was merciful for Gollum and so on. I'm not going to count all his positive traits, but I think that I stated my point clearly. For me, Frodo is one of the best characters in the book.

[Meneltarmacil]

Wormtongue is the worst character IMO. He lets Saruman use him to corrupt Theoden and he even stalks Eowyn in the movie. But what's even worse about him is that he goes and cuts SARUMAN'S throat. He doesn't care about anyone or anything but himself and for that I think he's even worse than Sauron.

[dancing spawn of ungoliant]

i'm not arguing against your opinion, Meneltarmacil, but re-read from RotK how saruman treats him...i mean i kind of understand why he kills saruman but i think too that wormtongue certainly IS very, very annoying character