Quote:
|
The movies give of a more sympathetic view of a nice little hobbit, living his own life, and he is thrust into an unfortunate situation that he loses control of. The Ring is a factor, but it is only half the story.
|
In the film we see Deagol get the ring. Smeagol simply has to look upon it and the worse side of his nature comes out very quickly. Within moments he has murdered.
Question: why was Deagol not so negatively impacted by his possession of the ring? Why later is Bilbo not suddenly turned evil when he gets the ring in his possession? Why is Frodo able to retain his essential goodness despite having the ring?
Perhaps the answer is in the character of the one who has it. Smeagol was most likely not a very nice person to begin with -- of course in the film we know nothing of his background -- but it is interesting that the appeal to his darker nature is instant while with the others it does not happen that way.
I do not think Jackson needed to have big arrows and neon signs or a five minute additional backstory telling us that Smeagol was not so good to begin with but it is implied when you contrast the behavior of the other ring holders.