Frodo's change from book to film

[FerniesApple]

Originally Posted by alatar

I wouldn't blame Elijah Wood for the failures of Frodo or the movies - that would be like blaming Hayden Christensen for the dreck that are the Star Wars prequels. Wood could only do what he was asked and what was in the script.

In other posts I renamed the movie Frodo as "Frodo Baggage," as the character always seems to be being carried by others. In the books he seems to be much more self-reliant.

What scenes from the movies or from the books do you feel show Frodo in a better light?

- Of course I like when he takes a swipe at the Witch-King on Weathertop.

- "Go back to the land of Mordor and follow me no more!" at the Fords of Bruinen.

- The scene where Frodo is shown to be both soft and stern (in Sam's eyes) when dealing with Gollum and the Ring.

- His shrewd interactions with Faramir.

In the movie I do like when he and Sam are awaiting death on Mount Doom, before the Eagles appear. The look on his face when the entire Minas Tirith crowd turns to him (and his three companions) is excellent.

Hayden Christensen is a Wooden actor, Wood can act and emote.
As for the 'Go back to the land of Mordor' its a bit silly, I didnt like it when I read it for the first time in the book. Its probably the only line in the Whole of the books that doesnt sit well for me. Soft and stern, yep he is like that in the film too. The only real difference between MF and BF are one or two ineffectual swipes at Ringwraiths, the lack of which does not mean that MF is suddenly a wimp. We didnt get the Barrow scenes so we dont know how that would have panned out.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

Hayden Christensen is a Wooden actor, Wood can act and emote.

That might be true, but one thing LotR had over the Prequels was not using green screen and tennis balls for every shoot (which might be why The Hobbit suffers so).

As for the 'Go back to the land of Mordor' its a bit silly, I didnt like it when I read it for the first time in the book. Its probably the only line in the Whole of the books that doesnt sit well for me.

To each his own. I'm just saying that BF is defying the enemy, not whining or simpering.

Soft and stern, yep he is like that in the film too. The only real difference between MF and BF are one or two ineffectual swipes at Ringwraiths, the lack of which does not mean that MF is suddenly a wimp.

Not really. Some top-of-mind examples (more in the SbS):

• Frodo did not look effectual when being manhandled by Strider in Bree.
• 'Give the Ring back to the baby' is what I see on Caradhras.
• His upper lip is not very stiff when suffering from the Nazgul wound.
• The Watcher wrings some more 'whine' out of MF.
• Begging Faramir to let him go, to the point of it looking like a tantrum.
• Almost giving the Ring to the Winged Nazgul in Osgiliath.
• Cirith Ungol and the lembas.
• The big swoon when 'hit' by the Eye light on Mordor.

I'm sure there are some scenes where MF shows some spine. Any examples?

[Nerwen]

I'm sure there are some scenes where MF shows some spine. Any examples?

There's the Council of Elrond scene, where everyone starts squabbling and he tells them to shut up.

- Incidentally, that scene is a pretty efficient bit of adaptation, considering how dialogue- and exposition-heavy the original is at that point. I mean, I don't know what's happened to the writers- these days they would have practically given it its own movie.

[Nerwen]

However–

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

I am trying to understand why the people on this forum seem to dislike Woods performance and am putting forward hypothetical reasons why. The 'characters actions or dialogue' and his acting are one and the same thing.

I don’t know what to say to this, except that– well, no they’re not. I mean unless you know for a fact that Wood himself wrote and directed every scene he was in? (For the record, I do actually think his performance was *part* of the problem.)

I am saying perhaps Wood has been misjudged by not 'looking' like people imagined Frodo from the books, and perhaps he has 'acted' in a manner unlike imagined from the books, but that is down to personal taste more than any serious flaws or deviations from the original. The message is the same even if the messenger is speaking in an unfamiliar accent. I dont think they did Frodo a disservice by making him gentler, I think it made him more interesting, but thats my personal opinion.

This… is another sticking point. Maybe we all need to define what we mean by words like “weak” or “gentle”, and also make it clearer what we're talking about. For you, I gather, the focus is on the presence or absence of "one or two ineffectual swipes at Ringwraiths” the lack of which makes Movie Frodo “gentler” in your eyes, and (you assume) “weak” in other peoples’. Also, you keep saying we’re just prejudiced against Wood’s personal appearance.

And yet, here is the actual list of complaints:

• The “Go home, Sam” scene
• General lack of initiative
• Powerlessness against the Ring
• Deviousness
• Lack of humour
• Whining
• Swooning
• And yes, finally, failure to defy the Ringwraiths at Weathetop and the Ford.

Now, obviously you don’t agree with any of this, and that’s fine. However, if you are indeed “trying to understand” other people’s reactions, I think you need to take more note of what they actually are.

[Morthoron]

There were any number of character assassinations in the movies, why should Frodo be any different? However, if you look at bitter "Arwen is dying" Elrond, maniacal and ignoble Denethor, and particularly "Show my quality" Faramir, I think they got an even rawer deal from the spurious script. The characters are Bizzaro World versions of Middle-earth characters.

[FerniesApple]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

However–

I don’t know what to say to this, except that– well, no they’re not. I mean unless you know for a fact that Wood himself wrote and directed every scene he was in? (For the record, I do actually think his performance was *part* of the problem.)


This… is another sticking point. Maybe we all need to define what we mean by words like “weak” or “gentle”, and also make it clearer what we're talking about. For you, I gather, the focus is on the presence or absence of "one or two ineffectual swipes at Ringwraiths” the lack of which makes Movie Frodo “gentler” in your eyes, and (you assume) “weak” in other peoples’. Also, you keep saying we’re just prejudiced against Wood’s personal appearance.

And yet, here is the actual list of complaints:

• The “Go home, Sam” scene
• General lack of initiative
• Powerlessness against the Ring
• Deviousness
• Lack of humour
• Whining
• Swooning
• And yes, finally, failure to defy the Ringwraiths at Weathetop and the Ford.

Now, obviously you don’t agree with any of this, and that’s fine. However, if you are indeed “trying to understand” other people’s reactions, I think you need to take more note of what they actually are.

the ''go home Sam'' scene makes him look more aggressive than he was in the book, so thats a bad example if you are saying it makes him look weak.
''general lack of initiative'' wrong again. After escaping Boromir Frodo decides to take the boat and go to Mordor alone without Sam, he also saves Sam from drowning. This shows great courage and initiative. you really need better examples of frodos weakness because I dont get it.
''powerlessness against the Ring'' thats a given, in the book or the films, its part of being a Ring bearer.
''whining'' this is more prejudice based on dislike of Woods performance rather than reality. Frodo doesnt whine, he suffers.
''swooning'' more prejudice, any so called 'feminine' behaviour like swooning is immediately ridiculed, like swooning from lack of food or exhaustion is somehow ridiculous.
this list of complaints are a bit flimsy.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

Frodo doesnt whine, he suffers.

Not as much as I while watching Wood's portrayal.

To me, 'book' Frodo does come across as patiently enduring mental and physical anguish. Film version always seemed to me to have a harassed and fretful air about him, as if to let the viewer know he was just carrying the Ring because he'd been bullied into it. And I just don't see book-Frodo's sense of humor displayed. Wood can't seem to forget about the Ring's terrible burden for an instant, even if Frodo in the book does on occasion.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

the ''go home Sam'' scene makes him look more aggressive than he was in the book, so thats a bad example if you are saying it makes him look weak.

My issue with that scene is that it makes no sense, but that's for another thread.

''general lack of initiative'' wrong again. After escaping Boromir Frodo decides to take the boat and go to Mordor alone without Sam, he also saves Sam from drowning. This shows great courage and initiative. you really need better examples of frodos weakness because I dont get it.

Okay. You show one example where I think we'd all agree that Frodo took action. What of the other scenes (plural) where he doesn't? You may not agree, but I see more scenes where Frodo's more 'along for the ride' than taking the reins in his own hands.

He did jump on the ferry boat on the way to Bree - forgot that one.

''powerlessness against the Ring'' thats a given, in the book or the films, its part of being a Ring bearer.

Agreed.

''whining'' this is more prejudice based on dislike of Woods performance rather than reality. Frodo doesnt whine, he suffers.

Maybe you see it that way. I don't. To me, 'whining' is when the person could take some action (other than vocalizing) that could change his/her state, but doesn't. This action typically would not take much effort. But there is zero effort and much vocalization, and so...whining.

Note that I did not mention a specific actor. Don't care if it's Wood, McKellen or Otto - whining's whining.

''swooning'' more prejudice, any so called 'feminine' behaviour like swooning is immediately ridiculed, like swooning from lack of food or exhaustion is somehow ridiculous.

In the scene I described Frodo swoons/faints/crumbles/folds/wilts/gets a case of the vapours/etc when the light of Sauron's Eye (ugh!) hits him. So, regardless of his physical state, it's the light that pushes him over some threshold.

It just looks seriously silly, as it's slightly slowed down as if it's something interesting and not sad.

this list of complaints are a bit flimsy.

Note that the thinnest lembas has two sides.

[FerniesApple]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Not as much as I while watching Wood's portrayal.

Film version always seemed to me to have a harassed and fretful air about him, as if to let the viewer know he was just carrying the Ring because he'd been bullied into it. .

erm thats called acting.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

erm thats called acting.

Well, he's not acting like Frodo. And that's what he was paid (handsomely) to do.

[Nerwen]

Can we just remember that this is the sort of topic on which nobody is ultimately "right" or "wrong"? Some people like Movie Frodo; some people don't, and it's unlikely that either side is going to convince the other.

With that in mind-

FerniesApple, my intention in making that list was not to "prove" that you're somehow wrong to prefer the film version of the character- because how can you be? I merely wanted to suggest that, since you *were* choosing to argue against the opposing view, it might be well to acknowledge that there had in fact been more than one point of criticism.

One thing I see confirmed here is that we are indeed defining terms differently. For me, the "go home" scene *is* an example of "weakness" in the sense of poor judgement and petulant self-indulgence. Now, of course you don't agree with this assessment, which, again, I'm perfectly okay with. The point is that we are *not* all making a simple equation of aggression with strength or gentleness with weakness, which is what you seem to assume.

On that note, will you *kindly* refrain from these accusations of "prejudice"? Apart from the fact that it's not even close to being a valid argument, I feel it's really raising the temperature of this discussion. Which, again, is about whether people like or don't like a film character- not exactly a matter of world-shaking importance.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

not exactly a matter of world-shaking importance.

Ya, it's just Frodo for gosh sakes...it's not like we're discussing Gandalf.

[FerniesApple]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Can we just remember that this is the sort of topic on which nobody is ultimately "right" or "wrong"? Some people like Movie Frodo; some people don't, and it's unlikely that either side is going to convince the other.

With that in mind-

FerniesApple, my intention in making that list was not to "prove" that you're somehow wrong to prefer the film version of the character- because how can you be? I merely wanted to suggest that, since you *were* choosing to argue against the opposing view, it might be well to acknowledge that there had in fact been more than one point of criticism.

One thing I see confirmed here is that we are indeed defining terms differently. For me, the "go home" scene *is* an example of "weakness" in the sense of poor judgement and petulant self-indulgence. Now, of course you don't agree with this assessment, which, again, I'm perfectly okay with. The point is that we are *not* all making a simple equation of aggression with strength or gentleness with weakness, which is what you seem to assume.

On that note, will you *kindly* refrain from these accusations of "prejudice"? Apart from the fact that it's not even close to being a valid argument, I feel it's really raising the temperature of this discussion. Which, again, is about whether people like or don't like a film character- not exactly a matter of world-shaking importance.

so basically you are telling me to shut up.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

so basically you are telling me to shut up.

Not shut up, Fernie, but "refrain". There is a decided difference, just as there are decided differences in the book and movie character, as well as the opinions regarding said character and the film alter-ego.

The topic has been discussed here for over a decade, and folks are quite set in their views.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

so basically you are telling me to shut up.

Hey FerniesApple, I'm sure that's not what Nerwen intended. I think that she was just trying to remind you (and the rest of us) that we are discussing movie characters, of which opinions might differ. Also Nerwen might be asking that we read what's actually presented in reply posts, and not to make assumptions.

Anyway, make and defend your arguments, please. I find that having a polite - though sometimes heated, especially if it involves Gandalf - discussion with someone with whom I disagree (as we might be doing here) is where I learn the most.

[Note that if you think that I'm not a movie fan now, you should have read my posts when it first came out! ]

[FerniesApple]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Not shut up, Fernie, but "refrain". There is a decided difference, just as there are decided differences in the book and movie character, as well as the opinions regarding said character and the film alter-ego.

The topic has been discussed here for over a decade, and folks are quite set in their views.

I dont do ''refrain''. Either its on or its off. I dont do wishywashy tip toeing. But I will bow out of the discussion. I got this kind of treatment ovr at TORn, didnt like it when they told me what I could and couldnt say, and I dont like it now. I dont like being policed.

The irony is over there it was the Jackson fanboys telling me to refrain.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

I dont do ''refrain''. Either its on or its off. I dont do wishywashy tip toeing. But I will bow out of the discussion. I got this kind of treatment ovr at TORn, didnt like it when they told me what I could and couldnt say, and I dont like it now. I dont like being policed.

The irony is over there it was the Jackson fanboys telling me to refrain.

So, let me get this straight, "fanboys" over at TORn suggested you refrain on their site. Obviously, attacking the films in one form or another. So what do you do? Come to the Downs and take an equal but opposite tack and defend the films, or at least a specific film role, deciding to describe as "flimsy" a poster's concern about the degradation of that role in the film as opposed to the book.

Is that about right? Tailor your rhetoric to annoy a specific audience?

Meh. Do what you like. But don't expect civility if, as you say, you don't care for "wishy-washy tiptoeing". Toes can get stepped on, particularly in a venue where words and tone are often misjudged.

[FerniesApple]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

So, let me get this straight, "fanboys" over at TORn suggested you refrain on their site. Obviously, attacking the films in one form or another. So what do you do? Come to the Downs and take an equal but opposite tack and defend the films, or at least a specific film role, deciding to describe as "flimsy" a poster's concern about the degradation of that role in the film as opposed to the book.

Is that about right? Tailor your rhetoric to annoy a specific audience?
.

No its NOT right, but thanks for the aggressive attitude.

I happen to love Jacksons LOTR but hate Jacksons Hobbit, so over at TORn I am persona non grata for daring to critisize The Hobbit, and persona non grata here for daring to defend LOTR. see its very simple, no need to get the hive mind on.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

I happen to love Jacksons LOTR but hate Jacksons Hobbit, so over at TORn I am persona non grata for daring to critisize The Hobbit, and persona non grata here for daring to defend LOTR. see its very simple, no need to get the hive mind on.

There are a lot of people here who like the LOTR movies; I would say they outnumber us critics.

It looks to me as if posters were responding to you by simply saying that ultimately a like/dislike of a particular actor's portrayal was a matter of opinion, which it certainly is.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

No its NOT right, but thanks for the aggressive attitude.

I happen to love Jacksons LOTR but hate Jacksons Hobbit, so over at TORn I am persona non grata for daring to critisize The Hobbit, and persona non grata here for daring to defend LOTR. see its very simple, no need to get the hive mind on.

Hmmm...and you feel persecuted. You, of course, are as innocent as the driven snow. Whatever.

In any case, I do apologize for your feelings of inferiority and unease, and I welcome you to the Downs, where discussions are aggressively cordial.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

It looks to me as if posters were responding to you by simply saying that ultimately a like/dislike of a particular actor's portrayal was a matter of opinion, which it certainly is.

I can prove it with mathematics, but it'd bore everyone to tears.

But...as the equation clearly shows, Frodo's Hurinness is dependent on the Gandalf/Istari wand ratio, and because Gandalf's character in the film is weaker (he is proned by the Witch-King), Frodo's character is, as a result, lessened.

Q.E.D.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by FerniesApple

so basically you are telling me to shut up.

Where do you get that from? I *emphasised* the fact that I was quite okay with your having, and expressing, a different opinion; I just asked you to stop one specific thing- your repeated accusations of "prejudice", which are both needlessly offensive and a discussion-killer. And again, not actually an argument- besides, at this point I'm not even sure what I'm supposed to be "prejudiced" against. Elijah Wood? Swooning? Men? Women? Babies?

(I was, by the way, trying to give you an "out" by stressing that it's all subjective anyway, since it was looking to me as though you were rather floundering.)

Finally, a few posters disagreeing on a specific topic with you are not the "hive-mind" treating you as "persona non grata" for "daring to defend" something. They're just disagreeing with you. People have different points of view; that's life.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by alatar

But...as the equation clearly shows, Frodo's Hurinness is dependent on the Gandalf/Istari wand ratio, and because Gandalf's character in the film is weaker (he is proned by the Witch-King), Frodo's character is, as a result, lessened.

Math to me is nearly as maddening and inexplicable as the female gender.
But if you can put your prowess to the question of why the 'unfunny' factor of the films rises in direct proportion to the amount of effort PJ puts into 'lighthearted' moments, you'll be more esteemed than if you figured out this.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Math to me is nearly as maddening and inexplicable as the female gender.

Hey!

But if you can put your prowess to the question of why the 'unfunny' factor of the films rises in direct proportion to the amount of effort PJ puts into 'lighthearted' moments, you'll be more esteemed than if you figured out this.

Now, Fermat definitely belongs in Middle-earth, being one of history's great trolls. "Yeah, so I've got this marvellous proof, but I'm not going to tell you suckers what it is."

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Hey!

No offense! See? I've done it again.

[FerniesApple]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Hmmm...and you feel persecuted. You, of course, are as innocent as the driven snow. Whatever.

In any case, I do apologize for your feelings of inferiority and unease, and I welcome you to the Downs, where discussions are aggressively cordial.

oooh! supercilious and passive aggressive, and an insult thrown in for good measure!
I bet you post on TORn too, fit right in with the hivemind mentality warding off newcomers to your tiny world if they dont tow the party line. It makes for an interesting sociological experiment at the very least.
Ill just wait around a bit until someone mentions the word 'troll' that usually activates the drones to buzz around.

All because I voiced my opinion. weird. and a bit sad.

[FerniesApple]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Where do you get that from? I *emphasised* the fact that I was quite okay with your having, and expressing, a different opinion; I just asked you to stop one specific thing- your repeated accusations of "prejudice", which are both needlessly offensive and a discussion-killer. And again, not actually an argument- besides, at this point I'm not even sure what I'm supposed to be "prejudiced" against. Elijah Wood? Swooning? Men? Women? Babies?

(I was, by the way, trying to give you an "out" by stressing that it's all subjective anyway, since it was looking to me as though you were rather floundering.)

Finally, a few posters disagreeing on a specific topic with you are not the "hive-mind" treating you as "persona non grata" for "daring to defend" something. They're just disagreeing with you. People have different points of view; that's life.

You have absolutely no right to tell another adult how to phrase their opinions, people say things you dont like, thats life, I suggest you get over yourself.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Math to me is nearly as maddening and inexplicable as the female gender.

Might I suggest the repeated and frequent use of the following phrase, "Yes, dear."

But if you can put your prowess to the question of why the 'unfunny' factor of the films rises in direct proportion to the amount of effort PJ puts into 'lighthearted' moments, you'll be more esteemed than if you figured out this.

My issue with the films, stated repetitively, is that they could have been so much better had Jackson and company were simply consistent within the world that they created.

Some subtlety would help too, but I won't ask for too much.

[alatar]

Oh, and can we get back on topic?

Surely there are other forums and modalities available if we want to compliment each other...

Thought that this thread was about some hobbit named Frodo.

[Nerwen]

Fernie, whether or not you are in fact an adult, I have every right to ask you to be more civil.

And again- there is no "hive-mind". It's your behaviour that's getting you criticised now, not the fact that you happen to have a different opinion of a fictional character. Frankly, I suspect you know this and your claims of being persecuted by the "hive mind" are just a way of saving face, since your actual argument doesn't seem to be making much headway. But of course only you can know the truth of that.

[The Barrow-Wight]

This topic has been discussed enough for this go around.

Perhaps someone could start a different one and all of you could be less.... ummm ...whatever it is that's been going on in this thread.