Opinions on the changes to Sam and Frodos relationship.

[The Saucepan Man]

Child ot the 7th Age made the excellent point in the "Downsizing Frodo" thread that Frodo banishing Sam is a logical extension of the development of Frodo in the film. He is not the same character as Frodo of the book by a long way. Accordingly, this scene does not (to my mind) seem out of place in the film. Like Lyta, I was far more irked by the fact that Sam actually went, since film Sam is far closer in character to book Sam, and so it seems out of character when we see him starting off home. As I have said elsewhere, I would have preferred to see him simply stay on the ledge in despair, and then make his mind up to follow. He does not need to find the Lembas, since he knows that he did not eat it, and it does not take much to work out that Gollum was the perpetrator.

Why did they taint Frodo's character by having him do this act? For a cliched comeback scene?

Quite often, the reason that something becaomes a "cliche" is because it works well. And I do think that the scenes where Frodo is alone in Shelob's lair, and Sam's later return, work very well on screen. Lyta put it very well, I think:

Having Sam leave for a time allows for Frodo's turn as the fly to Shelob's spider, increasing the tension to a breaking point as Frodo runs into web after web, barely escaping each time, until he is stung at the point when he thinks he is free. The cinematic effect is quite strong, and I can see why the scene is handled this way.

So, I don't have a problem with it as a device to split them up, and it works in terms of Frodo's "film persona". I only wish that Sam hadn't actually set off.