Movie Characters Revisited: Frodo

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Because sometimes Frodo resembles a girl more than Arwen does.

Let's differentiate between looks and mannerisms (and stereotypes). As someone stated earlier, I don't think that we'd consider Xena 'manly' just because she fights instead of waiting around to be rescued.

The issue with Frodo's mannerisms is that he doesn't seem to be or to want to be in charge of the situation. This behavior isn't to me masculine or feminine, but annoying.

Sure, he takes action when at the Council he accepts the burden of the Ring. But before and after that, he doesn't seem to be ratcheting up his will or resolve.

Guess what I'm looking for is a Frodo that's gonna go down swinging, whether he's falling from a horse at the Ford or fighting Gollum in Mordor.

Wasn't there a line from Sam about Gollum mistaking Frodo for being soft just because he's not pistol-whipping Gollum like Faramir?

Another thought: remember the scene in the Tower of Cirith Ungol? When Sam finally finds Frodo, and Frodo makes Sam aware that the quest had failed as he no longer had the Ring. I don't get the feeling that Frodo was considering a plan to get the Ring back, or to take out a few Morgul rats before being captured...no, he seems defeated and about to whine.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Can only concur with what's been said already. Not enough strength in movie-Frodo. Combined with some weird and displeasing plot changes, it doesn't paint a very flattering picture.

Also, he falls down too often. Way too often.

[Sarumian]

Should we take into account the fact that the book Frodo is a 50-year old hobbit (=40-year old man) who only looks 10 years younger than he is (thanks to the Ring) but still older then the rest of the hobbits. He is more experienced and superior to them in any respect. In the movie all hobbits look and act like teenagers; Sam seems to be even a bit more mature than Frodo.

[alatar]

Sarumian, much agreed. The movie and book ages of the Hobbits are not even close. That said, even though Frodo is probably younger in the movies (don't even get me started on timelines...), this fact doesn't give PJ cover for not having Frodo 'grow' during the movie.

Like at what scene/point do you feel like Frodo's in control, or taking an active part in his part of this long story? I'm sure that there must be a few examples (and I don't think that the Council is one of them)?

[Lalwendë]

So many good points here.

Frodo, while I can't hate him because he's Frodo and a Hobbit, is one of the more unappealing aspects of the films. He's not old enough, and the other three Hobbits seem to be older than he is. He's too 'girly' and 'dreamy'. I can perhaps see that they may have been aiming for the effect that Frodo is enraptured by 'faerie' and is a nice, quiet Hobbit, but he's also got nerve and isn't a pushover which is how he comes across in the films. Baggage indeed.

His eyes are strange, and it's something I've not been able to quite put my finger on about Elijah Wood that I do not like - he stares too much (I have the same feeling about Tobey Maguire and Tara Reid - they both un-nerve me).

He's also too posh and his accent is jarring when heard alongside the other Hobbits. Merry and Pippin are part of the very top layer of Shire society but they have completely different accents, Merry's being similar to Sam's, who is part of the labouring class.

There's something endearing about Elijah Wood's role, but looking at it critically, he is in the wrong role.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Not enough strength in movie-Frodo. Combined with some weird and displeasing plot changes, it doesn't paint a very flattering picture.

.

One of my friends read the books becuase she couldn't wait a year to find out what happened next and was absolutely astonished to find out that in the books Frodo was brave and noble. As she said in the film he was only ever running away.

[Lollipop010900]

I think that Ejihad Wood did a good job as an actor but i think it was the scripts fault that he didn't seem as courageous and brave as he was in the books. I think Tolkein would be ashamed.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

One of my friends read the books becuase she couldn't wait a year to find out what happened next and was absolutely astonished to find out that in the books Frodo was brave and noble. As she said in the film he was only ever running away.

And when he wasn't doing that, he was standing around looking bug-eyed and helpless.

[Morthoron]

The thing I take away from the movies is that Frodo is always pictured wide-eyed, whining, and moving in slow-motion. Check out how many shots of him are in slo-mo.

[Idril]

In short: I was nine years old when I watched Fellowship in theaters and I was twelve when I read the books. The movies take precedent with me not only because I saw them first, but because nine was such an impressionable age (as well as symbolic--the Nine Walkers/Wraiths).
So this is terribly plebeian, but I loved the movies and thought the casting was perfect (more or less). My main critique with Elijah Wood's portrayal of Frodo is, as everyone else has said, his effeminacy. Perhaps this is due less about Wood and his eyes and more about what they gave him in way of script? Frodo's weakness while roaming the wilderness in way to Mordor brings out Sam's steadfast hope and courage (as well as loyal dedication to his master). Frodo's lack of hobbit-hardiness after being stabbed by the Morgul-blade demonstrates the frightening strength of the Wraiths/Mordor (which never really came across to me in the books-- Frodo fought the poison for over two weeks). I think the only flaw in that way of scripting was the lack of balance. Frodo surpassed "human" and relatable to become weak. Thoughts?

Somebody already brought this up, but Frodo's age in the movies may have a little to do with his effeminate nature. In the books he begins his adventure soon after his 51st birthday. On screen he appears to be in his mid-20's, at most. Wood himself began filming when he was only eighteen. Although Frodo was in possession of the Ring and described as more than "well preserved," I'm sure PJ and the casting crew gave away the part intentionally. A 40+ year old actor with garish makeup isn't going to measure up to the spritely, wide-eyed Elijah Wood. I believe it also balanced out the ages of Merry and Pippin, who were two of Frodo's youngest cousins.

Two of my favorite parts in the movie:
1) When Gollum attacks Sam in Emyn Muil and Frodo reacquaints Gollum with Sting. That was beautifully done and almost word-for-word with the book. Frodo can be ferocious when he wants to.
2) Frodo vs. the Nazgul on the parapet of Osgiliath in TT. Brilliant cinematography, visually stunning. Canon with the book? No. I love it regardless. When the music cuts out and all you can hear is the sound of the Nazgul's wings and the whistle of the ring it almost steals your breath.

I'm rambling now, but my only real complaint with Frodo was how he left the Fellowship. In the book it is blatantly clear that he does it to protect his friends from turning on one another because of the Ring. A very noble sacrifice. Although we get that scene when Boromir tries to take the Ring by force, the exposition isn't long enough to where the audience understands Frodo's true intentions for leaving (even with the internal monologue from Gandalf).

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Too passive, and too young.

Frodo was, in the books, definitely older, wiser, and as CT puts it, "more long-headed" than the other hobbits. It's no accident at all that Tolkien made him the same age as Bilbo was at the time of his adventure, 50: a middle-aged bachelor getting set in his ways.

Movie-Frodo comes across as a teenage emo.