How much Frodo grew...

[Lalaith]

To go back to Essex's point about the ages of the hobbits and also that the 'coming of age' was 33. At the time of Tolkien's writing, our coming of age was actually 21.
So how would we translate the ages of our hobbits into 'man years'?
By my reckoning, the actors playing Merry and Sam should have been, or at least look, in their early twenties, and Pippin in his late teens.
Obviously Frodo should not look like a fifty-year-old man, but he should look older than the other hobbits, in his early thirties perhaps.
In the film, I think Pippin looked about right to me, but Merry and Sam were a shade too old and Frodo much, much too young.
And to go back to the original question of the thread (of course! ) movie-Frodo did grow somewhat, but should certainly not have started out giving the impression of being a schoolboy. Which, I agree, he did.
Because (as I said before somewhere else) would Gandalf, Galadriel and Elrond really have entrusted the most dangerous thing in middle-earth to a schoolboy?

[tar-ancalime]

This idea of 'growth' through a film has become an obsession for many filmmakers and studios, often to the detriment of movies where it isn't an apt element...

Yes! Thank you! Bravo! Well done! I concur! Lauds and acclamations!

I tried to make this point several weeks ago in a thread about Faramir but, sadly, no one wanted to play with me.

The obsession with "arc" totally denies the idea that there are other kinds of stories in the world--and it's one of the areas where I think PJ made his worst mistakes. Aragorn, Faramir, Frodo, Theoden--these are not characters in a romantic comedy who need two hours to figure out what they really want. But in each case, PJ inserted a story line to make them do just that.

In the books, it seems to me, Frodo's growth is subtle and often symbolic: he is continually given gifts throughout the story (the Ring, for one, then being named an Elf-Friend, then Sting and the mithril coat, then the Light of Earendil), and he's also injured or attacked continually, and each time he comes through an injury or is given another gift, it shows his growth. In the movies, these things happen but their significance is diminished by Frodo's constant appearance after Weathertop (I think I"m agreeing with Rimbaud again here) as a head-lolling, pale-faced Ring vehicle.

[Essex]

tar-ancalime, I think the problem one has in converting book to MOVIE nesessitates Frodo as "head-lolling, pale-faced" after Weathertop is that how can we show Frodo gradually declining in health over a 12 day period in a 3 hour movie? It's impossible, and would kill the film.

Over the past 3 years, in discussions on these type of websites, and listening to the director/scriptwriters reasons, I'm begining to get an understanding of film making, and how a straight copy of book - movie would not work.

I'm putting together a script (purely for my own purposes of seing how hard it is) for a long winded series of LOTR, sticking as close to the text (and trying to use ALL of it) as possible. I'm also trying this without a NARRATOR'S voice, which makes it VERY difficult.

Just looking at the begining chapter, how do I show Bilbo welcoming Frodo into the fold without straying from the text? How do I show Frodo visiting different places, meeting with elves and dwarves after the Party and before Gandalf's 'final' visit? Indeed, how do I show the 17 year period between the Party and Bag End without a narration?

Jackson cleverly used narration where it was absolutely nessessary. ie the Prolouge, Gandalf's reading of the scrolls in minas tirith, and the "60 years Later" subtitle at the start of the film. They all worked. He could have put in "17 years later" to show the gap between party and leaving, but that would have looked silly.

And finally, to get back to my point, how could he have put "12 days later" before Arwen (Glorfindel) turned up?

PS Eomer, I think you're being a tad unfair to Elijah re:

Elijah Wood seemed to substitute scary eye movement in place of quality acting

I feel Mr Wood showed some of the best acting in the movies. So what if it is done with his face. All great actors are able to show a host of feelings/moods without having to say a word. Just look at Sir Ian's acting.

The tear on Frodo's face when he says 'here at the end of all things' makes me cry every time. Frodo crawling up the mountain. Frodo's look at the cracks of doom. Frodo realising the trouble he is in when he says "What must I do?" Frodo accepting the challenge "I will take the Ring". Frodo's snatching of the ring from Boromir. Frodo's smile at the start and begining of the movies. And most of all, the most scariest, atmospheric, well acted line in the movie: "I'm here, Sam" at the Sammath Naur. That line sends a shiver down my spine every time I hear it. Just listen to the inflections in his voice when he says it. Absolutely marvellous. And yes, he is good at rolling his eyes, but again, that's another sign of good acting. Anyway, end of rant!

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Essex, I appreciate that comment and I realise that my earlier post was unfair to Elijah Wood. I actually am not as hard on Elijah as that would suggest (certainly not as harsh as some other Downers). I agree that Elijah did display some quality acting, and I should have made that clear earlier. However, I maintain that the numerous 'eye movements' (these - ) were poor, and I do think that Frodo could have been a lot better.

I do think that this discussion becomes a microcosm for the whole film. I think Elijah was good, but not as good as he should have been. It's harsh to criticise such a good film, but compared to the visualisation I had in my mind, it was a poor imitation. This is an inevitable consequence of the project. I have great respect for everyone involved in the films, but this is not enough.

Talk about hard to please!

[tar-ancalime]

Essex, you're absolutely right that the filmmakers couldn't indicate the twelve-day interval without wasting a lot of time. Perhaps I was being a little harsh this morning.

Also, I understand that a movie adaptation can never be completely identical to a book--characters must say things in the movie that the author tells the reader directly in the book, and usually some elements must be omitted for time, simplicity, or other reasons. But I just don't see how it was helpful for PJ to invent new storylines and manufacture arcs for so many of the characters, when Tolkien provided so much material to begin with.

That sounds like a massive project you're undertaking! Good luck!

[Lalaith]

I'm with Rimbaud and tar-ancalime on the growth issue. Tar-ancalime, the movie changes you mention were precisely the ones that riled me most, and for exactly the reasons you mention. It's also all about this modern conviction that 'weak morals and purpose are interesting, strong morals and purpose are boring.' (Dear me, I sound like my own grandmother...)
So because weak = interesting, Frodo spends half the films rolling around in psychological agony or trying to give the ring to passing Nazgul, Faramir is tempted by the ring, Theoden sulks in his tent and Aragorn just wants to stay plain ol' Strider.

Ironically, when there really *is* character growth in the text (Merry and Pippin, Eowyn) it was disappointingly portrayed in the film: by confusing a carefree nature with plain stupidity (in the case of M&P); or by failing to show either the extent of the initial psychological problem or the happy final transformation (in the case of Eowyn).

(By the by, a friend who is a writer recently sent me the blurb for her new book which had a sentence something along the lines of "along the way X's journey becomes a personal voyage of discovery". I told her to take it out because it was cheesy and pedestrian, and she did. I feel I have struck a blow for the 'anti-growth' brigade.)

[Essex]

Lalaith, I think I can 'hear' jest in your last post, so I'll take what you said regarding

Frodo trying to give the ring to passing Nazgul, Faramir is tempted by the ring

with a pinch of salt, but:

Frodo was not giving the ring to the nazgul. I think he was being tempted/forced to put on the ring so that the Nazgul could 'see' him properly. (I still think this is one of the most weakest points in the film, and it really stinks!)

But Faramir WAS tempted by the Ring in the book. People are confusing Faramir dragging Frodo all the way to Osgilliath being wrong (which it was) with his 'temptation' being wrong (which was NOT).

Faramir is a man of his word. He said he would not pick up the 'thing' if it were lying on the highway BEFORE HE KNEW WHAT IT REALLY WAS, but then after finding out what is was by Sam's slip up (and Faramir's superb interrogation techniques) he then kept to his word. But he WAS tempted. Read the chapter again with this in mind, and I then hope you will agree with me. here's a quote to explain my point:

`So that is the answer to all the riddles! The One Ring that was thought to have perished from the world. And Boromir tried to take it by force? And you escaped? And ran all the way – to me! And here in the wild I have you: two halflings, and a host of men at my call, and the Ring of Rings. A pretty stroke of fortune! A chance for Faramir, Captain of Gondor, to show his quality! Ha!' He stood up, very tall and stern, his grey eyes glinting.
Frodo and Sam sprang from their stools and set themselves side by side with their backs to the wall, fumbling for their sword-hilts. There was a silence. All the men in the cave stopped talking and looked towards them in wonder. But Faramir sat down again in his chair and began to laugh quietly, and then suddenly became grave again.
'Alas for Boromir! It was too sore a trial! ' he said. `How you have increased my sorrow, you two strange wanderers from a far country, bearing the peril of Men! But you are less judges of Men than I of Halflings. We are truth-speakers, we men of Gondor. We boast seldom, and then perform, or die in the attempt._ Not if I found it on the highway would I take it_ I said. Even if I were such a man as to desire this thing, and even though I knew not clearly what this thing was when I spoke, still I should take those words as a vow, and be held by them.
'But I am not such a man. Or I am wise enough to know that there are some perils from which a man must flee. Sit at peace! And be comforted, Samwise. If you seem to have stumbled, think that it was fated to be so. Your heart is shrewd as well as faithful, and saw clearer than your eyes. For strange though it may seem, it was safe to declare this to me. It may even help the master that you love. It shall turn to his good, if it is in my power. So be comforted. But do not even name this thing again aloud. Once is enough.'

Hey, my post has gone off on a tangent again.

PS We mainly see Merry and Pippin's growth in the penultimate chapter of LOTR, ie the Scouring of the Shire. With Jackson's decision to remove this from the film, we, alas, do not see their and (to some extent) Sam's full growth. This is a pity.