Frodo v's Elijah

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Dragon Reborn

However the quote above can also be looked at in terms of Frodo's sensibility and wisdom. Compared to the other hobbits he is somewhat wiser, in both book and film. In this sense Elijah/PJ did a good job. They made an effort to make the other hobbits seem younger and spontaneous, which at the same time added humour to some scenes.

Dragon Reborn, I agree regarding Frodo looking older/wiser than the other three. It worked at times.

Watching FOTR EE as I write, I noticed that during the Balin Tomb fight that initially when the Orcs are entering the room, Frodo is the most surprised/worried/afraid of the four.

Also, in regards to my Weathertop "Waaa!" comment, to be more concise, in the books I never saw Frodo as anything other than a Hobbit, and would say that his 'voice' was always that of an adult. In the movie, however, in that particular scene (and elsewhere) I hear the hysterical cry of a child, so instead of thinking Hobbit, I think child. Couple this with PJ's belittling (sorry) of the Little Folk, and I don't see Frodo being in charge of his own fate.

Note that I thought that Elijah Wood's acting was fine, but again, he did what the directors wanted.

[Lyta_Underhill]

Also, in regards to my Weathertop "Waaa!" comment, to be more concise, in the books I never saw Frodo as anything other than a Hobbit, and would say that his 'voice' was always that of an adult. In the movie, however, in that particular scene (and elsewhere) I hear the hysterical cry of a child, so instead of thinking Hobbit, I think child. Couple this with PJ's belittling (sorry) of the Little Folk, and I don't see Frodo being in charge of his own fate.

I seem to recall a scene in the book from near Weathertop when Frodo is panicking in a manner reminiscent of what some here might term a "Waaa!" reaction. I don't have the books handy, but I can tell you Frodo was NOT composed or showing his older and wiser nature at this point! Also, I noticed all the hobbits voices seemed somewhat higher pitched than the humans' . I wondered about it at the time, thinking Billy Boyd had a particularly high voice, but I put it down to the shortening of vocal chords in a smaller statured humanoid being and thought no more of it. OK, I forgot Billy Boyd was human, and not Pippin the Hobbit, OK? Same with Elijah...but, as mark12_30 says so concisely above, he is not an identical copy of the printed page Frodo Baggins. I think every character suffers from this "shortening," but I can't bring myself to believe that the abridgment of Frodo Baggins makes Elijah less of an apt personification of the character in the context of the film. The Middle Earth of the movies is abridged, shortcuts taken, subtleties lost.

But I think that Frodo of the movies is no more or less a master of his fate than Tolkien's Frodo. They are both in the same boat. They both make the same decisions when those decisions are shown. (Keep in mind that I just assume they went through the Barrowdowns and saw old Tom, even if this wasn't shown!) It does not matter whether Frodo stabbed at the Witch King's feet and invoked Elbereth when we are considering large plot points. It would have made the character richer, but it was not included for one reason or another. In the end, any representation of the character of Frodo Baggins other than Tolkien's will fall short or at least be different enough to lend credence to the argument that it is a different character. Elijah Wood is not Frodo Baggins. But he does a good enough job of invoking the spirit of Mr. Baggins in many (but not all!) particulars to allow me to suspend disbelief and forgive him a few missteps. I remain indebted to the movie for making me go back and re-read the books and for opening my eyes to things I never considered when I first read them (but which had lain dormant in my attic-like brain all the same!)


Cheers!
Lyta

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Lyta_Underhill

But I think that Frodo of the movies is no more or less a master of his fate than Tolkien's Frodo. They are both in the same boat. They both make the same decisions when those decisions are shown. (Keep in mind that I just assume they went through the Barrowdowns and saw old Tom, even if this wasn't shown!) It does not matter whether Frodo stabbed at the Witch King's feet and invoked Elbereth when we are considering large plot points. It would have made the character richer, but it was not included for one reason or another. In the end, any representation of the character of Frodo Baggins other than Tolkien's will fall short or at least be different enough to lend credence to the argument that it is a different character. Elijah Wood is not Frodo Baggins. But he does a good enough job of invoking the spirit of Mr. Baggins in many (but not all!) particulars to allow me to suspend disbelief and forgive him a few missteps. I remain indebted to the movie for making me go back and re-read the books and for opening my eyes to things I never considered when I first read them (but which had lain dormant in my attic-like brain all the same!)

Thanks Lyta. Why the Movie-Frodo fails to appear to be in charge might be due to the 'missing scenes' in which Book-Frodo really asserts himself. In the Barrowdowns he could have cut and run, but didn't, and at the Fords he defies the Nine.

I would disagree in regards to Movie-Frodo's actions at Weathertop. Dropping his sword did not show courage but only helplessness and submission.

Note that I appreciate having the movies made, but if I were to have done them, they'd be much different - (a) no character would ever say, "She-Elf," and (b) they'd be terrible as I know nothing about movie making but only how to carp about the same.

[Snorri Swifthammer]

Originally Posted by alatar

(a) no character would ever say, "She-Elf,"

hear, hear!

[Lathriel]

Well, of course the book Frodo and movie Frodo can't be exactly the same because Frodo in the book has so much to him that it is difficult to portray everything.
Oh yes, part of all this eye rolling is also to show the audience who hasn't read the book how dangerous the ring is and trust me some people needed a LOT of convincing. (How many hours did I spend trying to tell my friends the ring was dangerous? I don't want to count)
I think that Elijah actually began to act better as the movies progressed cause I thought his acting was very good in ROTK. However the weathertop thing DID annoy me too.
As for Frodo being a victim. I remeber reading ROTK a few days ago and feeling incredibly sorry for Frodo as he was making his way through Mordor. (Tears were almost rolling across my cheeks) I think he is a victim but in the way of the ring. In the end the ring captures him, which is why he puts it on his finger at the cracks of Mount Doom. Doesn't all the sufferenig he has to go trough which is caused by the ring show that he is a victim. I think so. Same as with Gollum, he is still bound to the ring and therefore also becomes a victim because that bond becomes his death.
All in all I think Elijah did well with the material tha was given to him.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Lathriel

Well, of course the book Frodo and movie Frodo can't be exactly the same because Frodo in the book has so much to him that it is difficult to portray everything.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Lathriel

As for Frodo being a victim. I remeber reading ROTK a few days ago and feeling incredibly sorry for Frodo as he was making his way through Mordor. (Tears were almost rolling across my cheeks) I think he is a victim but in the way of the ring. In the end the ring captures him, which is why he puts it on his finger at the cracks of Mount Doom. Doesn't all the sufferenig he has to go trough which is caused by the ring show that he is a victim. I think so. Same as with Gollum, he is still bound to the ring and therefore also becomes a victim because that bond becomes his death.

Agreed. I think that in the books the progression from Shire Hobbit to Ring Zombie is slower and more consistent. In the movies Frodo starts looking like a Ring Zombie in TTT, but every now and then becomes lucid as needed. The "They're here..." line and the handing of the Ring to the flying Nazgul scene in Osgiliath were goofy. Frodo being beaten down by the Ring had to be shown, but I think that there may have been a better way to show the same without making Frodo seem helpless (except when he should be in Gorgoroth and on Mount Doom).

Originally Posted by Lathriel

All in all I think Elijah did well with the material tha was given to him.

Hopefully it's clear that I'm 100% in agreement.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Lathriel

All in all I think Elijah did well with the material tha was given to him.

On the whole, it is customary for people here to excuse performances that they did not like by reference to the material (aka the "blame it all on Jackson, Boyens and Walsh" approach). In general, I think that this approach is justified. For example, I think that John Noble turned in a great performance but, given the way the character was written, he was never going to be anything like the Denethor of the book.

There are, however, two notable exceptions to this in my view. Orlando Bloom's performance was good, but (largely in view of his inexperience) he appears poor next to such accomplished actors as Messrs McKellen, Hill, Bean and Rhys-Davies. I can't see that being any different, even had all his lines come straight from the book.

I would say the same about Elijah Wood, but for two things. First, he is a far more experienced actor than Orlando. And secondly, in view of the (to my mind) stunning performance that he turns in during in most of the Mount Doom/Sammath Naur scenes, it seems to me that he was more than capable of putting in a better performance throughout the entire film trilogy than he in fact did.

I agree that film Frodo is, in many respects, a markedly different character to book Frodo and that this accounts for many of the issues raised here. But I do think that he was capable of doing, and therefore should have done, better (regardless of the material).

[King of the North]

Even though I have a great amount of respect for Elijah and everyone else's hard work on the LotR Trilogy, I was sometimes annoyed by Elijah's performance, especially voice. But seeing as Mr. Wood put forth his hardest effort, I believe that his acting problems were mainly due to lack of experience and himself. He cant help the latter reason. Face it, at age 23 or so, u have a set voice, and a set voice for certain types of characters. But still, he was not entirely helpless. I personally admire and respect Frodo in the books because he is noble and wise beyond his years and race. In the movies, he is helpless and can't survive unless trusty Samwise is at his side. Whereas in the book, Frodo is above Sam in almost every way possible. When these movies first came out, I knew a few characters were going to not match the book, or be poorly portrayed. Movies will never be as good as the books they depict. But for the movie version, Elijah was good enough.