LotR1-FotR-Seq07

[Mister Underhill]

Sure, Aragorn leapt into the fray with torches -- but read on:

'Look!' he cried; and stooping he lifted from the ground a black cloak that had lain there hidden by the darkness. A foot above the lower hem there was a slash. 'This was the stroke of Frodo's sword,' he said. 'The only hurt that it did to his enemy, I fear; for it is unharmed, but all blades perish that pierce that dreadful King. More deadly to him was the name of Elbereth.'

There's not much exposition needed -- how much is in the book, really? A line of explanation from Strider, or a line about Elbereth tucked in somewhere earlier or later would easily suffice. And although Jackson here is as you say "partly" faithful to the books in terms of the events of the fight, he is not at all faithful to the character of Frodo. Which is more important?

Not sure what you mean by needing a fourteen day trip to the ford in order to have the line work.

[Essex]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

Sure, Aragorn leapt into the fray with torches -- but read on: There's not much exposition needed -- how much is in the book, really? A line of explanation from Strider, or a line about Elbereth tucked in somewhere earlier or later would easily suffice. And although Jackson here is as you say "partly" faithful to the books in terms of the events of the fight, he is not at all faithful to the character of Frodo. Which is more important?

Not sure what you mean by needing a fourteen day trip to the ford in order to have the line work.

with the exposition we would need a slow down of the film at this point. the way the film is running at this point, we have nearly reached the crescendo before the healing of Frodo at rivendell. to slow it down (ie have aragorn talking about the sword / nazgul cloak / elbereth's name etc) would have meant slowing the film down before arwen's chase scene.

the arwen/aragorn scene just worked anyway without slowing things to a halt - but at least this was not exposition - just the continuation of events - to have all the exposition about the sword / ring / wraiths etc would have jarred greatly cinematically wise and would not have worked - ie build the story up and up and then stop dead for some chat - it just would not have worked -

the only way TO make it work was to have all the exposition during the two weeks of travel before the Ford - now this would have meant seing Glorfindel 'in all his wrath' - but unfortunately we do not see this.

And although Jackson here is as you say "partly" faithful to the books in terms of the events of the fight, he is not at all faithful to the character of Frodo. Which is more important?

To me, Frodo's character in the books is all about his SUFFERING. it's not about his leadership, not about him standing up at the Ford or at Weathertop, not about him weeping or moaning or crying as some people put it - it's about the PAIN he goes through, and this culminates with his journey into the West for healing. This is what Frodo is about to me - And I believe this is what we see in Jackson's versions of the films - his suffering - and how close he came to death on certain occasions - now this is were Jackson comes up trumps.

We can see how close to death he was after the attack by the Witch King - so when people say his character has been 'lessened' - then yes, he sometimes doesn't 'stand up for himself' when he should, but by golly we see his suffering AND FINALLY HIS VICTORY IN SPITE OF IT which is the KEY aspect of his character throughout the books to me.

[Mister Underhill]

Originally Posted by Essex

To me, Frodo's character in the books is all about his SUFFERING.

Well, that's certainly an interesting take. Can Frodo's character and journey finally be summed up as endurance of suffering and pain?

This is an important topic because it goes to the heart of an adaptation and its success or failure. Frodo is the principal character of LotR; it would thus seem essential that the essence of his character and his journey be preserved in an adaptation.

I don't think it's only Frodo's suffering that makes him heroic. And I do think that his resistance to Evil, though ultimately not enough to overcome it, is an important step in his sanctification. Frodo comes to understand grace because he resists and then is pushed beyond his breaking point.

And anyway I guess I just hate to see Frodo so passive because that's not the Frodo I know. Frodo suffers mainly because of the choices he makes, not just because he happens to find himself in painful situations. Frodo, to me, is more about sacrifice than suffering per se.

to slow it down (ie have aragorn talking about the sword / nazgul cloak / elbereth's name etc) would have meant slowing the film down before arwen's chase scene.

Still not sure why you're convinced we'd need an extended explanation here. Aragorn's dialogue in the book is three sentences. I'm sure this could be compressed for film into a line or two. Are you really convinced that two lines of dialogue would bring the film's pace to a halt? I disagree.