# LOTR fail



## Shinigami357 (Nov 21, 2010)

Well, my net went bonkers, so I did what any discerning Temper would: I watched the LOTR movies in DVD  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 So, anyway, I was basically going nuts on the fight scenes (Legolas killing off that big elephant thingy and all the riders alone, just so imba) and nearly pulling my hair out every time Frodo shows up.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 The useless lump of a hobbit is, well, useless.

Let me enumerate:
1. all he's good at is cowering, whimpering (getting stabbed by ringwraiths??) etc
2. he trusts smeagle/gollum more than sam
3. dude's a coward (the other 3 Hobbits actually know how to fight for themselves, Frodo gets smothered by this big spider thing and that's the only real time he fights anything)
4. he actually tries to make off with the ring (good thing his finger got bitten off, serves him right)

Seriously, Gandalf was more useful dead than Frodo was when he was alive. Why Tolkien would make such a dbag/weakling/half-ass idiotic coward one of his main characters is beyond me.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 21, 2010)

Better than godmodding.


----------



## Snailface (Nov 21, 2010)

Frodo had to bear the burden of the One Ring, which, if you pay attention to the story, has a history of cursing the one who bears it. So yea, he had a very good excuse for being a scrub. (and a heroic, world-saving scrub he was, ultimately)


----------



## Shinigami357 (Nov 22, 2010)

Snailface said:
			
		

> Frodo had to bear the burden of the One Ring, which, if you pay attention to the story, has a history of cursing the one who bears it. So yea, he had a very good excuse for being a scrub. (and a heroic, world-saving scrub he was, ultimately)



LOL, The Burden of the One Ring. Lemme see... Well, the big baddie didn't have a problem with it, so that counts him out... Smeagle went crazy, so that's one for that theory, but Frodo's uncle was fine for years and years. Maybe it'd have been better if Frodo got some inner fiber from the old dude. I mean, he actually gave the ring to Gandalf when he was asked to, and then he went on his merry way. He gave it away and then walked away, see? Frodo tried to take it and had it bitten away. There's a difference


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Nov 22, 2010)

Shinigami357 said:
			
		

> 1. all he's good at is cowering, whimpering (getting stabbed by ringwraiths??) etc: *Frodo isn't meant to be a straight-up brave character. Unlike Sam, who grows into a brave character (and which is why I think he's the most interesting character in the series), Frodo only shows his bravery by constantly venturing forward and accepting his duty as the ring bearer.*
> 2. he trusts smeagle/gollum more than sam: *The Ring has incredible influence over him, and with Smeagel/Gollum having had the Ring for hundreds of years he knows exactly how to manipulate those who are enticed by it.*
> 3. dude's a coward (the other 3 Hobbits actually know how to fight for themselves, Frodo gets smothered by this big spider thing and that's the only real time he fights anything): *It's a big spider and he's a three foot tall, scared shitless Hobbit. Sam only scared it off enough because he didn't give up.*
> 4. he actually tries to make off with the ring (good thing his finger got bitten off, serves him right): *Again, the Ring has incredible influence. In the end it consumed Frodo and Frodo's will gave up; he could no longer resist. It was a miracle that he actually had the Ring all that time and only then got overcome by it; the last dude who got it to the mountain probably had for it a couple of hours and was consumed.*



I don't really see Frodo as a stupid character, he's just someone whose pulled from their ordinary and quiet life and tasked with doing something monumental. He's not a battle-hardened badass like Aragorn or Legolas. He's lived his entire life sheltered, and when you live a happy life and then suddenly get thrown into a battle by a bunch of Ringwraiths we'll see how brave you are.

EDIT: Derp typo.


----------



## Snailface (Nov 22, 2010)

Shinigami357 said:
			
		

> Snailface said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sauron did have a problem with the One Ring. He was slayed by Isildur while wielding it at the peak of his power. After cursing Isildur to his death, the spirit of Sauron and the Ring (which are one in the same according to Tolkien) lay dormant for many years. When Bilbo found the Ring and held it for many years, it hadn't fully started to seak out it's master, Sauron, and thus, wasn't at it's deadliest best.

Bilbo was very lucky (and pure of heart -- two known Hobbit perks) that he wielded the Ring in it's semi-dormant state. Frodo, on the other hand, was tasked with dealing with the Ring at it's full power, making his eventual success with destroying it (with a little Hobbit luck at Mt. Doom, of course) all the more remarkable. The below link explains Frodo's heroism in good detail.

Good Frodo Analysis Scroll down to Frodo.


----------



## Shinigami357 (Nov 22, 2010)

Guild McCommunist said:
			
		

> Shinigami357 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




But that is my point. I know that Frodo is this no-name Hobbit plucked from obscurity (aren't most literary heroes plucked from obscurity anyways?) and all that. But, the guy has no character progression, he just stays as a weak, scared Hobbit for the rest of the story. The least he can do is resist the ring, but he almost made off with it, and really, that takes away all his redeeming qualities. Seriously, aside from him being one of the core characters, there's nothing that even remotely makes him look good. Sam is a better character overall.


----------



## Snailface (Nov 22, 2010)

Shinigami357 said:
			
		

> Guild McCommunist said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think what you're trying to get at is that you didn't like Elijah Wood's performance of Frodo. Indeed, I thought he was a little too baby-faced for the role and his silly whimpering after being stabbed by the Witch-King was cringe-worthy. I guess we can agree on that, but I'm steadfast in praise for the character as Tolkien wrote him.
And, if you think about it, Elijah Wood could have been worse. Just ask Hayden Christensen . . .


----------



## Shinigami357 (Nov 22, 2010)

Snailface said:
			
		

> I think what you're trying to get at is that you didn't like Elijah Wood's performance of Frodo. Indeed, I thought he was a little too baby-faced for the role and his silly whimpering after being stabbed by the Witch-King was cringe-worthy. I guess we can agree on that, but I'm steadfast in praise for the character as Tolkien wrote him.
> And, if you think about it, Elijah Wood could have been worse. Just ask Hayden Christensen . . .



Come to think of it, that's prob a part of it. But really, I just dislike Frodo. Maybe I'll get my hands on the novel and see if that changes my view of it, but ?I think it unlikely.

EDIT:
Come to think of it, Sauron had the ring cut off with his finger too, right? The same thing happened to Frodo... Hmmm, is it a coincidence, maybe???


----------



## Rydian (Nov 22, 2010)

... you never read it, just watched the movies?


----------



## Zaertix (Nov 22, 2010)

It's obvious he never read the books. If he did, he would understand.

Silly movie watchers, watching a movie made YEARS after the books and WELL after the authors death.

Props on making me laugh though.


----------



## Shinigami357 (Nov 22, 2010)

I think I made it pretty clear I watched the movies, ok? And I know that sometimes movies don't do characters justice, but really, this is ridiculous. If I had a copy of the novel I'd have read that first, so don't say I'm a silly movie watcher. I prob read lots more than you do.


----------



## Son of Science (Nov 22, 2010)

Shinigami357 said:
			
		

> I think I made it pretty clear I watched the movies, ok? And I know that sometimes movies don't do characters justice, but really, this is ridiculous. If I had a copy of the novel I'd have read that first, so don't say I'm a silly movie watcher. I prob read lots more than you do.








In the books, he does have some use.  I don't wanna spoil it for everyone though


----------



## Shinigami357 (Nov 22, 2010)

Son of Science said:
			
		

> In the books, he does have some use.  I don't wanna spoil it for everyone though



Good thing. Gotta get me a copy of the books then. Maybe I won't be as pissed.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 22, 2010)

1 - Movies are rarely as good as the story.
2 - Movies can't fit the content of most stories.
3 - This one was so big they had to split it across three movies and still didn't fit a bunch of shit in.


----------



## Shinigami357 (Nov 22, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> 1 - Movies are rarely as good as the story.
> 2 - Movies can't fit the content of most stories.
> 3 - This one was so big they had to split it across three movies and still didn't fit a bunch of shit in.




I know that. But, seriously, they should have been able to pay attention to the characters. Not focuing on your characters is BS movie-making, esp with such a rich source. Or maybe they just cashed in on the "epic battle" craze??? God, sometimes I hate Hollywood. I really have to get a copy of those darn books.


----------



## BORTZ (Nov 22, 2010)

Shinigami357 said:
			
		

> Son of Science said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The books would clear lots up. As good as the movies were, the books are better. 
Also if you feel the urge i suggest the Silmarillion as well. It explains why the world is like it is when you get to the ring.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Nov 22, 2010)

Shinigami357 said:
			
		

> But that is my point. I know that Frodo is this no-name Hobbit plucked from obscurity (aren't most literary heroes plucked from obscurity anyways?) and all that. But, the guy has no character progression, he just stays as a weak, scared Hobbit for the rest of the story. The least he can do is resist the ring, but he almost made off with it, and really, that takes away all his redeeming qualities. Seriously, aside from him being one of the core characters, there's nothing that even remotely makes him look good. Sam is a better character overall.



Well, Sam is the best character in the series.

But really, compared to the other characters in Lord of the Rings, Frodo is about equal in character progression (outside of Sam, Merry, and Pippin). I mean Aragorn is just always a gruff ranger, he just eventually gains hope in humanity. Legolas is always this super elf, Gimli is always that comical dwarf, and Gandalf is just a badass wizard. Frodo as a character is about the same. But he does change a bit. Like in the first movie, he changes from wanting nothing more than his old life back to accepting his responsibilities in carrying the Ring and deciding to bring it to Mt. Doom.

As per the Ring thing, it just represents Frodo being human (well, in nature). He still was able to resist temptation to the Ring more than any of its holders before him and any of the people he encountered, and that's damn impressive. The Ring is incredibly powerful and has an aura to it that corrupts all who go near it. The fact Frodo made it through months of shit with the Ring to the top of the mountain is damn impressive, even if he can't go through with it.

Maybe Frodo is an average character, but it's the story that counts a lot. LotR is still among my favorite sets of movies.


----------



## Sterling (Nov 22, 2010)

Guild McCommunist said:
			
		

> [*Snip


My respect for you and the others who know a lot about the world of LotR, just rose 10 points.


----------



## spectral (Nov 22, 2010)

Not only did the movies not do the characters justice, it outright left out others completely. The movies are fun action flicks but as mentioned should by no means be a basis to judge the world or the characters. The books do a much better job of getting across how manipulative the ring is. It manipulates everything around it in subtle ways, preying on weaknesses and desires and is a massive burden to the one who carries it. Bilbo owned the ring but didn't carry it with him all the time, the ring also knew he was not a way back to it's master. When in the movie it says the ring is getting heavier, it is not physically getting heavier, the burden is.


----------



## spectral (Nov 22, 2010)

The books only cover just after he finds it and just before he gives it to frodo. Once he's stopped adventuring while still owning the ring its unlikely he carried it around with him in the shire. If he had no intention to adventure it had no reason manipulate him. It mentions repeatedly , the ring has it's own will and is patient. Although tbh I don't think it was considered by Tolkien as when he wrote The Hobbit he hadn't yet decided that it was anything more than a magical invisibility ring. Also a likely reason the burden was far greater on Frodo is that he is the first ring bearer actively trying to destroy it, the ring will be actively trying to hinder him.


----------



## mameks (Nov 22, 2010)

Guild McCommunist said:
			
		

> I mean Aragorn is just always a gruff ranger, he just eventually gains hope in humanity. Legolas is always this super elf, Gimli is always that comical dwarf, and Gandalf is just a badass wizard.


Greatest character summary ever x3
But yeah, the book>>>>>>>>>>films.


----------



## Shinigami357 (Nov 23, 2010)

Frankly, the reason I watched the movies at all was coz i was pissed and needed something to get things off my mind. What better film than one with all the big set pieces where everyone kills each other, right? Well,  I was PO'd and saw Frodo and it got worse. Damn. Anyway, need to get books, ASAP (prob christmas).

Chill, folks.


----------



## BORTZ (Nov 24, 2010)

It also sucks cause in the books, after the ring is destroyed, the hobbits return to the shire to find it in the midst of destruction, actually.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 24, 2010)

BortzANATOR said:
			
		

> It also sucks cause in the books, after the ring is destroyed, the hobbits return to the shire to find it in the midst of destruction, actually.


Wait, they didn't cover that in the movies?

That was one of my favorite parts!  They had their own little hobbit war, it was awesome.


----------



## BORTZ (Nov 24, 2010)

Rydian said:
			
		

> BortzANATOR said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nope. Froto woke up in the bed with Gandalf waiting for him. 

Kinda pissed me off.


----------



## Sterling (Nov 24, 2010)

BortzANATOR said:
			
		

> Rydian said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Everyone who read the books, then watched the movies was pissed off about that.


----------



## mameks (Nov 24, 2010)

It was annoying. The destruction of the Shire's an awesome bit.


----------



## Wabsta (Nov 24, 2010)

shlong said:
			
		

> It was annoying. The destruction of the Shire's an awesome bit.


Omg. I always thought that I was imagining that part of the story >.<
Thought I dreamed it or something, cause I could clearly remember and see it in my head, but it wasn't in the movie.


----------



## Satangel (Nov 26, 2013)

Just rewatched the LotR movies, haven't read the books yet (will probably do after I finish GoT <3)
Read this topic, and yeah, Frodo is a big pansy really, although it is VERY hard to translate into a movie why he's a pansy. You can't describe the feelings and the evil the Ring does in a movie like you can do in a book, where you have unlimited possibilities and time to explain that.

But good God, the movies were glorious, so well made, so big in production values. Wow. The acting (Legolas especially) made me cringe a few times, but wow, so cool.


----------



## wrettcaughn (Dec 2, 2013)

Satangel said:


> Just rewatched the LotR movies, haven't read the books yet (will probably do after I finish GoT <3)
> Read this topic, and yeah, Frodo is a big pansy really, although it is VERY hard to translate into a movie why he's a pansy. You can't describe the feelings and the evil the Ring does in a movie like you can do in a book, where you have unlimited possibilities and time to explain that.
> 
> But good God, the movies were glorious, so well made, so big in production values. Wow. The acting (Legolas especially) made me cringe a few times, but wow, so cool.



Frodo seems a big pansy because Elijah Wood only had a single expression on his face through the whole 12 hours...  I think Peter Jackson told him, "Give me something between 'jilted lover' and 'I just watched my dog get hit by a car'...  Okay, that's perfect.  Now just do that every minute of every day for the next 18 months!"


----------

