Lord of the Rings

I think with frodo and sam - they kind of messed up the relationship in the movie. They made it like they were always best friends, drinking in the green dragon together, etc. I get the idea that of course Frodo liked Sam, but Merry was his best friend. Sam was just the servant. Sam worshiped frodo, it wasn't really a friendship, it was just adoration. I would never say that Frodo disliked Sam, but Frodo was a rich gentleman, and Sam was his untutored gardener. However, sam makes it his business to care for "Mr. Frodo" (btw: I didn't like that in the movied Sam is always just calling frodo "frodo" no "Mr." I think that makes it less touching, when for the first time Sam calls his master "frodo" in Shelob's lair.) anywayOnce, they are alone, and frodo, especially when sam tries to swim to him, and he says "of all the confounded nuisances... " that part, Frodo starts to realize just how much he needs Sam. Then through TTT "friend of Friends" and RotK, they do truly become best friends, and equals. So, anyway, that's my take on Frodo and Sam. And I LOVE sam for his devotion.


Also, I have been thinking about writing an essay on Sam as the sympathetic character in LotR. - my first point - check out the last quote in every book ;) Then, he really is the character that changes through the story - I mean everyone changes, but then they go back to their old lives - "waking up" or "falling asleep again." ONly Sam grows and changes from servant to 7-time mayor of Hobbiton.

Well, I guess you can tell I'm obscessed with sam, but hey - where would Middle Earth have been without him - Possessed by Sauron - and one poor little hobbit would be in the tortures of Barad-dur, or eaten by a demonic spider, or dead of starvation

I think there are better choices for arwen. Although I do find Liv Tyler attractive, she just doesnt look elfish enough to me. Im not really bothered by them expanding her role, though I dont think she shouldve been the one to rescue frodo. The love story was hinted at enough by Tolkien in the books, so it seems fairly natural for them to have a few scenes in the movies. And it really isn't that big a part of the two towers movie.. just a bit of reminiscing by Aragorn.

Personally, I liked Tom Bombadil heh. It was very out of place, and naturally the first thing they should cut out to save time, but there was just something that I enjoyed about his merry, singing ways.

I actually though Arwen looked beautiful in TTT. Probably because she wasn't being a "tough guy." SHe was acting more like I would envision Arwen acting. Besides the costume and makeup was better.

However, She never strikes me as the second Luthien and the most fair creature that walked Middle Earth. (I mean, if she was, middle earth was in SERIOUS trouble)



I am SOOOOOOOOOO happy - they had the conversation about being in books (but why samwise the brave. stouthearted sounds SOOOOO much better). I LOVED sam and Frodo in this movie. THe only thing that really bothered me was FARAMIR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam Gamgee

However, She never strikes me as the second Luthien and the most fair creature that walked Middle Earth. (I mean, if she was, middle earth was in SERIOUS trouble)

---

LOL, you're so right. The chapter in which Beren and Luthien fight Sauron and his monsters with the help of Huan is my favorite of the Silmarillion.

The book is always better. Remember, Hollywood executives are stupid. They don't read. They don't care about literature. They only care about box office receipts. The hell with Tolkien's original intent, so they think. I am just sorry that millions of audience worldwide (those who have not had the honor of reading the books) may actually think that the movie did a great job of following the books!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jamesting

The book is always better. Remember, Hollywood executives are stupid. They don't read. They don't care about literature. They only care about box office receipts. The hell with Tolkien's original intent, so they think. I am just sorry that millions of audience worldwide (those who have not had the honor of reading the books) may actually think that the movie did a great job of following the books!

---

Well, I agree that the LotR movie trilogy is not following the books as it should (I don't think they ever planned to do so), and I agree about hollywood executives ;) , but there are examples of movies which surpassed the book or which adapted the book in an excellent manner. Sleepy Hollow and the Name of the Rose are the examples that come to my mind right now.

Yeah, I actually liked Emma Thompson's Sense and Sensibility better than Jane Austen's. However, that is a rare phenomenon.

I have to say though with LotR, some of the stuff is just because cinematography is SOOO different from literature. So with a few exceptions (IE: Arwen at the Fords of Bruinen) I think that many of the changes were done because you can't follow a movie the way you do a book. For example, you can't really show Sam and Frodo's relationship in the way Tolkien does, because much of it is seen in Sam's thoughts. I kind of liked the Osgiliath scene. I think it was meant to remind you of Smeagol and Deagol.

However, did anyone think that they made Sam seem really mean to Gollum (poor innocent Gollum who only tried to kill Frodo twice, besides killing his own best friend)? I thought they made it like Frodo was trying to help Gollum and Sam's harsh words ruined everything. They should have put more of Gollum winning over Smeagol (which is always happening in the book) and they also should have clarified that Sam overhears Gollum's conversations, and even once stopped Gollum from grabbing the ring from Frodo while he slept.