Kevin's Watch

Book or Film...

Other options:
- Grishnakh
- Ugluk
- Balrog of Morgoth
- Witch-King
- Mouth of Sauron
- The Eye
- The Ring
- Gothmog
- Lurtz
- Saruman
- Faramir
- Merry
- Pippen
- Theoden
- Eomer
- Elron
- Eowyn
- Grima Wormtongue
- Denethor
- Prince what'sits from Dol Amroth
- Arwyn
- Gimli
- Borimir
- Bilbo
- Galadriel
- Haladir
- Celeborn
- Tom Bombadil
- Radagast
- Shadowfax
- Shelob
- Goldberry

I think that's all of 'em...yeesh.

I had to do some hard thinking, but ultimately I voted Sam - in book and film. Without Sam's courage, level-headedness and resourcefulness at his side, Frodo wouldn't have gone far in his mission. And Sean Astin's portrayal of Sam in the films is brilliant.

In the books, Gandalf is a close runner-up favorite. I really liked Faramir, too, which again is why I wasn't happy with the film version - though I'll credit Philippa Boyens and Peter Jackson for making a strong argument for their changes to the character.

In the films, there are many runner up favorites to Sam. There are just so many good performances. Frodo I guess is the obvious choice: Elijah Wood is absolutely believable in the role. But Viggo Mortensen is terrific as Aragorn, too. Ian McKellen is awesome as Gandalf, though in TTT and ROTK the character becomes kind of bland.

teH GaNdALf 4 TeH wiN.

matrixman wrote:Elijah Wood is absolutely believable in the role.

I am sorry, but I couldn't disagree more. Even when the ring has kept him young and Hobbits live longer than humans, he was already 50 years old at the time the story took place. He was a well respected Hobbit and not a teenager who looked as if he suffered from obstipation.

Whoever said Elijah Wood was an actor told a lie. Sir Ian McKellen is an actor and to some extent Christopher Lee is an actor as well - a bit restricted in the range of characters he is able to play, though, but still. Elijah Wood is most definitly NOT. He is just annyoing.

Vader wrote:teH GaNdALf 4 TeH wiN.

matrixman wrote:Elijah Wood is absolutely believable in the role.

I am sorry, but I couldn't disagree more. Even when the ring has kept him young and Hobbits live longer than humans, he was already 50 years old at the time the story took place. He was a well respected Hobbit and not a teenager who looked as if he suffered from obstipation.

Whoever said Elijah Wood was an actor told a lie. Sir Ian McKellen is an actor and to some extent Christopher Lee is an actor as well - a bit restricted in the range of characters he is able to play, though, but still. Elijah Wood is most definitly NOT. He is just annyoing.

I was thinking about this today - they're playing all three films on TNT...
and I have to agree matrixman for this reason: because of the casting choice, age and so on...Elijah's somewhat two-dimensional and simple portrayal of Frodo allowed the other actors to really bring out their respective characters, Frodo really could have dominated, which would have taken away from the others. Am I making sense?

Sure, I see what you're saying. I do remember hearing complaints about Elijah Wood's age, and about him as an actor in general, at the time of Fellowship's release. All I can say is all that was a non-issue for me personally. I bought into Elijah's portrayal 100%. I have some problems with the films, but Elijah Wood was not one of them. Maybe it helped that I didn't have a strong preconceived picture of Frodo in my head before I saw the movie.

I think having the Hobbits being the youngest of the Fellowship made Jackson's job easier because it automatically brings the audience to subconciously umm deliniate between the others as bigger/older, wiser, more powerful, etc.

Does that make sense?

Oh yes, I agree with that. I certainly identified with Elijah's Frodo in that way - the innocent youth being led into danger but also guided through it by his elders.

I kind of saw the same thing going on with Jackson's portrayel of Denethor as a one-dimensional psychotic weenie so that his personality and image didn't conflict with the audience's view of Gandalf's role in RotK. Smart move me thinks...though I would have liked to see more of a fleshed out Denethor with more time...but alas, such wishes are but dreams...

Gollum.

Aragorn in the movies. I'm not sure who's my favorite in the books. It's a tough decision in either case, there are so many good characters.

I could never identify with the movie Frodo because of the age issue. I also had problems with Denethor (who I pictured more to be a Caesar like person) and with Elrond who had short silver grey hair for me (a bit like the haircut you see on ancient greek sculptures.)

matrixman wrote:I had to do some hard thinking, but ultimately I voted Sam - in book and film. Without Sam's courage, level-headedness and resourcefulness at his side, Frodo wouldn't have gone far in his mission. And Sean Astin's portrayal of Sam in the films is brilliant.

In the books, Gandalf is a close runner-up favorite. I really liked Faramir, too, which again is why I wasn't happy with the film version - though I'll credit Philippa Boyens and Peter Jackson for making a strong argument for their changes to the character.

In the films, there are many runner up favorites to Sam. There are just so many good performances. Frodo I guess is the obvious choice: Elijah Wood is absolutely believable in the role. But Viggo Mortensen is terrific as Aragorn, too. Ian McKellen is awesome as Gandalf, though in TTT and ROTK the character becomes kind of bland.

Yah, I agree. Mine's Sam for both, also...the first time I read TT, I honestly wanted Froto to stay dead in a noble way and Sam to finish the Quest...and Astin deserved at least an Oscar nomination for his Sam portrayel, better even than McKellen, Holm or Sirkis...and even Lee's perfect Saruman.

Sam certainly is a noble character (and near the top of my list).

I've always found it interesting how different people identify with stories. My sister's a very visual person, she always creates a clear visual of characters. I'm mostly a audio learner, I almost never have a clear visual of any character, usually developing more of a sense of who they are. I've wondered if that difference would drastically change how one experiences the stories and characters.

(Talking the book here, the films distorted the characters too much imo)

Of the fellowship, I think I liked Pippin the best. The way he went from friendly puppy type, through the horror of the palantir episode, and came out the other end as a knight of Minas Tirith. Wasn't it Pippin who stood up for Frodo at the beginning of the Scouring of the Shire? The bit where he throws his cloak back to reveal his armour and draws his sword and makes the bad guy eat dirt. Raises a cheer every time from me!

Of the more minor characters, I like Tom Bombadil for his hippyness, Bilbo for the drama, and Ghan-buri-Ghan (?) just for the (difficult to describe)...the uniqueness of the setting, or something. Just a guy who didn't want the world to interfere with his secluded life, but knew that he'd have to help to keep things the same, but with no thought of glory or reward. Prince Imrahil always impressed me too (love swans).

See...in the books, I found Sam to be kind of annoying.
Sure he had his acts of bravery, but for a lot of it, he kind of got on my nerves.
In the movies he was much stronger.

as for Aragorn...the books made me cheer for him much more than in the movies....Watching the movies, I just couldn't get the feel that he is the one that half the world is waiting for.

Gandalf for Both book and movie for me.

Gimli rocked in the movies to.

Tom Bombadil - Without him, I don't think we can understand what Middle Earth is. I was, at first, disappointed in his absence in the films, but the more I watch the films, the more I think his heart is there.
As for the best character in the films, Samwise.

Of the main group, I liked Merry the best. He was the only hobbit who had his act together from the start. Certainly, he was the most responsible of the four. And, he was bold from the start. They really did him a disservice in the films by making him a joke. Then again, I really disliked the films. They were beautiful, but they really made a hollywood mess of them in my opinion.

I alsoliked Eowyn in the books.