?

Log in

No account? Create an account
January 2018   01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
NF-Lee's Gildor and Frodo

The End of All Things: Pt. IV ~ “If ever I was to marry someone….”

Posted on 2006.03.20 at 15:36
Tags:
RotK Screencaps…. The End of All Things: Part Four ~ “If ever I was to marry someone….”




Screencap #’s 52 – 71



After Frodo’s reaction shot to Sam’s, “She had ribbons in her hair,” the camera cuts again to Sam. He tries to gather recover himself, “If ever I was to marry someone,” he begins, but breaks down, declaring through almost bitter tears, “it would have been her…”

Close-ups show Frodo’s empathy welling up as he listens, as well as his decision to act.
































































(--to be cont’d…)



Next entry here.

Previous entry HERE.

Click HERE for a complete table of Frodo and Elijah Wood Screencaps.



~ Mechtild

Comments:


Notabluemaia
notabluemaia at 2006-03-20 22:09 (UTC) (Link)
Ah, Mechtild, those pictures hurt so much I can hardly bear to see them. I do not know how EW manages such amazing expressiveness or the utter weariness over which his compassion prevails.

Beautiful caps. Heartbreaking.

Thank you.

(I will be more on lj soon for replies to lovely comments you've made - I enjoy the dialog)
Mechtild
mechtild at 2006-03-20 23:06 (UTC) (Link)
They are almost beyond belief, aren't they? I just couldn't help myself. I went onto the DVD to find a couple of caps for an illustration idea and they were just too gorgeous and moving. And once I had worked on them, sharpening them, bringing the lighting up, and bringing the colour back to its more natural values, they were just so vivid in every way (in terms of sheer beauty and the emotional power they projected), I just had to do the works.

What a project it's been. But I think it was worth it. In them Frodo is gorgeous, but in a way that is as resplendent, exquisite, and precious as the crown jewels. Better than the crown jewels.

(OK, I just love him.)
Notabluemaia
notabluemaia at 2006-03-20 23:12 (UTC) (Link)
Yes, I love him, too, and here I see the Frodo who sacrificed everything, and was capable still of pity for his Sam's grief and loss. Your narration (which I discovered with the other caps after I commented) is lovely, too. Thank you!

Beautiful scene, beautiful hobbits. (though I always wish for Sam's 'hand' speech)

(Interesting that Frodo notes not that he is glad Sam is with him, but that he is with Sam - a nod to the film 'choice' as he hangs between the fiery death with the Ring and life from Sam's outstretched hand)
Mechtild
mechtild at 2006-03-20 23:59 (UTC) (Link)
Thanks, Notabluemaia, for commenting further.

(Interesting that Frodo notes not that he is glad Sam is with him, but that he is with Sam - a nod to the film 'choice' as he hangs between the fiery death with the Ring and life from Sam's outstretched hand)

I read a very compelling post on a messageboard, pointing out how in the end of "The Two Towers," Frodo turned to tell his friend, "I'm glad you're with me, Sam." Sam's been looking out for Frodo, and will continue to do so.

But, at "the end of all things," when Sam is not able to do the 'looking out,' Frodo says the same thing, but not quite:

"I'm glad to be with you, Samwise Gamgee."

I had never noticed the difference before this person pointed it out, but it really is different. And I am sure the screenwriters meant it to be.

Frodo is the active person in this last scene, assuring Sam that he is not alone. Frodo is not assuring Sam that he appreciates Sam being there for him, as he was at the close of TTT.

For myself, it also strikes me that Frodo (in the film) calls Sam by his full name, which reminds me of something a parent might do, when commending or encouraging a child.
Notabluemaia
notabluemaia at 2006-03-21 00:06 (UTC) (Link)
There is a kindness and honesty in the change of language from Tolkien's - I see the reference to the choice Frodo made, to 'be with Sam' and choose life (in the cliff scene) and also Frodo's fervent wish that Sam could be any place *but* here - he cannot in the film context be glad that Sam is here with him, though he can be very glad that he is here to offer comfort, and to die with Sam. The use of the full name seems to formalize the 'end' in almost a ritual manner. Presumably these are what he believes will be his last words (per film version). *weep*
Mechtild
mechtild at 2006-03-21 00:20 (UTC) (Link)
Presumably these are what he believes will be his last words (per film version). *weep*

Really, Notabluemaia, you are making me all weepy, too.

I see the reference to the choice Frodo made, to 'be with Sam' and choose life (in the cliff scene) and also Frodo's fervent wish that Sam could be any place *but* here - he cannot in the film context be glad that Sam is here with him, though he can be very glad that he is here to offer comfort, and to die with Sam.

That was a very cool observation, giving me another little nuance that hadn't quite nudged the brain cells in just that way. Am I hearing you properly: I am taking it, that "I'm glad to be with you," emphasizes the sense of Frodo making a preference. It's an active statement. He's saying, with reference to the cliff scene (which I had not thought of at all, hearing this speech), "I'm glad I listened to you; I'm glad I chose to keep living," so that, "I am 'glad to be here with you' -- now," is also a sense of it. "You made me want to live, Sam. Now, it is my turn to encourage you not to despair, not to die grieving and despondent."

(*Whaaaaah!*)

But your comment implies that Frodo is consciously phrasing his remark carefully to show that he is not glad that Sam is stuck there to die a miserable death with him, but that he is glad of Sam's friendship, in the event of their dying.

That is very beautiful to comtemplate. Thank you so much for expressing these thoughts.
Notabluemaia
notabluemaia at 2006-03-21 00:55 (UTC) (Link)
In the book, Frodo says that he is glad that Sam is with *him* ('I am glad that you are with me') - I had wondered why they changed the line, and it seemed to flow from that moment of choice on the cliff, and almost to be required by that. Frodo wants to follow the Ring and/or to give up, but as worn as he is, he is still *himself* - to let go would be to leave Sam to die alone as well as to *leave* his dear Sam. He chooses to struggle, to keep living, so that Sam does not die alone, and so that he has finally and completely rejected the Ring, when he must still be feeling the pull of it.

I do think that Frodo phrases it so because of the distinction in the meaning - he *is* glad that he has chosen to be here, for Sam, at the end. Yet more of Frodo's capacity for a compassion that he is not able to extend to himself in Middle-earth, even as much as he has come to understand.

(I adore Frodo, dear Frodo, and his fine and beloved Sam...)
Shirebound
shirebound at 2006-03-21 00:39 (UTC) (Link)
he cannot in the film context be glad that Sam is here with him, though he can be very glad that he is here to offer comfort, and to die with Sam. The use of the full name seems to formalize the 'end' in almost a ritual manner. Presumably these are what he believes will be his last words (per film version). *weep*

Oh my, what a marvelous perception!
Mechtild
mechtild at 2006-03-21 00:47 (UTC) (Link)
Isn't it? *sniffles*
Notabluemaia
notabluemaia at 2006-03-21 01:06 (UTC) (Link)
*blush*

Thank you. Beloved hobbits...
Mona
lame_pegasus at 2006-03-21 08:01 (UTC) (Link)
Oh dear, they are marvelous. You know, I had severe problems with the screenplay, because Frodo was so weak - not the hobbit I always imagined, strong, wise and mature. But these scenes at Mount Doom in the ROTK-movie still had me helplessly in tears when I watched them first in London, and ever since. What Elijah Wood managed here is the total blend with his role, as if he gave all he had to portray this being at the verge of disaster... and succeeded, giving him the dignity and strength he was so often missing before.

Thank you. How wonderful to se those pictures again.
Mechtild
mechtild at 2006-03-21 13:51 (UTC) (Link)
You know, I had severe problems with the screenplay, because Frodo was so weak - not the hobbit I always imagined, strong, wise and mature. (...) What Elijah Wood managed here is the total blend with his role (...) and succeeded, giving him the dignity and strength he was so often missing before.

I cut and pasted the part I most wanted to second. Yes, I would agree. After three films of them making Frodo taking away a lot of book Frodo's acumen, graciousness and maturity, it all came through here ten-fold. I look at these, Mona, and still can't believe a person his age was performing these scenes. I have read Astin's (pathetic) book, and heard in many interviews how Sean Astin felt that the much younger Wood was the wiser, smarter, more mature and more generous of the two of them, as a person. I thought they let it all come through in this scene. Wow.
pearlette
pearlette at 2006-03-22 09:33 (UTC) (Link)
After three films of them making Frodo taking away a lot of book Frodo's acumen, graciousness and maturity, it all came through here ten-fold.

Oh YES. Yes, yes, yes.

For that alone, PJ, I thank you.

Sean's book ... *frowns*. It really put me off him. It's a shame, because I am very fond of his Sam. The problem is not so much that PJ recognised Sam's heroism (Sam is deeply heroic and admirable) ... it's that he didn't seem to recognise Frodo's. :( Except here, in this marvellously moving sequence, it all seems to come together. (And about time! :p)

Mona, you were in London to see ROTK???? Why didn't I know that????
taerie
taerie at 2006-03-21 14:34 (UTC) (Link)
Okay.. so here I am on a Tuesday morning drowned in tears. My husbands near having me committed as it is. God how I love this little guy.
Mechtild
mechtild at 2006-03-21 14:37 (UTC) (Link)
God how I love this little guy.

He really is a heartbreaker. Yet we just want to have our hearts broken over and over again. Maybe that's part of his sexual appeal. We want to be done to death, if it's by Frodo, in every possible way of being done to.
pearlette
pearlette at 2006-03-22 09:34 (UTC) (Link)
Mecthild, I am in awe of you. :D

Oh, how I love this fandom! :)
taerie
taerie at 2006-03-21 14:51 (UTC) (Link)
I actually didn't have a really big problem with how Frodo behaved in the movie.. Probably because of my long association with the books I felt like they really had to underline in the movie just how evil and awful the ring was.. and what a painful and terrifying ordeal it was for Frodo. I already knew how brave Frodo was so to me, this just made what I was watching that much worse. Now that I have heard, to my amazement people comment on what a wimp he was and "Why is he having such a spaz?" I realize that people didn't get it anyway and so now I do mind that they didn't make Frodo the action hero he was in the book.. A balance could have been struck I think that they didn't. Would it have hurt the story or drama if he had struck at the Witch King on Weathertop like he did in Tolkien's version? He still came off as a major league pacifist. I think they did make the Ring and Sauron very much more obviously terrible in the movie so few could miss the point but I wish they hadn't done it so much at the expense of my favorite character.
Mechtild
mechtild at 2006-03-21 15:14 (UTC) (Link)
Ah, Tearie, much ink has been spilled on the de-hero-ification of Frodo in the films. Book fans watching the films, like me, tended to just "fill in" material from the book at they watched. I appreciated the film portrayal as an illumination of the inner life of Frodo, bringing to the viewable outside what had remained hidden in the book portrayal of the emotionally reserved hobbit. But that persons who were not book fans tended to see Frodo very differently was made clear to me over and over again in viewer comments. They'd scratch their heads, wondering why such a wimpy, ineffectual guy, who couldn't keep the damned Ring in his pocket for ten minutes running was given the job instead of, well, anyone, pretty much. To so many viewers, Sam was the "real hero." Not just because he killed Shelob, did the rescue and the "action" stuff. But because all the way through, from the time they got to Bree, Sam was portrayed as the more astute, the more canny, the more assertive by far (always butting in and saying what he thought they ought to do or what Frodo ought to do), and the more noticing of the two. He was portrayed as, by far, the more reliable. People weren't being nasty or judgmental, they just were responding to what they saw. They liked Frodo, they felt for Frodo, but they thought him singularly ill-equipped to be the Ring-bearer.

As my brother said when we were discussing parts of the film that were most unsupported or were plot holes, "Well, to be honest, the hardest thing for me to believe was the scene at the Elves council in the first film, when Frodo gets up and says he'll take the Ring and they all say, OK, dude, go for it. Why did they do that? I still can't understand why no one tried to talk him out of it or just tell him flat out, no."
taerie
taerie at 2006-03-21 15:30 (UTC) (Link)
Ha! Your brother has a point. From what we had seen up to then.. (Non book readers.) only an idiot would hand the ring to the little fool. It is a hard bit to swallow. You would expect them to gently request that he sit down and be quiet and refreshments will be served later.

Frodo's angle could only be understood by somebody who already knew him. SAM was improved intellectually a lot. He was a bit of a moron although a sweet and brave and faithful one in the book.

Maybe the lack of understanding of Frodo cost Elijah Wood the oscar? (He was nominated but didn't win right? I don't watch those things.)
Mechtild
mechtild at 2006-03-21 15:51 (UTC) (Link)
No, unfortunately, neither actor was nominated. I think Sean was nominated for a best supporting actor at either the Globes or the SAG's for RotK, but he didn't win. Maybe he wasn't nominated for those, either, but there was a lot of buz about him being a possible. He really was outstanding in RotK, and Sam's was the sort of role (in that film only) that could attract awards attention. It had a very dramatic arc, all in one film. Frodo's "arc" was just as big and impressive but, for the sake of awards, it unfortunately was stretched throughout all three films. One has to see the whole trilogy to truly appreciate what Wood did with that part.

In fact, only Ian McKellen was nominated for an acting award (for FotR), out of all of the films, and he didn't win, either.
pearlette
pearlette at 2006-03-22 09:46 (UTC) (Link)
One has to see the whole trilogy to truly appreciate what Wood did with that part.

Absolutely. :)

Not everyone gets book Frodo either. I remember one colleague telling me that she'd read FOTR after seeing the first film (this was before TTT came out) and that she was far more impressed with Sam in the book than with Frodo, she felt that Sam had done so much more (i.e. why hadn't Tolkien made HIM Ring-bearer??) Now that I'm out of the clash and fury of fandom spats, I can critique her insights objectively and in a way I see what she means. I don't agree with her assessment of Frodo - she had failed to read between the lines, IMO. But I can see how Sam is more accessible as a character to some readers than Frodo is.

I know just what I think of Book Frodo. He's NOT a wimp, he is quiet and intelligent and stoic and has a dash of dry humour. He is wise and he has enormous inner strength (and spirituality). And Frodo's introspection is not perhaps so accessible to some people as Sam's lovely open heart is. (Of course, Sam has his detractors too ... some readers find him very irritating. It takes all sorts. :) )

Frodo is truly a light for those to see that can.

Mechtild
mechtild at 2006-03-22 14:43 (UTC) (Link)
Well, didn't even Tolkien call Sam, "the hero"? But he would never denigrate Frodo's role. I think he was talking about the difference in the roles they played. Sam's was the obvious, necessary "hero," rising to the occasion beautifully, but because he was able to -- he was not bearing the Ring. He was, in fact, merely doing his job - beautifully. But that he would be seen as the "hero" by readers is plain, and plain to Tolkien. Didn't he even say that Frodo himself suffered afterwards in part because he had wanted to be "the hero"? Tolkien related it to his last shred of pride, the bit of pride that needed to be dealt with on Tol Eressea. If he hadn't had it, he would have been able to accept that he had done just what he ought, and all that anyone could have done and more put in the same circumstance. But his bit of pride made him regret that he had not done the "heroic" thing.

Also, I think that readers can't help but focus on and love Sam's heroism precisely because it preserves Frodo, whom they love. In so far as they identify with Frodo, they love Sam for being a person whom they can count on to rescue and sustain them. In so far as they identify with Sam, they revel in the fact that they are able to rescue and sustain him.

Since the last part of the Quest is written from Sam's POV, it's difficult not to understand Sam better, to identify with him, and love him. And he really has been through an awful lot and grown a lot by the time the hobbis set foot in Mordor. Who would recognize that hobbit from the one we saw in the end of "The Shadow of the Past", when he seems little more than a goggle-eyed 'tween, squeeing about seeing the Elves?

Frodo is truly a light for those to see that can.

I think all lovers of the books can see this, but they see this more or less clearly depending upon what place they are in, in their own lives.

Estë   (or ST for short)
este_tangletoes at 2006-03-22 12:24 (UTC) (Link)
Wow!

Two treats in one LJ entry, first Mechtild’s beautifully emotional screencaps and then the engrossing discussion that ensues.

Thank you ladies!
Mechtild
mechtild at 2006-03-22 15:21 (UTC) (Link)
Thanks, Este. Yes, it's been great. Sort of a trip back to the old messageboard. I just answered Pearl's cool post on how readers also can fail to see Frodo's heroism, but only Sam's.

Previous Entry  Next Entry