H

I fully agree with you Harad. PJ wanted to flesh out Arwen at Frodo's expense. That one admission from you is telling though, because the change is significant enough to likely have merited JRRT's disapproval. And your statement gives credence (whether you like it or no) that the characterization was one that enhanced Arwen at a cost to Frodo. (One from which his character can survive.)Originally posted by Harad
As you know I do not argue that point. The upshot is that PJ wanted to flesh out Arwen at the expense of that one scene of Frodos. Its true..its done...we live with it.
Frodo's character, however, survives in good stead. He remains the main character and soldiers on bravely, despite.
Contrary to what some critics have suggested, Tolkien's letters make clear that he was eager to do business with the Lidless Eye of Hollywood, and had few illusions about the compromises that might be required.
Awww Harad, anyone who agrees with you is "on to something".
Originally posted by Thorin
Okay, I will say this....Because Arwen was needed to be in the movie more, she could have replaced Glorfindel and found the Company...I could live with that...But throw him on the horse and let the rest take it's course...The riding, the defiant, sword-raising ,. "if you want him...blah,blah" spell casting, tears in her eyes, "Hang on Frodo" healing crap was just plain overkill and that is what I have the most problem with.
Originally posted by Thorin
it bothers me that for some reason I have to defend why it SHOULDN'T be in....Where the heck is the logic in that?
On the other hand, I'm perhaps less demanding than Harad. I don't expect you to agree with me on all points.
Originally posted by Harad
Another thing you dont understand is "spirit of Tolkien." For Arwen to become the hero of the story and kill Sauron would not be. For Arwen to do things that she might, had the character been filled out by JRRT (it wasnt), and take over some attributes of Glorfindel, thats just fine.