Second time around...ROTK with a newbie and thoughts on Movie!Frodo and Sam

[sistermagpie]

So I saw ROTK again with my friend who's a newbie and her reactions were

P originally saw FOTR before I did and when I asked her how Frodo was she said he "wasn't in it much." She's just one of those people who doesn't get Frodo at all, except to say he's "very strange looking." Loves Aragorn, hated the parts in the Shire. She preferred TTT because it was more of Aragorn's movie. I warned her about the multiple endings, most of which are in the Shire, and that this movie was hobbit-centric which I loved. She said that was okay, she was prepared for parts she wouldn't like.

So the result? She loved it. The hobbits won her over--YOU GO GUYS! She flashed me a huge grin when Merry was trembling before the battle.

Also, she loved Faramir because he was--get this--SO NOBLE. Here we were all worried about his nobility being gone and that was her pronouncement after ROTK (and she's a big one for nobillity in men too--thus, the Aragorn love). Also very OOC her, she very much wished that Faramir and Eowyn ended up together because she thought they were perfect for each other. She was very happy to hear that they do.

But here's the best bit. She still loved Aragorn, but said this movie obviously belonged to Gandalf ("the world's greatest general") and Frodo. I'm like, "Frodo?? You mean...you...thought he was the hero?" She said yeah, this was his movie. She also loved Sam and said his "I can't carry it for you..." moment was totally incredible. She had no trouble with them splitting and was surprised anyone would think Sam was actually going far when he turned around. All in all, a very happy Tolkien virgin and me!

I've also been thinking more about

When you're a fan of the books, it's just impossible to watch the movie completely objectively. Still, I think a lot of times we make it hard for ourselves by constantly comparing the characters to their book counterparts instead of seeing them as separate entities. In ROTK the temptation is to think about what's going on in the book in these scenes and take changes as a comment on that text when really we should be thinking about Movie F&S in TTT and FOTR. When you think of the book the movie starts telling a sort of story in negative--since they separate when they don't in the book, the movie appears to be telling us they are separate, if that makes sense. Anything that's different seems like it's maybe much more significant, to me at least.

But in leaving the book behind (or trying to) I find it interesting how the movie chose to deal with F&S dramatically. They knew that the source of drama here came from the Terrible Trio of F/G/S, with each one having his own private struggles. Frodo struggles with the ring, Gollum struggles with his love for Frodo, Sam struggles with his suspicions of Gollum and worry over Frodo. This is the way the movies seemed to handle it, imo.

In TTT Frodo seems primarily afraid. He hasn't yet accepted his destiny and is trying to cling to hope for personal salvation. That's why in TTT he actively wants Gollum to be redeemable, is so happy when he appears to be turning around, is so defensive when Sam says it's hopeless. Sam is unaware of Frodo's connection to Gollum--that is, he's unaware the Frodo is aware of it. But he notices the signs--he points out Frodo can't take his eyes off the ring, etc. It's been suggested--and I took this very seriously--that Frodo's care for Gollum is misguided and has no effect. But actually, I think that TTT tried to play out the fact that it was effective, it just changed exactly how Gollum came to reject his chances for redemption. I think Gollum in TTT is indeed entertaining thoughts of being good with Master taking care of him. At the end of TTT he's given up on that idea and Smeagol is as evil as ever. Frodo, too, gives up on his fantasies. His line, "I can't do this," imo, referred to more than just destroying the ring, but saving himself. (Before that he confessed to Sam that the ring was "taking him.")

In ROTK I think we see Frodo in a very different place. I think he has separated himself from Gollum and no longer projects any wishes for redemption onto him. He's no longer defensive of Gollum. He protects him from Sam, certainly, but he doesn't argue with Sam's view of his character, just says they need a guide. I honestly don't think Frodo is placing his hope in Gollum's being redeemed anymore in ROTK. His struggle is no longer about trying to hold on to himself but get to the mountain with the ring.

Since Movie Frodo has now gotten to a point where he's basically focused on his task and ready to do whatever he has to do, Sam has his chance to struggle with the ring in his own way. In TTT he feared for Frodo's sanity with the ring, now he's focused on the threat coming from Gollum. He gets more and more frazzled--in a way he's in a similar state that Frodo was in TTT, not wanting to wait around for Gollum to murder them. But there's nothing he can do, Frodo is determined to keep Gollum as a guide, and Sam's fear makes him an easy target for Gollum and the ring. Sam reacts to fear in a typical Sam way, by wanting to tdo something about all the threats. After the scene at the pool in ROTK Frodo tells Sam to trust him and at first I thought that was a weird line--it's not Frodo that Sam doesn't trust, it's Gollum. But now I realize it was Frodo as well. Sam was having a hard time accepting Frodo's decision about Gollum and this also led him to doubt Frodo's strength in general and therefore...oops!...ask if maybe he shouldn't just take the ring for a while.

That makes Frodo send him away--but not by snapping at him. Frodo thinks he's making the right decision here. Shortly thereafter, probably around the same time, Sam and Frodo both realize exactly how they've been tricked when Frodo finds himself lost in the cave and Sam sees the lembas bread. And they both react by stopping their tears, getting a determined look on their face and going on.

I don't think Sam is being literally influenced by the ring when he offers to take it the first time, at least not any more than, say, Boromir was being influenced the first time he said the ring should go to Gondor. What's great, though, is that Frodo's mistake leads to Sam actually having to carry the ring so in Cirith Ungol we get Sam's temptation for real. It sounds just like before--I just wanted to help--but just a little off. (I wonder if they did The One Ring challenge today there would be more stories about Sam after that scene--I thought Sean Astin was great in it.) We also get a repeat of what Frodo did earlier for real--he still wants/needs the ring and just might have jumped on Sam if he hadn't handed it over, but he seems to also genuinely want to keep Sam from turning into what he himself has turned into.

Regarding Frodo and Gollum, I did ultimately see Frodo as forgiving Gollum knowing full well how irredeemable he was. The way I read their fight in Shelob's cave, I thought the reason Frodo stopped throttling Gollum when he claimed the Precious had made him lead Frodo into a trap wasn't because he thought Gollum wasn't responsible for his actions but because of what the Precious might make he himself do for it--starting with murder. When he told Gollum he had to destroy the ring for both of them I didn't think there was anything in his delivery that suggested he thought there was any hope Gollum was "on his side" as Sam was. In TTT his conversations with Gollum always had an eagerness to them, like Gollum's reaction really matters to him. Think of how tense he is in telling Gollum what he knows about him ("Gandalf said you were one of the River Folk...") for instance. In ROTK he seems much more removed from Gollum, and his line about destroying the ring "for both of them" was, imo, said with the understanding that Gollum would not see this as Frodo doing anything for him. It sounded to me like he considered their connection a tiresome fact now, not something he thought offered either of them any hope. JMO.

Comments

[jewelsong.livejournal.com]

As usual, I think your comments are spot-on, Mags. Excellent analysis of the whole Frodo-Sam-Gollum dynamic.

I think you should post that one on TORC, too.

Here's hoping I can meet you in NYC for a drink one of these fine days!

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

That would be awesome!!!

You think I should? I guess I might as well--we always need good Frodo/Sam talk on TORC.

[chresimos.livejournal.com]

I...really don't know how to respond. You make good sense. Very interesting reading.

I think you do need to get the books out of your head to some extent to really understand the movies, and it's something I have much difficulty doing. :)

I thought the reason Frodo stopped throttling Gollum when he claimed the Precious had made him lead Frodo into a trap wasn't because he thought Gollum wasn't responsible for his actions but because of what the Precious might make he himself do for it--starting with murder

I agree.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think you do need to get the books out of your head to some extent to really understand the movies, and it's something I have much difficulty doing. :)

It's ridiculously hard to do!

-m

[dotsomething.livejournal.com]

Interesting movie analysis.

I think a lot of times we make it hard for ourselves by constantly comparing the characters to their book counterparts instead of seeing them as separate entities.

I've been puzzling over this myself. How much of my interpretation of the characters is the movie and the performances, and how much is all the baggage I know about them from the books? So much so that I asked my coworker who had not read ROTK yet, how she found Denethor. I thought the Denethor stuff was all right--it wasn't really book!Denethor but it worked in the film; but I wondered if that was just because I knew what I knew. She said it worked great, she was shocked, very into it and liked it, good family drama.

I both underestimate and elevate the films because of my knowledge of the books. I'm too hard on the movies because the books have this or that detail that the movies don't. At the same time I wonder if my emotions while watching the trilogy are purely the movies, or phantom emotions from subconscious memory of last reading of the books?

As you said, it's impossible to separate them so it's a moot point, maybe.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

At the same time I wonder if my emotions while watching the trilogy are purely the movies, or phantom emotions from subconscious memory of last reading of the books?


Exactly. I sometimes wish I could just step outside myself and see how the movies play on their own. Then there's the added problem of being in the fandom as well, where I'm not only aware of the books but the opinions fandom will have about things etc. I think my friend felt like she got the best version of all: she saw the movie without reading the book, but had me with her if she needed to ask any questions.

[dotsomething.livejournal.com]

There's often so much baggage that comes with the things we love, isn't there? No such thing as a "pure" read or watch.

Your comment just reminded me of something Peter Jackson said on the Two Towers EE, where he said he wished someone would hypnotize him so he could watch the movies without knowing he had made them. So he could see them as they really are, see the flaws, and experience them as his audiences did.

So, what we need, is a hypnotist! ;)

[ljash.livejournal.com]

Also very OOC her, she very much wished that Faramir and Eowyn ended up together because she thought they were perfect for each other.

!!! That's hilarious! I always thought their relationship rather came out of nowhere in the books, and in the movies they don't even encounter each other, and here she manages to bring them together anyway.

I'm afraid I can't reply coherently to your Frodo/Sam comments. I still have a mash of feelings and storylines in my head, trying to sort out what was in the books and what was in the movies and how they're different and how they're not. Big mess. And I'm afraid I haven't entirely digested the movie yet, at least not on that front. But great stuff in your essay.

I've now heard so many people say they didn't think for a second that Sam was really leaving that I can have that interpretation, too. I was surprised to see him going down the stairs, but maybe that was just a temporizing thing. Instead of just sitting there for quite a while, which is what I expected, he stumbled slowly down the stairs.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

!!! That's hilarious! I always thought their relationship rather came out of nowhere in the books, and in the movies they don't even encounter each other, and here she manages to bring them together anyway.

Isn't it weird? She just loved Faramir and was madly shipping...I mean, why? But there it was.

Instead of just sitting there for quite a while, which is what I expected, he stumbled slowly down the stairs.

Yes, I suspect that was also so that we could get the lembas shot and the shot of the stairs separating him from Frodo. But he sure does look bereft bumping down those stairs with all his pots and pans!

[samaranth.livejournal.com]

I don’t know if you’ve posted anything on this on TORC yet, magpie – I had a peek there yesterday and you seem to have been everywhere! Go you!!!

It is really hard to not read the movie through the prism of the book, and I think that most of the first viewing is taken up with ‘oh, that’s different, oh, why didn’t they do/include that?’

But looking at the whole sweep of the Frodo/Sam/Gollum interaction in the film (as we can now, w00t!), I’d agree that by ROTK film Frodo does know that he, himself, cannot be – will not be – saved. As you say the almost emotional bond (sense of responsibility?) between himself and Smeagol has permutated to a tie, a burden that can’t be avoided or denied, it just is. I think its significant that when Frodo realises that he has been tricked, he then tries to just go on. He doesn’t anguish about what Gollum’s betrayal might mean in terms of his own salvation. He’s past that now.

I think that, in a way, Gollum is not speaking just for himself but is also acting as the voice of the Ring, whispering to Frodo, telling him all sorts of untruths (or twisted truths, actually) in an effort to undermine Sam, to get Frodo to do what he (Gollum/the Ring) wants him to do. For the purposes of the film we have one voice serving two evil masters. And Sam’s increasing susceptibility to the apparent power of Gollum over Frodo, leading Frodo into harm, causing Frodo to apparently reject him (when he tells Sam to go home, although this could also be read as Frodo trying to protect Sam.) Frodo’s opinion of him is very important to Sam, the ending scenes of both FoTR and TTT made that very clear, the apparent loss of this would be enough for him to step back, allow Frodo to go with Gollum in such a place and at such a critical point in the Quest, and to lead Sam to kind of aimlessly wander back down the stairs in the way he does. It all creates the chink in Sam’s defences, the thing for the Ring to work on.

BTW I was very glad to now see the whole of the scene which had worried me so much a few weeks back, the ‘I need you on my side’ exchange. It wasn’t as bad as it could have been, more a confirmation of the way things stood rather than a questioning of them. Phew.

The element from the book I did miss was any further exploration of ‘pity’. It was stressed so much in FOTR, but not mentioned again. This may have been one element behind Frodo backing off from throttling Gollum, but all the characters (including Gandalf) seemed to want to hit first and pity later.

I hope this makes sense.

It’s interesting, the way hope shifts between Frodo and Sam over the story. At the beginning Sam is still thinking in terms of the return journey, but by the end even he seems to have accepted there won’t be one. I can’t remember the exact sequence of the scenes, I just came out of it with the impression that Sam had lost hope too, rather than being the other name given to him sometimes – ‘hope unconquered’ (or something like that). But perhaps that’s a book/movie discussion :-D.

It was great to read your friend’s reaction, too! I think this is where ROTK is wonderful, in the way it places its greatest emphasis on the importance of the hobbits. That one they got very right indeed.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I don’t know if you’ve posted anything on this on TORC yet, magpie – I had a peek there yesterday and you seem to have been everywhere! Go you!!!

LOL! I was! It was like Wimbledon. I was all over the court, volleying balls back and forth.

I think its significant that when Frodo realises that he has been tricked, he then tries to just go on. He doesn’t anguish about what Gollum’s betrayal might mean in terms of his own salvation. He’s past that now.

Yes, and it seemed right that this was the moment Frodo told Gollum he was going to destroy the Precious. Like all pretense was gone for both of them--and he makes Gollum furious!

I like the idea of Gollum almost being a second voice of the ring. One of the reasons I liked the way the ending dragged out the ring's destruction in the lava was that the ring was a real character throughout the movies. I've been thinking of these scenes as between three people, Frodo, Sam and Gollum, but we should probably add the ring as a fourth person there. It could be giving Gollum ideas, but truly it would be using him as well.

BTW I was very glad to now see the whole of the scene which had worried me so much a few weeks back, the ‘I need you on my side’ exchange. It wasn’t as bad as it could have been, more a confirmation of the way things stood rather than a questioning of them. Phew.


Sam, I totally thought of you when I watched that scene! And I had just the same thought--phew! Frodo's more speaking to Sam like a parent saying they have to present a united front in front of the children, he's not questioning Sam's loyalty.

I had the same feeling about the pity aspect. You can't say it's not in the story because it's highlighted so nicely in Moria and then in TTT, but I wonder if in the EE we'll get another reference to it.

I just came out of it with the impression that Sam had lost hope too, rather than being the other name given to him sometimes – ‘hope unconquered’ (or something like that).

Taht's interesting--I didn't feel like Sam was hopeless in saying that line. He no longer believed they'd come back, perhaps, but it seemed like he was at that book moment when he just doesn't think about that if he can't change it. It sort of seemed like he confronted the real possibility at the end when they were on the rock in the lava--and boy was it sad.

I think this is where ROTK is wonderful, in the way it places its greatest emphasis on the importance of the hobbits. That one they got very right indeed.

I was talking about it with her today and she said that in the other movies she just wasn't as aware of her size and how brave that made them. In this movie she was very aware of them being tiny yet still going out there and fighting. She was also happy that in this movie she could tell them all apart whereas before only Sam really stood out because he had the servant's role to Mr. Frodo. Now she could tell Merry from Pippin and loved them both. Our boys came through!

Reaction to your Frodo and Sam essay

[sleeplessmarea.livejournal.com]

Bravo Magpie! Insightful and wise as always.

I must admit that it was a new thought you put into my head... that Frodo stopped throttling Gollum not because he bought into Gollum's explanation of "the Precious made me do it" as a motivation for Gollum's action of a few minutes before... but rather that he could see that this could well be a motivation for what he himself was doing to Gollum right then and there. Interesting, intruiging notion that.

I generally agree that we book-philes are going into the movie and playing matchy-matchy.... by which I mean...that if a scene successfully translates a passage in the book, we sigh and say... ah... THAT was good... THAT was spot on... WONDERFUL scene. But then the tendency is that when there is NOT an exact match, we recoil and bit and say "Now... what's THIS? What's it doing? Spoiling nice Tolkien scenes!" without actually stepping back a bit and regaining focus and actually SEEING what is before you... which was often a beautifully conceived, acted, and scripted scene that supports the underlying theme of LOTR, and whose only "problem" was divergence from the book.

There were a lot of those moments for me in ROTK where facts changed but not the message behind them. My second viewing it was easier... and it was not as bad as it could have been because "friends" warned me about some of the greater departures.... a kindness on their part.

Great essay Magpie. And now I go off to read it again...

Re: Reaction to your Frodo and Sam essay

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

You made me feel much better before I saw it the first time. When you said you thought I'd be okay with changes, I relaxed. You were right!:-)

It's kind of depressing reading some of the stuff on TORC right now--I know Jewel thinks so too. I totally respect people having problems with the movie...it's not like it's this perfect thing nobody can talk about. But the lack of respect for the amazing thing PJ put out there, and especially the dismissal of things in the movie for completely invalid reasons drives me crazy. Every fan is going to have to make an effort to separate the book from the movie in order to enjoy it fully, but some people are just determined to focus on the movie they didn't see (and probably couldn't have existed) they can't appreciate the one that's there.