September 30, 2002

Re: Quirk
Laurie

First of all, the character Aragorn was not like a broken child. To me, he came across as having that "I know more about what's going on then you could possibly imagine." kind of look. The scene where Boromir picks up Narsil as Aragorn stares at him, for example.

If you paid attention in the first hour of the movie, you would see that Frodo and Sam's friendship was clear. Frodo teasing Sam about Rosie...Them walking home after partying...sounds friendly to me.

In the books, it is clearly stated that Frodo saw Galadriel as terrifying. The scene where she has that spaz attack slowly merges into the scene when they are leaving Lothlorien. At first, she seems almost evil, then she "diminishes" (sound familiar?) and is tranquil.

Merry and Pippin had a scene that proved that they weren't just goofballs: After the first encounter with the ringwraith, Merry immidatly understands that Frodo and Sam are in danger. There were also scenes where they fought to defend Frodo (Moria, Weathertop...)

The special effects were great for the movie. It gave it an etherreal feeling. For example, the Balrog in Moria. Gandalf knew what it was and how to deal with it giving it a sense of history ("..There are older and fouler things than Orks in the deep of the world..." or somthing like that.) "The Others" did not need these special effects because they're not the same kind of movie.

The reason Gandalf left the ring on the floor was because he did not know that it was THE ring. It also gives a sort of symbolic feeling of Bilbo's leaving. Frodo saw it in the doorway and immidiatly knew Bilbo was gone for good.

Peter Jackson did a terrific job on this movie, no doubt. Ofcourse it couldn't be perfect! Then those who didn't read the books would find it hard to understand and boring.