March 20, 2002

Of Aragorn and Casting Decisions
Brian S.

Hello. I've read this site for a couple of months now, and enjoy it immensely. The debate section is extremely interesting. I just wanted to throw my proverbial hat into the ring on the subject of Aragorn, and the choice of Viggo Mortenson to portray him in the movie.

I've read around that some purists despise the choice of Viggo for Aragorn, because he is far too young. It is calculated that Aragorn would be over 87 years old during the time of the LOTR trilogy. I, however, wish to defend the choice, because I think it is perfect.

Aragorn may be old indeed, but does he not also carry elvish blood in his veins? And has he not spent time in Lothlorien at length? Is it not true that time spent in the golden wood does not pass in the same manner as time in the world outside it? Both of these factors, at least in my opinion, would well preserve his body, and spirit alike. I know when I read LOTR, I didn't picture Aragorn as an old, kingly man, but as a strong, youthful (yet well-worn), princely man. I believe Viggo carries all of these qualities, and then some. His portrayal of Aragorn is everything that it needed to be, and I personally don't think anyone could have done a better job.

Thank you for reading, and feel free to respond with any corrections or opinions you may have. Have a wonderful day.