Replies

Agreed that there is no "leading" character or protagonist, but I don't have too much trouble figuring out that an ordinary hobbit, Frodo, is easily more of a central character than the rest of the heros, important and wonderful though they be.

Filmmakers gravitate to the action hero. Aragorn is very much the conventional hero and ideally suited for the films. Making the story of Frodo's journey as readily engaging and still staying true to the story would be no easy task for any director

I don't agree with most things that Roger Ebert has to say about films, but I honestly think he was truer than most reviewers when assessing the The Two Towers. He noted that the story had shifted decisively in favor of Aragorn's portion of the tale. And with the Return of the King, we already know who get the lion's share of screen time in that movie.

I think the story was at its best in the Fellowship. The action will probably be at its zenith in Return. I hope, in the end, I feel that the story of Frodo and Sam will be equal in memory to the story of Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli.

FWIW, I think Mortenson's Aragorn is very good.

I'll be somewhat upset if Aragorn emerges as the main character in these movies, though. But I agree with you tentatively that he won't.

I also agree with his son that Viggo is deserving of a "healthy amount of disrespect." But he projects a likable self in the movies, so one can hope that, even though he is a vocal leftist, that he is still an OK person.

Yes, I much prefer FOTR over TTT.

If I hadn't figured that out before, it was really brought home to me when I noticed that while I can still watch FOTR over and over, I am pretty well tired of TTT for the time being, after one and a half viewings of the DVD.