The Perfect Cast!

[Agalayth]

Christopher Lee: Could there be a better Saruman? His voice is deep, powerful, and has a very sinister sound to it: perfect. He also had some experience with being a villain, because he was Count Dooku in Star Wars: The Attack of the Clones (which wasn't a good movie in my eyes, but he was good).

Ian McKellen: He is very diverse actor with much experience. He was a villain in the X-Men movie, but he's a perfect hero in LOTR.

Cate Blanchett: In my eyes, she is the perfect Galadriel. One reason is because she projects the pure beauty of the Elves. She's not hot or sexy, but that's not what the Elves are supposed to be anyways. Also, she way she acts and talks, it seems like she knows all, and seems like she truly has been around since the first rings were forged.

Hugo Weaving: Hugo Weaving easily portrays what I though Elrond was like in the books. I especially think his facial expressions and voice are very authoritive and powerful.


This is what I'm writing about now, but I think that everyone in the LOTR was perfectly cast.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I agree about Lee. Superb. McKellen did well, but he didn't really seem like Gandalf to me. But I did love him in X-Men.

Cate Blanchett performed well, but she didn't really seem like Galadriel to me, either. As for Hugo...Well, I won't go into him. ;)

But I must say that Elijah Wood doesn't look fifty...:eek:

[gimli7410]

what do you mean mckellan didnt seem like gandalf to you. i thought he was great as gandalf. but i didnt like cate blanchett as galadriel and i thought viggo mortensen was perfect as aragorn

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I mean precisely what I said. He didn't seem like Gandalf to me. He seemed a bit...I don't know...but he just wasn't Gandalf for me.

[BeardofPants]

Hobbits age differently from humans.

Cate Blanchett has a big nose, and looks far too Australian to be an elf (no offence, aussies :p), Saruman looks like a drag queen. Hugo Weaving is definately too much of a combination of Aussie/Drag Queen to be an elf! :eek: I liked Ian in Gods and Monsters, but his Gandalf did leave a bit to be desired (not really his fault, more the direction I guess)... contrarily, I thought he was probably one of the better portrayals.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Yes, but that's still seventeen years after he "came of age". Probably, Elijah Wood still hadn't "come of age" by Tolkien's definition when he played EW, or just barely.

[Elf Girl]

I think Richard Harris should have been Gandalf, and Ian Mckellen should have been Dumbledore. :rolleyes:

[Gwaimir Windgem]

But, but then...Gandalf would be...DEAD!:eek:

[Elf Girl]

Fitting, isn't it? ;)

[gimli7410]

that would suck because wo would be magneto and richard harris could probably barely hold a sword

[cassiopeia]

*Refuses to even respond to BoP's comments* :p :D
I don't think Elijah is too young if you think of it this way: he left on the quest a little after Bilbo's 111st birthday, so he would be thirty-three. Thirty-three is the hobbit's coming of age, which I always thought was akin to our 18. Which is around the age Elijah was when the film began shooting. Of course, if they stuck to the book, he is too young, but the fangirls wouldn't like a middle-aged Frodo, would they? :)
Elrond didn't look life an elf. Elves are supposed to be fair. I'm sorry to say, but Hugo isn't. But he is an Aussie....
Sam was perfect. Except...does it actually say in the books that he is fat? Because I have tried to find if it says this, but I have had no luck.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Hobbits as a whole are, though Frodo was less so than normal.

[Elf Girl]

Originally posted by cassiopeia
I don't think Elijah is too young if you think of it this way: he left on the quest a little after Bilbo's 111st birthday, so he would be thirty-three.
He left at age 50, 17 years after Bilbo's 111st birthday. However due to the effects of the One Ring, he would still look 33.

[Sminty_Smeagol]

Hm... hey it makes sense. That's really... wow... I always thought Frodo was too young! However, Elijah did look a bit... young for his age.

Lol if they matured more slowly... and they had the physical maturity of 18 when they were 33.... lol imagine having double the years of teenage-ness... oh my. That would stink.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally posted by Elf Girl
He left at age 50, 17 years after Bilbo's 111st birthday. However due to the effects of the One Ring, he would still look 33.

Hmm...true...but I still think that the Hobbits didn't age that much more slowly than Men. I mean, they only lived about ten years longer on average than the Edain of Beleriand (Hobbits seem to live to be about 99-100, while according to some source, I think Foster, the Edain lived to be about ninety). I think that the 33 "coming of age" was really more a time when they were considered mature and respectable, rather than like leaving the state of minorhood today.

[Elf Girl]

I agree. Just correcting a little age mistake somebody made. *can't be bothered to check who*

[SamwiseGamgeeOTS]

true true, the only thing that bothered me were the hobbits ages. Sauron looked a little weird for me in the beggining, but I got used to it. He kind of looked like one of those cheep sci-fi characters at first to me, but..I dunno. :rolleyes:

[Elvellyn]

Viggo as Aragorn was great.

Now...
What did you think of Liv Tyler as Arwen?

[Elf Girl]

GRRRRR! Kill it we hates it forever!

[Agalayth]

LOL

I don't exactly know what Arwen is really supposed to be like (I hardly remember her in the books). She's alright at acting, but possibly miscast. I can't think of anyone who could play that role though...

[cassiopeia]

Originally posted by Elf Girl
He left at age 50, 17 years after Bilbo's 111st birthday. However due to the effects of the One Ring, he would still look 33.
I know he left at age 50 in the book, but since he left a little after the party in the movie, he would be 33.

[Wayfarer]

The cast, while they all attempted to perform their best, and did adaquately as a whole, were far from perfect.

[Mrs. Maggott]

We are confusing film and book here. In the book, Frodo leaves the Shire at age 50, 17 years after he receives the Ring from Bilbo after the Party. However, as he possessed the Ring during those 17 years, he still appears to be the same age as he was when he received it - 33.

In the film, we are never told how old Frodo is nor is there any mention of a shared birthday, so his age never comes up. Furthermore, unlike the 17 year hiatus between the receipt of the Ring and the Quest, less than a year passes between the two events. Indeed, Frodo apparently sets out upon the quest in the spring/summer following the Party - enough time for Gandalf to ride to Minas Tirith and retrieve Isildur's scroll. However, it must be remembered that however much or little time has passed, possession of the Ring would mean that Frodo would appear the same as he did when he received it.

Of course, Jackson rather destroyed that characteristic of the Ring by aging Bilbo from the time he first possessed the Ring wherein he changes from a hobbit with a full head of dark, luxurious hair (in the tunnel) to a hobbit with thinning gray hair when Gandalf comes to visit before the Party. When the Wizard tells an obviously much older hobbit he "hasn't aged a day" (which in fact is how he should have been portrayed), the audience is left to wonder whether or not Gandalf needs spectacles!

But with regard to Frodo, although there has obviously been confusion between the book and film, the fact is that he would not have appeared to have aged from the moment he gained possession of the Ring and therefore his youthful appearance is hardly problematic.

[azalea]

There has been past discussion here regarding Possession vs. Use as far as the Ring and aging are concerned. I still maintain that the bearer did age, but only very slightly over a very long period of time, and the effect was even greater when the bearer actually used the ring vs. not. Plus, I know we aren't told this in the movie, but Gandalf had visited Bilbo several times between the time he found the ring and the long-expected party. I think he means Bilbo hasn't aged a day from the last time he saw him. Of course again that is crossing movie with book, but I don't think the non-reading audience even noticed (at least none I know mentioned that as an area of confusion).

[Mrs. Maggott]

Originally posted by azalea
There has been past discussion here regarding Possession vs. Use as far as the Ring and aging are concerned. I still maintain that the bearer did age, but only very slightly over a very long period of time, and the effect was even greater when the bearer actually used the ring vs. not. Plus, I know we aren't told this in the movie, but Gandalf had visited Bilbo several times between the time he found the ring and the long-expected party. I think he means Bilbo hasn't aged a day from the last time he saw him. Of course again that is crossing movie with book, but I don't think the non-reading audience even noticed (at least none I know mentioned that as an area of confusion).
"'And all seemed well with Bilbo. And the years passed. Yes, they passed, and they seemed not to touch him. HE SHOWED NO SIGNS OF AGE. The shadow fell on me again.'" [The Shadow of the Past, FOTR, LOTR]

Thus does Gandalf speak to Frodo about Bilbo and the Ring. It is clear that Bilbo should have looked much as he looked when he found the Ring because Gandalf then goes on to say, "Of course, he possessed the ring for many years, and used it..." I don't think there can be much doubt that Bilbo might have showed some sign of the passing years, but they would have been quite miniscule for Gandalf to say that "he showed no signs of age".

[Bombadillo]

Ahhh... I started this post last night and it was really long and the computer frose. So in short Christopher Lee really had the voice of Saruman. Great cast.

[Finrod Felagund]

Hugo Weaving wnot a good Elrond. Sorry, my opinion. I thought Mckellen was brilliant but I think that perhaps Richard Harris could have done even better. Just a thought.

[Elf Girl]

Originally posted by cassiopeia
I know he left at age 50 in the book, but since he left a little after the party in the movie, he would be 33.
I don't think so, remember Bilbo's hair changed color.

But that is beside the point. Forget about it. :rolleyes:

[ladyarwen]

I really liked the actors for LOTR. Viggo was AWESOME as Aragorn. I can't think of a better person to play him. As for the hobbits being too young, I don't think it would be as good if they got 30-40 year old actors to play the hobbits. But I think Elijah Wood was a good Frodo. And I think Sam was good. The only one I didn't really like was Galadriel. But Gandalf I thought was really well done.

[azalea]

Originally posted by Mrs. Maggott
"'And all seemed well with Bilbo. And the years passed. Yes, they passed, and they seemed not to touch him. HE SHOWED NO SIGNS OF AGE. The shadow fell on me again.'" [The Shadow of the Past, FOTR, LOTR]

Thus does Gandalf speak to Frodo about Bilbo and the Ring. It is clear that Bilbo should have looked much as he looked when he found the Ring because Gandalf then goes on to say, "Of course, he possessed the ring for many years, and used it..." I don't think there can be much doubt that Bilbo might have showed some sign of the passing years, but they would have been quite miniscule for Gandalf to say that "he showed no signs of age".

I could be difficult and say that saying"no signs of age" could be different than saying "no signs of aging."



But I won't. :p :D

[Mrs. Maggott]

Originally posted by azalea
I could be difficult and say that saying"no signs of age" could be different than saying "no signs of aging."
But I won't. :p :D
You are, as Bugs Bunny was wont to say, "splitting hares". The idiom here means the same. When G. says "no signs of age", he means just that: Bilbo does not appear "old". However, he also means "no sign of aging" since he has also said that "the years didn't touch him". When you put the two together, there is no doubt that the Wizard is alluding to the fact that Bilbo looks much the same as he did when he acquired the Ring so many years before. Indeed, it is the apparently "changeless" aspect of the hobbit - as well as his lack of candor about the Ring which was certainly out of character - which led the Wizard to have suspicions in the first place! By aging Bilbo as much as he did, Jackson made a cardinal error in the matter.

In fact, he aged Bilbo so much that it "threw off" the matter of the hobbit's natural return of the aging process upon his surrender of the Ring. And even that didn't make sense because less than a year passed between Bilbo giving up the Ring and Frodo seeing him in Rivendell, yet he was supposed to have aged greatly in that short time. On the other hand, in the book, some seventeen years pass between the former and latter occurrences. However, Jackson seemed to have no concern for these small details although he told the story as if he had remained true to them.

[azalea]

Originally posted by Mrs. Maggott
You are, as Bugs Bunny was wont to say, "splitting hares". The idiom here means the same. When G. says "no signs of age", he means just that: Bilbo does not appear "old". However, he also means "no sign of aging" since he has also said that "the years didn't touch him". When you put the two together, there is no doubt that the Wizard is alluding to the fact that Bilbo looks much the same as he did when he acquired the Ring so many years before. Indeed, it is the apparently "changeless" aspect of the hobbit - as well as his lack of candor about the Ring which was certainly out of character - which led the Wizard to have suspicions in the first place! By aging Bilbo as much as he did, Jackson made a cardinal error in the matter.


(I don't know how to do that split-quote thingy, so I'll just try this this. Ah, it worked!)
How do you KNOW that's what he meant? "Years" could also mean the number of his years as a whole. :) Anyway, the bottom line here is that no one will ever convince me that when he set out from Bag End, Frodo looked like an 18 year old man (I mean man in the "race" sense of the word). My mental image may be "wrong," but I don't think so! :)


In fact, he aged Bilbo so much that it "threw off" the matter of the hobbit's natural return of the aging process upon his surrender of the Ring. And even that didn't make sense because less than a year passed between Bilbo giving up the Ring and Frodo seeing him in Rivendell, yet he was supposed to have aged greatly in that short time. On the other hand, in the book, some seventeen years pass between the former and latter occurrences. However, Jackson seemed to have no concern for these small details although he told the story as if he had remained true to them.

I agree with you there.

[Mrs. Maggott]

We are never told Frodo's age in the films. The party is for Bilbo alone; there is no mention of a shared birthday. Therefore, whatever age Frodo is, he is. And since less than a year passes between the time he receives the Ring and leaving the Shire, of course one could not expect to see any unique aging - or lack thereof. Again, remember in the book, Frodo is said to look like a hobbit just leaving his "tweens" (that is, age 33) when he leaves the Shire with the Ring at the actual age of 50. In the film, none of this obtains since [1] we don't know Frodo's age at the beginning and [2] less than a year passes before he has to leave the Shire.

As for Bilbo: he was 50 when he found the Ring (the age at which he set off on his adventure). Gandalf notes throughout all the time he watches over him after that, that "the years don't touch him" - which means that he does not age at least in appearance. If Bilbo aged in his appearance, Gandalf would not have grown suspicious of the Ring for only the Great Rings gave extended life for as long as they were possessed. Furthermore, Gandalf tells Frodo that Bilbo would just "go on" after getting rid of the Ring and I would suppose that this means he would start to age again and eventually "catch up" with his actual chronological age. This is shown to be true when in the book, Frodo comes to Rivendell and finds Bilbo (now 128) looking every year of that robust age.

The interesting aside from this is, of course, Gollum! Gollum has possessed the Ring for 500 years - and used it. Yet he has never "faded" (as Gandalf notes in the Council of Elrond) nor has he "caught up" with his actual age after losing the Ring to Bilbo! In fact, he is apparently still "living on" as if he still possessed the Ring. I have never understood this, but some have suggested that it may be the fact that Gollum's life force is now completely connected to and been absorbed by the Ring and he simply continues to exist until the Ring is destroyed. That may in fact be the case because in Mordor, Gollum tells Sam that he will "die" when the Ring goes into the Fire. Still, Gollum appears to be the exception that proves the rule about aging and possession of the Ring.

[Indril Anarion]

I think that PJ could not have picked a better cast

[Balrog_of_Morgoth]

:) Jeez, ya bunch O' nit pickers!

The cast was definitely not perfect. But I was pleasantly surprised, nonetheless. I do not think we could have hoped for any better, all things considered.

The standouts IMO are as follows:

Gandalf - I thought McKellen was near perfect.

Aragorn - Very, very good. His voice threw me at first, though.

Bilbo - his looks were perfect, plus great acting.

Boromir - his excellent acting really made the part.

Eowyn - Miranda made me like the character more than I did prior
to watching the movies.

Galadriel - her voice really seals the deal. Her eyes are beautiful.

Saruman - Perfect, but I think the script for his parts could have been better.

Wormtongue - loathsome, as he should be.

Eomer - very impressive. I wish he would have had more screen time.

Pippen - he just "looked" like Pippen to me.

Sam - he acted the part very well, but I had to warm up to him.

Theoden - good screen presence.

Legolas - He has really grown on me.

Gimli - excellant choice, though his scripted parts suck bigtime.


Passable choices are as follows:

Arwen - she does fine with what she was scripted with
Frodo
Merry
Haldir - he seems ok to me, though I know he's not popular


Miscasts are as follows:

Elrond - Although I like him alright now, it took a very long time for me to accept him.

[BeardofPants]

Did anyone else find it really odd that - given how much of a perfectionist Viggo is - he didn't work on his accent?

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Hmm...I didn't notice that before...it is odd, isn't it?

I see you brought your sheep back. :D

[Bombadillo]

Originally posted by Indril Anarion
I think that PJ could not have picked a better cast I don't think so. There could have been better hobbits (in the fellowship) but other than them it was perfect.

[BeardofPants]

Baaaaa.

[Wayfarer]

Is that an insult or a compliment, BoP?

[BeardofPants]

Oh, I'm sorry, I seem to have left a letter off. Let me rephrase that:

Baaaaad

[Mrs. Maggott]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Did anyone else find it really odd that - given how much of a perfectionist Viggo is - he didn't work on his accent?
What accent? He spoke "American English" with one or two exceptions (the rolled "r" in Mordor). The others spoke normally with the exception of Sam whose accept slipped from time to time. Obviously, the Brits in the cast had their accent (and unlike Sam didn't have to work on it). Those who were not did not appear to make too much of an effort to sound "English". Mortensen might have made a hash of an affected British accent had he attempted one. It's not the same as an affected "burr" (Pippin) or a bit 'o lower class (Sam). Trying to sound "English when one isn't can seriously backfire. Far better for the actor to have spoken naturally than affectedly.

[Bombadillo]

I think he tried only a little bit. It did backfire a little though. Did you catch his voice at the council when he said "It has no other master"? I think he was trying to sound English but instead he sounded like an American Muppet.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Mrs. Maggott
What accent? He spoke "American English" ....

Which was my point, missy. :rolleyes: And since I'm from New Zealand, American English is an accent to me. :p

[Mrs. Maggott]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Which was my point, missy. :rolleyes: And since I'm from New Zealand, American English is an accent to me. :p
You misunderstood my point. I meant "accent" with regard to him, not his listeners. If he had attempted to "sound" British, then it would have been an "accent" because it would not have been his normal speech pattern. Of course, Mortensen even has an "accent" in this country to people who are from the South or New England etc. I am reminded of Kevin Kostner's "Robin Hood" where the actor was intelligent enough not to attempt an English accent because he knew it would be a disaster.

I realize that American English (and I'm being kind here) has its own accent - indeed it has many accents. Of course, so do the English. A fellow from Northumberland sounds nothing like a fellow from Nottingham or someone born within the sound of Bow bells. I'm simply glad that Mortensen had the good sense not to attempt an accent especially since his English was fairly standard (that is, he didn't have a southern drawl or a terrible Noo Yawk speech pattern!). Had he attempted to carry any kind of contrived speech pattern out over three films, it would have been more annoying than simply having him sound "natural" even if different from most of the rest of the cast. Although I didn't notice Elijah Woods sounded much like Rex Harrison either.

[gandalfstormcrow]

I think everyone was great for their parts. I agree that Saruman should've had more lines, think too many were given to Arwen.

I've heard that "Haldir Lives" is being written on things. I think it's a joke though.

[WhackoJacko]

lol Haldir Lives !!!

the cast was pathetic, gollum outacted the lot of them....and that tells the whole story!!!

Merry was passable, and the other idiot was having a good time, smiling all the time !! lol