3780Re: Digest Number 657
- Aug 10 8:16 AM--- In mythsoc@y..., WendellWag@a... wrote:
> It seems to me that all the parts were cast too young. I hadI love Francesca Annis, but in the book Galadriel appears as a young
> thought that Galadriel should be played by some 50-ish bombshell
> actress - Susan Sarandon, Catherine Deneuve, Francesca Annis, or
> some such. Having her played by the 30-to 31-year-old (as of the
> time of the filming) Cate Blanchett is weird.
maiden. She just happens to be thousands of years old.
To be more faithful to Tolkien, they should have gotten someone about
20-24 to play Galadriel, but I think they wanted a tinge of maturity.
I get the impression that Peter Jackson wanted the (principal)
Hobbits to seem a bit child-like yet mature. Hence, he went for
young actors. Bilbo, of course, is very old in the story.
If, as some spy reports suggest, only a few months pass between
Bilbo's handing on of the Ring and Gandalf's return, it will be a
major blunder because the effect of the Ring on Frodo's perceived
longevity will be lost. There is literally no difference
(technically) between saying "months later" and "17 years later", and
the only excuse I can imagine might be served up is that they
couldn't afford to film Hobbiton with two sets of extras (or two sets
of actors for the principal characters).
But I am hoping that timeless Frodo will be preserved. That is an
important part of the story, even if it requires explanation (which
it often does) for many people. The Ring's effect on Frodo should be
subtle enough that the movie audiences won't see rapid changes in his
behavior, but distinct enough that by the time he (presumably) claims
the Ring, it is understandable that he is no longer in control of
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>