Since this was based on a book and one held dear in the eyes of its many, many fans... I think the movie had to follow, pretty much, the structure of the Fellowship getting split up.
So, if that's unsatisfying to you, it's all on the book.
It's my observation that people tend to gravitate toward certain elements of the LOTR books and/or movies. Some folks love the battles. Some love the mystery and exoticness of the Elves. Some love the homeyness of the Hobbits. Some love the structure of Tolkien's writing and his love (and careful use) of words. Some love the Ents and their connection to Nature.
So, a person who loves battles usually wishes there were more. The person who loves the whimsical elements wished Tom Bombadil was in the movies. The person who loves Tolkien's language might resent when the filmmakers mess with that.
But the person who doesn't connect to the battles all that much might be mentally checking out during some of the fights. Or those that find Tom annoying are glad he wasn't in there.
I don't think one side is right and another wrong. I think people are just ... different. And LOTR is such a well constructed story full of depth that we can find lots to like about it.
Frodo's journey, as told by Tolkien, needed him to be isolated mentally and, to a fair extent, physically. If the Fellowship was all together throughout the journey and when the Ring was destroyed, it would have been a far different tale.
So it might worth thinking about why Tolkien isolated Frodo. What kind of tale is he telling when he sets Frodo and Sam out alone, without their friends and comrades, and put at the mercy of a highly unstable and untrustworthy Gollum, whom has his own history, attachment, and goals for the Ring.
He could have told the story of the Fellowship together for the entire journey, but he didn't. Why?
This isn't any criticism of your wishes and preferences. Just my sharing observations on how different folks love and wish for more of different things.
I think 'wanting more' is what drives a lot of people to write or read fan fiction.
reply
share
Blf1523
8 years ago
I agree with what you're saying, well said. However, it still doesn't explain why Jackson gave Frodo substantially less screen time than Aragorn when Frodo was the main character in the books. And even if you disagree with my belief that Frodo is the main character, the combination of Frodo and Gollum certainly are most prominent (in the books) as their stories are intertwined.
reply
share
Otaku-sempai
8 years ago
Frodo begins as the central character of the story; and, he and Sam remain the main point-of-view characters. However, once the Fellowship splits up, the narrative becomes more of an ensemble piece, focusing on different characters at different times. It's an unusual structure but it works for the story that Tolkien is telling.
"If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!" - The Joker
reply
share
Beren44
8 years ago
That is one of the most intelligent replies I have ever seen on IMDB, thank you.
I will qualify that with, for those who have only seen the movies, and not read the books, or for that matter, read the other works of Tolkien concerning the plot, i.e. The Hobbit or The Silmarillion, I can understand some of the the themes may seem disjointed. The books are just so much better, and explain so much that is missing in the <admittedly> well made movies.
I find that a shame; there is such a rich, rich history to all of it. Many points were left out in the movies due to 'movie popularity' concerns, for lack of a better term. Sigh.
~Oh, I'm well aware it's not a picnic, Mr. Save the Day~ (Fitz, Agents of Shield)
reply
share