Frodo's Bravery

[Lilnesser]

This is my first post, so I hope I'm doing so correctly. I very much enjoyed the movie (and I can be a pretty harsh film critic). Despite many an editing gliche that I did notice, I more noticed and enjoyed witnessing the reactions of many a Tolkien virgin (if you'll excuse the term) as being ones of enthusiasm to read Tolkien's works, and to learn more about Tolkien himself. I'll admit that there were several changes made to the story, within the movie, that disappointed me greatly because I felt they more hurt than helped (and I still can not understand the reasoning behind their being made).
However, the one change which, quite simply, bugged the hell out of me, was the ommission of Frodo's brave stand-off (by himself) against the Nazgul, despite his pain and terror, at the river outside of Rivendell (sorry, bad at remembering names), just before said river was "summoned" to Frodo's defense. This scene bore testimony to the little hobbit's bravery and strength- of-will. There were too many scenes in the movie which made Frodo, in particular, appear to be this weak, scared, and sad being - not as stout-of-heart, determined, and surprisingly wise as he is portrayed in the novel. Did anyone else find the lack of this scene as disturbing as I?

[DGoeij]

Welcome to the Forum Lilnesser!

Good reasoning and I totally agree with you. I have said this in other threads as well. The expanded role of the character of Arwen is debateble, but on the other hand understandable. It's the diminishing of Frodo's part that ticked me off. join in other discussion about this, I should say. You'll also pick up names of places along the way;) Like the Fords of the Bruinen.

[Baillie-Baggins]

I feel that Frodo's subtle heroism in The Movie is expressed all the more powerfully against a background where everybody else is using weapons right, left and center. His physical courage - which we all know he has - playing second fiddle to his moral courage emphasizes his strength of mind and character. He is both despairing and determined, terrified and grimly resolute; he has no hope for himself, but sees no other course.

[Grond]

Baillie-Baggins & Lilnesser. Welcome to the forum!
Alas Baillie...

I must disagree with you though. It was hard to determine Frodo's frame of mind or thoughts while at the Ford of Bruinen... after all, he was passed out on the back of a horse while Arwen took on the Black Riders. He also didn't appear too strong when Arwen actually breathed life back into him.

And all the things you state in your post, is exactly how Frodo is supposed to appear. I was pleased with his portrayal except for the scene at the Fords, I was happy with the movie in general and enjoyed it; but, leaving that scene out was a mistake on the director's part, IMHO. Of course, my opinion counts for less and less around here as each day passes.
:)

[DGoeij]

Opinion of the Grond counting for less? Now that's a load of ..... a peculiar reeking heap of brownish goo wich I shall give no precise name. But you get my point.

I too feel that in the movie the courage of Frodo (expertly described by Baillie-Baggins by the way) is not that good portrayed. In my view a waste of the strong points in the character of Frodo, nevertheless played rather good by Elijah Wood(sp?, last name).

Just the feeling I had at the end of the movie, wich I enjoyed.

[Tuor]

Wood did a good job, but the messing up of the scene at the Ford really sucked.

[QueenBeruthiel]

I agree with everybody else, the Ford scene in the movie destroyed what was supposed to be Frodo's moment.

By standing up to the Nazgul, Frodo displayed his considerable strength of character, which is to serve him well during his quest.

By taking his power away and delivering to Arwen, PJ reduced Frodo to a weak and humbled character, unsuited to the enormity of the quest he is about to volunteer for.

[ReadWryt]

Frodo only looks as brave as he does in the movie because Woods played him as though he were about to burst into tears at any moment. Last time I saw a character with eyes that big and watery for as much of the picture as Frodo was E.T. .

I was left felling so sorry for the poor `lil guy that I ended up amazed that he was so brave as to go on when he so obviously was too belwildered and scared to do so without an act of will.

[Grond]

Welcome QueenBeruthiel, you are a welcome addition to our humble forum. As you can tell from my previous posts, I am in full agreement with your assertions on Frodo. Overall, I was pleased with the movie but felt things were changed that should not have been. I'm not sure whether to blame PJ or the execs at New Line. One can only hope that with the success of the first film, PJ will given more latitude in editing the next ones and that he will keep scenes that are important in keeping with the spirit of the novel.:)

[lilhobo]

hmmmmm

spoiler
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.Frodo deosnt actually want to destroy the ring!!

[Kit Baggins]

Originally posted by ReadWryt
Frodo only looks as brave as he does in the movie because Woods played him as though he were about to burst into tears at any moment.
I thought that made Frodo seem a bit of a 'wet' character, but I still think he is brave, even in the film.

~Kit :p

[Greenleaf]

[Frodo only looks as brave as he does in the movie because Woods played him as though he were about to burst into tears at any moment. Last time I saw a character with eyes that big and watery for as much of the picture as Frodo was E.T.]

I thought that Elijah Woods did an excellent job. I personally didn’t think that he "looked like he was going to burst into tears" He was facing what he thought to be his death. He was brave, but scared, he didn’t want to do take the ring but he did because it was the right thing to do, and I though that that was well portrayed in the movie. :)

[Minas]

Frodo's Fighting Spirit

Here's what I wrote on another thread but it got no reaction I've copied it all, but the top bit really only applies to this thread.

Can someone explain to me why Frodo doesn't seem to use Sting at all in the Movie. He looks at the sword when orcs are about and it turns blue ( he didn't seem to check if it had turned red when the Ringwraiths were close) but never seemed to use it in anger. Per the book in 'Flight to the Ford'
"At that moment Frodo Threw himself forward on the ground, and he heard himself crying aloud : O Elbereth! Gilthoniel![/I] At that time he struck at the feet of his enemy(The Ringwraith King)."
Later as well in 'The Bridge of Khazad-dum'
" 'The Shire' Frodo cried and springing beside Broromir, he stooped, and stabbed with Sting at the hideous foot. There was a bellow and the foot jerked back, nearly wrenching Sting from Frodo's arm. Black drops dripped from the blade and smoked on the floor."
Frodo's lack of action in these fight scenes in the movie and Arwen making the stand at the Fords ticked me off the most.
Don't get me wrong I think Glorfindel doesn't have enough involvement in TTT and RoTK to justify his inclusion and I agree with PJ to have changed him for Arwen. (I know this has been thrashed out already but just my opinion). I just think Frodo should have been given more fighting spirit in the movie and it ticked me off.

For my personal movie enjoyment I think PJ should change more details in TTT and RoTK from the book. I know ReadWryt has said many times that PJ said he would be following the books closely. Personally I haven't seen this comment attributed to him apart from this forum. I've heard him say recently that he had created his own version based on the book and would be deviating from the books much more in TTT and RoTK.

Myself I can't wait that long for the next two movies. I watched FoTR on opening night and searched to Net to learn more. I have plowed through this thread over 3 days and got drunk on all the great interaction. It is a powerful movie, a great tribute to the greatest book, you are a genius Peter Jackson for having brought it all together.

[Dagorlad]

Minas:
OH - MY - GOD. I just can't word it any more thoroughly.
Wryt: The movie (like all movies drawn from a book of action) focused quite a lot on the parts with the most action, terror, or suspense. In those scenes, I would expect any person who has never left home or even seen a picture of a terrible thing, coming from a community with no murder and little crime, to be quite horrified. That means that if YOU, or I were raised under the aforementioned circumstances and then thrust out into a world with demon-like creatures who's very prescence filled one's mind with terror (and they were chasing you quite specifically), and then things actually got worse from there, I would bet any money that you too would look in each of those scenes like you might burst into tears at any moment. I'm not sure if you were saying that Frodo ought not to have looked that way, but in case you were, there's my piece on it.

The flood in the Bruinin. The whole thing was disgusting. Certain parts were necessary (but still disgusting) for simplicity's sake for those viewers ignorant to Tolkien, like Arwen bringing the flood with those ridiculous incantations, the rest was dispicable.
My face flushed with embarrassment at how utterly assinine and absurd the "come and claim him" gibberish was. Her bearing was most unseemly.

[Harad]

Sorry, squeek, but I have to disagree with you. Not having Frodo face the Nazgul, really diminishes his character's bravery in FOTR alone. What happens in the other 2 movies is an independent issue, since many people havent read the book, and the other movies are 1 and 2 years away.

[Grond]

Squeeky, you miss the point. The Fords showed Frodo's first acceptance that he and the Ring were now one. It was a moment in which both his bravery and resolve were clearly shown for the first time. It cannot be duplicated later in the movie. I won't argue with you that Frodo's bravery may be well depicted later in the movie. As a matter of fact, I'll even give you that it will; but, sadly, it should have been depicted at the Fords of Bruinen on the back of Glorfindel's horse Asfaloth. As it is we're left with an image of an unconcious Frodo being saved by an Elf-princess, who not only foils the Wraiths but then miraculously breaths life back into the dying Hobbit. Could you give me a chapter and page number on that scene??;)

[daisy]

Okay Jeky.. I mean harad....

Oh Grond, it looks like you beat me to it - I have to agree with you, that I felt the film really diminished Frodo's bravery - actually he seemed quite scared unsure etcetera which came through much more for me on film than in the book, but the ford was a very important scene for developing Frodo's character and PJ could have found another way to get Liv in there.

On some other thread ( I can never find them again!!!) there is a discussion about whether Frodo failed in his mission because he was not exactly the one that threw the ring into the fire.... the idea of him being a failure

I wonder what awaits us in two and three - actually I have read articles with PJ where he seems to make it pretty clear that he followed the book all the way through, although he may have made more 'noticeable' changes in TTT. FOTR, in my opinion, was by far the easiest to make as a film and keep somewhat in spirit with the story - hey it's the age old quest with the band of brothers thing!!! Don Quixote anyone??:p

[Grond]

Daisy, I agree with you but I have high hopes for ole PJ in the next two films. Other than the Arwen thing (which is major) and a few minor glitches, I really felt he kept fairly close. I've also discovered that much of the stay at Lorien was cut for time. Maybe (I'm hoping) that PJ will get much more influence in the cutting of the next two films due to the popularity of the first. That might give us more of the meat and less of the gore it you get my drift. New Line had to have the nonstop action because that's what they think sells a movie. I hope that they tone it down a tad in the next two since there will be plenty of action ready made with Helm's Deep, etc.

At least I'll hope that the next two don't do more damage than good. All in all, I keep telling myself that they will bring new readers to the works. (P. S. I know they have, one of my 19 year old twin sons had just finished reading the Hobbit and has even posted here on the board. The other one would start but is busy with studies and work. My oldest is known on this forum as Pops and has had his interest rekindled by the movie. So much good has come with the little bad.):D

[Minas]

Hey Squeeky Wheel,

I'm not sure where you think Frod's bravery is going to be enhanced in TTT and ROTK. As far as drawing his sword to attack he all out of chances as they should only come in FOTR

[lilhobo]

Originally posted by Grond
....The Fords showed Frodo's first acceptance that he and the Ring were now one. It was a moment in which both his bravery and resolve were clearly shown for the first time.

how can his resolve and bravery be considered, when he decides to succumb to the ring????

Hey Dr jeckyll and Mr Hyde, where is the logic here??? Frodo is meant to relate to the masses, while gollum is seen as the pathetic one.....

YET gollum is the one that saves the day

[Mithiril]

"there is more to bravery than sword hacking. There is the bravery of endurance and maintenance of purpose..."

Very well put. I think EW did a very good job of portraying that kind of bravery. He is not perfect, he does get frightened, like any of us would. Isn't he supposed to be the "everyman" character? He drew his sword at Weathertop (and dropped it as soon as the Nazgul stepped towards him), but the things were supposed to breathe terror, so that was understandable. All of the hobbits drew their swords and charged bravely in Moria at Balin's Tomb. He admits to being afraid to do what he must to Galadriel and her words, and Gandalf's give him courage.

The scene at the boat at the end when he hesitates with the ring and then, strengthened by Gandalf's words resolves -with much bravery- to go on and go alone for god's sake ... *that* is courage.

[tookish-girl]

I'm not sure how many times Frodo uses Sting in the movie, but there is one point when the Black Riders attack them and Frodo gets stabbed, that his bravery is shown. He's the vigilant one who realises that the fire is attracting them and is the first to unsheath his sword when he sees them. It's not exactly big, but it shows he had courage.
One problem with the movie (and you don't hear me saying that much!) is that Frodo falls over 12 times (yes, I counted, what? I never said I was normal!) and that does make him look a bit of a buffoon! Oh, look Frodo's fallen over, oh he's got stabbed, oh's been skewered onto a spike, ih, he's falen over again. I'm sure he doesn't fall over this much in the book? Or maybe it's just because it's compressed into one film....

[Harad]

"hes no fun. he fell right over."

well goodness..and someone else counted the number of worried expressions on his face..or was that you too. As far as Frodo's bravery there is a definte male-female schism, and count me on the side of squeek and the ladies.

[lilhobo]

Originally posted by Harad

..and someone else counted the number of worried expressions on his face..or was that you too.


ok, lets count the number of expression on EW's face during the whole movie

errrrrrrhmmmmmmmm ONE

[Harad]

no smilies, but a gratuitous slam of EW. he smiled at Gandalf, he grimaced at the nazgul, he was horrified in Bree, he was pensive in pennsivannia--all with different expressions.

[lilhobo]

you had better show some evidence, it was the same expression all the way thru!!! :eek:

[tookish-girl]

It really isn't you know. He is a good actor. I think his portrayal was very good as Frodo, with a grand variety of facial expressions! Elijah Wood has a very expressive face, he can say a great deal with it.

By the way, Harad, no it wasn't me who counted the number of worried expressions on his face, though that is entirely the sort of thing I'd do, oh well, maybe next time!

[Nimawae's hope]

I agree with you tookish-girl that Elijah Wood had a very wide variety of expressions throughout the movie. I personally thought he did an excellent job of acting!

In fact, way back when I first found out that he was playing Frodo Baggins I was simply ecstatic! Mainly because I knew he was a very good actor. (His youth never bothered me, in fact I thought it was somehow appropriate.)

[Snaga]

Frodo is supposed to look like a hobbit who has just come of age. He is 33 when he inherits the ring. That is equivalent to 21 (arguably 18). The ring stops him from aging. Occasionally I have read criticisms saying that Frodo looks too young to be 50 - but he should look young.

My problem is that he ACTS too young. The master of Bag End is a serious hobbit, with a fair amount of gravitas (amongst his own kind at least). 'Mr Baggins' he is called by everyone from the Gaffer to Farmer Cotton. So I didn't really like the scene where he pushes Sam into a dancing Rosie, or his 'We Bagginses used to be very respectable' line (the delivery of it). He should look 33(or 21) and act 50 (or 30 something). Frodo of the book is serious, learned (he can speak some elvish), and has some fighting spirit, even when well out of his depth.

PJ I think has made him seem more vulnerable in the film, for dramatic affect. Perhaps in particular he is less stoical. EW's face is an open book - every thought and emotion chases across his face. Frodo in the book is much more of a dark horse.

Personally I find Frodo of the book much easier to identify with, but I'd bet that many others wouldn't feel that way.

[Isildur's Bane]

I want to know why he didn't stab the head Nazgul, at Weathertop. this really gives the first indication ogf his stubborn nature. ooh, makes me cross. I want to read the book again now, and its in manchester, and i wont be for a couple of weeks. nuts.

[Isildur's Bane]

So how many of the laydeez using the sight were impressed by EW's acting talents, and how many by his big blue eyes? come on hands up now, where iI can see them.....

Originally posted by Nimawae's hope
I agree with you tookish-girl that Elijah Wood had a very wide variety of expressions throughout the movie. I personally thought he did an excellent job of acting!

In fact, way back when I first found out that he was playing Frodo Baggins I was simply ecstatic! Mainly because I knew he was a very good actor. (His youth never bothered me, in fact I thought it was somehow appropriate.)

[Harad]

V of K,

I agree that there are two different takes on Frodo. I had no problem with the "Rosie" scene, which, of course, was completely fabricated in the movie.

The Book's arc for Frodo's character is different than the movie's perhaps based solely on the different media. In the book he begins as a more serious (brooding?) character and his strength may not be as much a surprise. The movie starts him further back, perhaps, to the good effect of showing a more pronounced development within FOTR and thruout LOTR. Character development in a movie is generally harder than a book with the time constraints, so this emphasis was IMO effective.

[Isildur's Bane]

IMO?

But they will surely have to do more character development if they start further back. And is there any garuntee that they will continue Frodo's development in the other films?

[Harad]

He has already come a long way:

From happy-go-lucky hobbit in the shire w/o a care in the world, blissfully greeting Gandalf and jumping on his cart.

To an important personage of the Third Age stating in front of the assembled VIPs at CoE, "I will take the Ring to Mordor, though I do not know the way."

To telling Aragorn, the next King of ME, to take a hike while he carries the Ring into Mordor alone.

If that aint enuf character development for one movie, then you are demanding indeed.

[Isildur's Bane]

Oh yeah, you have me sussed already.

[Nimawae's hope]

Isildur's Bane, I personally have always been impressed with Elijah Wood's acting talents, and I was not disappointed in his performance this time around. And of course I liked his blue eyes! Who wouldn't! But they could get a zillion different actors with beautiful blue eyes that would SCREW UP the part of Frodo Baggins. Blue eyes do not necessarily make for a good actor. I would have been just as happy if his eyes had been brown or grey.

Also, exactly how much character development do you expect in these movies? Harad's right, they have already brought Frodo's character a long way, and I doubt that they are through yet!

[tookish-girl]

That's just about what I was going to say. Those big bklue eyes are very nice to look at , but behind them is a very talented young actor, the fact he's changed quite alot already during the movie (as Harad pointed out!) shows hpow good he is. In my opinion, the best actors are the ones who can pull off lots of different types of character or give many different levels to one performance. If Elijah Wood keeps going and shows the deterioration of Frodo's happiness and his gradual longing to possess the ring himself with the same gusto then, wow! He's damn good as well as gorgeous! ;)

[Isildur's Bane]

they regressed his character somewhat, making Frodo more juvenille, less sure of himself, and less spirited, than he appeared in the book. I also realise that most of this is down to screen play and director, and that EW and his big blue eyes, would have had little imput on this. I am just of the opinion, that such justifiable fear in situations such as those, merry and pippin would be the mosr freaked, with sam being apoplectic that someone would look at frodo wrong.

However i was just baiting you all when i made above comment about EW and his eyes, and for this I appologise. I suppose im just revealling my own insecurities and shortfalls.
sorry.

[Nimawae's hope]

Hey, Isildur, don't go puting yourself down now! We all still like you!:D Besides I know how fun it is to bait someone.:rolleyes: Its just that sometimes no one dives for it like we hope. Oh well! Better luck next time! ;)

[Isildur's Bane]

so not only are you nawamea's (?) hope, youre also Isildur's Bane's hope. Ta. it took so long for anyone to even nibble, never mind fully take the bait. nuts.

[Nimawae's hope]

He,he,he!:D

[Snaga]

Thinking about it there is a lot in the chapters in the Old Forest and Barrow Downs where you get to realise that Frodo is not a wimp. Also in the Shire when they evade the Black Riders. In the film this is made into an exciting/scary chase scene. In the book, although there is fear they do not lose control. You get to see that Frodo can hold his nerve under pressure. I think this change has a big impact on the film. (PS I'm not arguing that the Old Forest/Barrow Down stuff should have been in incidentally!!!)

Harad you're right about how Frodo is in the book. I'd forgotten that you pick up his history as being the worst young rascal in the East Farthing. But I'm not sold on this change, purely because he's not the Frodo that I always identified with!

[Harad]

In the book Frodo was a high-spirited lad who settles into the Master of BagEnd role rather comfortably during the years between Bilbo going away and Gandalf returning. He never goes adventuring that I remember, although he thinks about it. My impression was he might never have done so until "forced" by that Ring Thing.

In the movie he begins like one of the angelic kids around town--dutiful relative of Bilbo, admirer of Gandalf, gentle teaser of Sam. But theres no time in the movie Shire--note people already complain about its length--to go into more character depth.

The first test occurs in the Shadow of the Past sequence and Frodo already begins to show his merits. Considering that he finds out that he's been keeping Sauron's Bestest Bauble, the fact that he doesnt go catatonic and offers constructive solutions is a subtle but important demo of his courage. More follows along the path to Rivendell.

Besides the compression, and specific incidents that were missing, I dont see a divergence of movie Frodo from book Frodo, so when you say,

he's not the Frodo that I always identified with

I would like more info

[Harad]

Having seen the movie again, I am more convinced that criticisms of Frodo's lack of bravery are unfounded. It is true that he doesnt defy the Nazgul at the Fords as in the book. That one instance is used for another purpose. However thruout the movie there are many instances of his bravery, some more emphasized than in the book.

At Weathertop for instance he DOES defy the Nazgul. He draws his sword and prepares to fight. To criticize him for not standing until the end against the Ringwraiths is unfair. These are terrors of the ancient world that barely a warrior alive could stand up to. What other criticism of "Frodo the Barbarian" would be heard if Frodo had really matched blades with the Witch King?

At Rivendell his heroism is emphasized by having the scene where Sam begins packing to go back to the Shire. Frodo is ready to go home having done his bit, but later makes the choice to forsake his home, AGAIN--when he really knows what it means--and take the Ring to Mordor.

At Amon Hen, Frodo removes the Ring to escape Sauron on his own without the help of Gandalf as in the book.

It may be disappointing to some, that their "favorite" scence of Frodo's heroism is left out, but there are many more such scenes that overall show Frodo's character in the same light as the book.

[Mithiril]

Amen to that, Harad. I agree with all your observations here...but I would add the one I mentioned before: his resolve shown at the end of the movie, standing by the shore with ring in hand. I think the voice-over of Gandalf, reminding him that all we can do is make the most of the time given us is a defining moment and he shows real courage in his decision to go on.

nice excuse to see the movie again, huh?!

[Harad]

I am there, Mithril. When can you join me?

[Isildur's Bane]

oh, come on. get a room.

[Mithiril]

Well, I've been told in no uncertain terms that if I attempt to see the movie again, friends and family will have an "intervention".

I tried to convince them that there are worse things to be addicted to, but I guess they just don't get it...

and I haven't seen it THAT often, just a few times on some weekends, and then maybe there was that couple of times on my way home from work, I only lied to leave work early once and then...omigod, I DO have a problem!!

thanks anyway:D

[Jai]

Isildur,
I'm a bit late entering into this thread. I don't even know how it started anymore, after reading all the posts. But, a couple points stuck with me.

I have to confess - EW's 'expressions' and gorgeous eyes certainly grabbed hold of my heart strings. Hook, line, and sinker - you got me with that bait!

But....we're talking about Frodo's courage, right? :D

In the discussion of how Frodo's courage is portrayed in the film vs. the book, I am torn between what I "saw" and what I "know" from the books and "think" I saw in the film. Yes, there is much evidence of his 'internal' courage, but still, they eliminated most instances of 'outward' courage - he doesn't slash at the hand of the Barrow-Wight, he doesn't stab the Nazgul captain on Weathertop, and he doesn't stand up to the Nazgul's on his own at the ford. Now, the first and third examples here were simply sacrificed in the film due to editing and other character developments (Arwen), but why couldn't PJ have included Frodo managing to get in a swipe at the Nazgul on Weathertop? Yes, he was terrorized, but so were Sam, Pippin, and Merry, yet they were portrayed as 'standing up' to the Nazgul in close contact.

So, how much of Frodo's courage is believed by us because we bring it WITH us to the film vs. our seeing the courage in the film?

I can't believe I admit to this doubt. I love the film and have also raised the eyebrows of family and friends by my addiction to the whole topic (I won't admit how many times I've seen the film!). But this is one adaptation I'm not thrilled with.

[Mithiril]

Jai says:

"So, how much of Frodo's courage is believed by us because we bring it WITH us to the film vs. our seeing the courage in the film?"

VERY good point, Jai! I wondered the same thing when a friend of mine, who had not ever read the books, complained that she thought the movie was just one chase scene after another with no character development. I had to wonder if I had not noticed that simply because I don't NEED any character development. I know most of these characters better than I know my own family (sad but true).

It is an impossible question to answer since we can never go back to not knowing what it was like to read the books, nor would I want to.

I know that I believe Frodo to be one of the bravest characters in literature and while I see Frodo being brave in the movie, I do miss some of those scenes where he could have shown it a bit more dramatically.

[Isildur's Bane]

ok so I agree Frodo does do some brave stuff in the film as Harad cites, but in the book, ********edited***********, he is so much braver. he is a hobbit, stuborn and proud, almost to the point of pig headedness (Sam refusing to let Frodo go to Mordor alone, etc.) and so he knows that however scarey and evil the nazgul (and the cave troll in Moria) is he's not going to get what he wants easily. sorry but I think his character has been sold short. all IMHO naturally.


*****************edited by Grond*******************

[Minas]

Jai

I'm sure there is another instance of Frodo's outward bravery that has been left out of the movie.

He stabs the Balrog in the foot. In the movie they totally leave out this display of courage.:mad:

[Grond]

I believe you mean the Cave Troll. Aragorn cries, "One for the shire, The Hobbit's bite is deep. You have a good blade, Frodo son of Drogo." That is when the Cave Troll sticks his ugly foot through the door to Balin's chamber. Boromir notches his sword on the foot and Frodo stabs the foot with Sting. Frodo never got very close to the Balrog.

[Greenleaf]

Originally posted by Grond
I believe you mean the Cave Troll. Aragorn cries, "One for the shire, The Hobbit's bite is deep. You have a good blade, Frodo son of Drogo." That is when the Cave Troll sticks his ugly foot through the door to Balin's chamber. Boromir notches his sword on the foot and Frodo stabs the foot with Sting. Frodo never got very close to the Balrog.

That is who I understood it

[Wood Elf]

I do think the Ford scene was a big moment for Frodo, though I agree with Harad too, that he does indeed show bravery, even if it isn't outright. It's the littler things. I think the scene in the beginning where Gandalf is telling him about the ring and that Sauron is after it, and Frodo says, "Do they Gandalf?" The look on his face when he turns around while asking this was priceless (IMHO). It was that perfect blend of frightened, innocent, vunerability that he had on his face, and you could just read it there like an open book. That showed the weight of what he was taking on, and he knew it then. I think that also helps to add to the contrast of how he will become stronger. I too agree that Frodo did undergo quite a change from beginning of movie to end, well said Harad.