Elrond - Like Him?

[Ariana Undomiel]

When I first saw pictures of Hugo Weaving and heard that he was to portray Elrond Half-Elven Lord of Rivendell, I was pretty dissapointed. I thought he was not at all good for the part. However, when I actually saw him in the film, I found that he was perfect afterall. How many people had experiences like that?

I also thought we could have a little poll concerning this.

[Talimon]

He was good, but certainly not great. This is one of the rare instances in the film where the acting was actually better then looks. I thought Hugo acted Elrond better then he actually looked him. He was also very dark. I thought they really needed a scene with him laughing. Not in the council obviously, but just in general.

[Flame of Anor]

I thought that Hugo was an interesting surprise. At first i was like, wow that is the bad guy from the Matrix. But now i am used to it. He did quite well for the part of Elrond.

-Flame

[Grond]

I voted he was awful but I actually like Hugo as an actor. My problem was with the characterization PJ gave him. He seemed genuinely distrustful of Man and I was surprised at this, especially since he was Aragorn's Foster-father. If you disliked a race and felt it would likely fail again, why on Earth would you have anything to do with it??????

[Grond]

I voted he was awful but I actually like Hugo as an actor. My problem was with the characterization PJ gave him. He seemed genuinely distrustful of Man and I was surprised at this, especially since he was Aragorn's Foster-father. If you disliked a race and felt it would likely fail again, why on Earth would you have anything to do with it??????

[ReadWryt]

I'm sure that Hugo did his best with the role as it was written, so it would probably be unfair to bag on the guy for my hatred of the character as it was portrayed....

[Melara]

Hugo was fine (but perhaps it is a good thing that I have never seen the Matrix...).

[Grond]

Originally posted by ReadWryt
I'm sure that Hugo did his best with the role as it was written, so it would probably be unfair to bag on the guy for my hatred of the character as it was portrayed.... Amen!!!

[Talimon]

I'm sure that Hugo did his best with the role as it was written, so it would probably be unfair to bag on the guy for my hatred of the character as it was portrayed....

That is a legit point, but do take into account that such actors as McKellen and Sean Bean had heavy input into the dialogue and portrayal of thier respective charachters.

As a side-note, what do people think about the fact that Elrond will be playing one role or another in TTT? I've even heard that he might fight... ?!? Somehow having in Elrond in the TTT is more offensive to me then having Arwen.

[Grond]

Originally posted by Talimon


That is a legit point, but do take into account that such actors as McKellen and Sean Bean had heavy input into the dialogue and portrayal of thier respective charachters.

As a side-note, what do people think about the fact that Elrond will be playing one role or another in TTT? I've even heard that he might fight... ?!? Somehow having in Elrond in the TTT is more offensive to me then having Arwen. Those changes (if true) just add fuel to the fire to me. I am also probably more sensitive to the changes than most due largely to the fact that I've read the book so many times. The plot is so deeply ingrained into my psyche that I feel any change is a sacrilege.

I just feel that he could have made ommissions and changes for the sake of time without making the (what I deem) serious characterization changes. They appear unnecessary to me and I feel the movie would have been just as great a cinematic event had he left well enough alone. :(

[Jon]

I think he was brilliant, in terms of looks. He looked excellent as Elrond - not quite Elvish, not quite Human.

[Talimon]

I just feel that he could have made ommissions and changes for the sake of time without making the (what I deem) serious characterization changes. They appear unnecessary to me and I feel the movie would have been just as great a cinematic event had he left well enough alone.

Concerning your last sentance, when I first saw the movie that was one of my main gripes with it. While I thought it had some great parts, the pulsing question in my mind was "why? What was the problem keeping things as they were?". While many of the changes are certainly based on time constraints, others were pure creative decisions. I think, after further viewing and much thought, that PJ had a very strong creative vision about how the movie should be done, and how certain scenes should play out. When November comes along and we'll see the extended DVD perhaps some of the mystery surrounding the changes will clear up. But for now it's all up for debate. I think we can say this much with certainty: the movie could have been good with changes and without them, and in this case it was with. PJ's version of the tale is certainly different then others, but I find it incredibly interesting. I just downloaded the 10 minute preview that's on the DVD for TTT. In it PJ says something to the effect of, "In a sense [TTT] is a tale of genocide." He is referring to Sarumans and Saurons mercilessness. Now while there was never a doubt as to whether Sauron or Saruman were evil in the book, there aren't many events that actually crystilize this in our mind. Perhaps with Saruman his killing ents and trees. But Tolkien really chose to have evil be more of a precense then a specific object or action. I think PJ, in a wise move as far as I am concerned, is adapting this view for todays audience in order to make Saruman more of a hated charachter. I get the impression this is being done through the hostility towards the Rohan refugees, which is never elaborated in the books. One sentence that does stick in my mind is Theoden talking to Saruman, though:

"Even if your war on me was just - as it was not, for were you ten times as wise you would have no right to rule me and mine for your own profit as you desired - even so, what will you say of your torches in Westfold and that children that lie dead there?"

Such bits are just lightly alluded to, but PJ has chosen to flesh them out. It's a far riskier road to walk, but I respect him for taking it, even moreso for managing to make a good movie when all is said and done.

[Grond]

Originally posted by Talimon
...Such bits are just lightly alluded to, but PJ has chosen to flesh them out. It's a far riskier road to walk, but I respect him for taking it, even moreso for managing to make a good movie when all is said and done. And as I have said repeatedly in the past, I have no problem with created plot. I'm not happy with it but can overlook it and still enjoy the movie. Going into detail about the evil deeds done to the Peoples of Rohan or Gondor is fine. Adding additional material in the Battle of Helm's Deep is fine. Making existing characters in the book do things that are clearly not in the book is not fine.

Talimon, I think you and I are closer in our opinions than one might think. I have no problems with PJ's creative processes in adding material... it is when he changes material that I begin to cringe. ;)