Viggo Mortensen: The Accidental King

www.foxnews.com ^ | December 12, 2003 | Anthony Breznican

[FReepaholic]

LOS ANGELES

[FReepaholic]

I'm not a fan of Jackson's decision to use Mortensen as Aragorn but I agree that Townsend would have been too young.

[ecurbh]

Ring Ping!!

There and Back Again: The Journeys of Flat Frodo

Anyone wishing to be added to or removed from the Ring-Ping list, please don't hesitate to let me know.

[HairOfTheDog]

His ideas are wacky, but.... Viggo did a good job.....

This sounds like background to pushing him for an actor Oscar.... Are they going to push Sean Astin or Elijah Wood for Supporting Oscars?

[Wneighbor]

"Everyone thinks (Aragorn) is the man for the job, because he has humility, a concern with the consequences of his actions and words on others and an interest in finding common ground with other people....."

Interesting to me.... this is his quote right after talking about his criticism of the Bush administration. And if I had to apply those words to a real life recent leader, I'd apply them to Pres. Bush.

[HairOfTheDog]

And if I had to apply those words to a real life recent leader, I'd apply them to Pres. Bush.

As would I!

[Lil'freeper]

There's no way to single out any of the actors fairly. They need a new category: Best Ensemble.

[Sam Cree]

So, I guess the idea must be that Aragorn is the main character? If so, Jackson failed, at least in part.

[HairOfTheDog]

Well, no - there is of course no character that stands out as a definate lead.... But in this case, since he is the ~title~ role, maybe he could be run as 'actor in a leading role' instead of competing for 'supporting actor'.

That's my theory.

[Restorer]

IMHO, LOTR (book version, anyway) has four main heroes: Gandalf, Aragorn, Frodo and Sam. Each is heroic in a different way.

[BradyLS]

IMHO, LOTR (book version, anyway) has four main heroes: Gandalf, Aragorn, Frodo and Sam. Each is heroic in a different way.

That's interesting. It has almost as many leading villains: Sauron, Saruman, and Gollum!

[Restorer]

Couldn't you stick Shelob and the Witch-king in there somewhere?

[Restorer]

he had another actor cast as the warrior Aragorn, a reluctant hero

Movie-Aragorn, maybe.

Bokk-Aragorn is an eighty year old war veteran. No reluctance to fight whatsoever, although he does suffer some doubt as to whether his tactics are the right ones.

[BradyLS]

So, I guess the idea must be that Aragorn is the main character? If so, Jackson failed, at least in part.

It's weird. Aragorn must do so much in the book. Yet all of it is for nought if Frodo and Sam fail in the their quest. Once the Fellowship breaks, all the fun, exciting things happen to Aragorn. All the depressing, harrowing things happen to Frodo and Sam. I have to admit that even if the movies were closer to the books, they would probably not be as popular as movies, because people hate to leave a theater feeling sad.

As it is, these movies have erred on the side of action and adventure whenever that choice must be made. They are still good movies and they are fun to return to. But, for me, they don't have nearly the impact that the books do.

[BradyLS]

They are indeed deadly villains. Just like the Balrog. (And who can forget that?) They're just not leading villains!

[BradyLS]

I'm not a fan of Jackson's decision to use Mortensen as Aragorn but I agree that Townsend would have been too young.

The one I can't et over is Elijah Woods as Frodo, though he has done a fine job, too. In the books, Frodo is 50.

[HairOfTheDog]

I got around that one with the notion that Hobbits don't "come of age" till 33. 33 might be equivalent to 18. I think they are slow-maturing. And Frodo would not show signs of aging once he began carrying the ring.

The ages of Frodo and Aragorn can't be compared to our own, given their life-spans. I didn't see either of them as on the way home from 'middle age' in the story.

[BradyLS]

While I agree. I think both characters would still be at least be a little older in appearance than they are in movies. Aragorn had traveled most of Middle Earth by the time Fellowship begins. He at least should look somewhat more rugged and care-worn than he does.

[HairOfTheDog]

Huh.... I think he looks pretty much the 'age' I pictured him.... a man in his prime, but that has been sleepin' outside awhile.

[HairOfTheDog]

I think if there is a criticism of the hobbits 'as cast'.... it would be that they are not at all fat.... Even all the weight Sean Astin put on didn't meet the description of round.

[ecurbh]

Well, I did some figuring. Aragorn lives to be 210, and is 87 at the time of the War of the Ring, so he is about 41.5% through his lifespan. If the life expectancy of a non-Numenorian is 91 years (using Eomer's lifespan as the baseline), that makes Aragorn the equivalent of a 38 year-old. And Viggo is 45, so I think he is a pretty good fit age-wise.