[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.

[Sam Cree]

Well, Tolkien considered LOTR to be one book only, dividing it in three and making it a "trilogy" was really an artificial construct of the publisher.

So, I guess I have been thinking of the movies the same way, not as 3 movies, but as 3 sections of just one. Agreed that there is no "leading" character or protagonist, but I don't have too much trouble figuring out that an ordinary hobbit, Frodo, is easily more of a central character than the rest of the heros, important and wonderful though they be.

I guess it makes sense, in a way, that the fellow who comes closest to a Hollywood style "leading man" is a commie.