9/27/2005 c1 8ValkyrieRavenfeather
Gay and stupid do not go hand-in-hand as some people think.

6/5/2005 c1 21TheDuke'sLover
You knwo what is bullshit? You. You go on stereotypes to see that "Frodo might be gay" Just becuase a guy is caring and smart doesn't mean that he's gay. and if he was, is it your business? Does he give a shit about what you think?(or does anyone?) If you acted a bit more like Frodo, people would like you better, you homophobe.If you really hate him so much, don't watch the movie. Simple as that. You don't need to write a homophobic poem about fictional characters.

4/1/2005 c1 116natanna
I like the 3rd stanza. Heh.

Interesting take on Frodo. I do think he was... soft... in the movie, but I go by the book. Two very different things.

Btw.. the "king" referred to in The Return of the King was actually Aragorn claiming the throne of Gondor. Nothing to do with Frodo.

I still say Peter Jackson spoiled the whole story with his movie but oh well, the scenery was nice. :)

2/10/2005 c1 40EternalSummer
Betrayed! Gah! I am ashamed of you! How could you say such horrible things about darling Frodo? Have you read the books, I wonder, or are you just going by the films. Because Frodo certaintly wasn't pampered as much as most of the wealthier hobbits.

From the age of 12 to 21, he lived as an orphan. Though not abused, he certaintly didn't get pampered in Brandy Hall, which was terribly crowded. When he moved in with Bilbo, Frodo was allowed some luxuries, but he also worked very hard.

Although Peter Jackson does not stress this in the movies, Frodo was highly educated, and much more intelligent than any of the other hobbits. He alone knew how to speak Elvish, he knew a good bit of the history of Middle Earth, he was well-read, and he also read into the characters and intentions of people very well.

At that comment you might be inclined to scream "Gollum!" loudly, to remind me that Frodo did not judge him very well, but in the books, Frodo had a very good idea of what he was up to. Frodo repeatedly threatened Gollum, if he practiced any treachery. Since Gollum was enslaved by the ring, if Frodo, wearing it, were to command the creature, Smeagol would be forced to adhere. Frodo understood this well, and used the point to his advantage. Tolkien actually had an entire passage explaining that Frodo's kindness was not to be mistaken with stupidity, and that Frodo gave his trust with a fair measure of caution.

In the end, when Gollum attacks Frodo on Mount Doom, Frodo fights him off and then says something to this effect: "If you trouble me again, *you will cast yourself into the fire.*" A few pages later, Frodo succums to the ring, but Gollum attacks him (because of the fact that Frodo spared Smeagol earlier, I might add.) Gollum takes the ring, and what happens? He casts himself into the fire!

Again, I don't know if you've read the books or not, so I'm explaining this just in case you haven't. Things went down quite a bit differently in Tolkien's version, and it is quite obvious that Frodo is the hero, and, I might add, wasn't gay. Tolkien was a very devout Christian, and I don't think he would make his protagonist gay. Peter Jackson, whose main goal in life was to hype up the drama, made Frodo a much weaker character. That being said, I don't believe Elijah Wood can be blamed for the way his character came off. Peter Jackson was telling Elijah how to play the scenes, and he was just going along with the director's wishes.

In the book, Frodo did have his moments of weakness, but we see in the brief time that Sam carries the ring that Frodo is handling it quite well. Sam, who probably was the second best person for the position of ring-bearer, had the ring for less than 48 hours, and was very close to putting on the ring a number of times. Therefore, I think it is safe to conclude that Frodo did a much better job than anyone else might have.

Frodo was also a very kind person, with a vibrant personality. We have to look early in the text to see Frodo as he was most of his life, because the ring certainly made him less amiable. But if you look at the early parts of the book we see that he was very witty, and an altogether good person.

In HP, I believe, Sirius Black says that a good way to judge a person's character is to look at the way they treat their "inferiors." We see very little of the relationship of Frodo and Sam as it was before the quest, but Frodo must have been a very good master to inspire such loyalty in Sam. In what we do see, Frodo is always very courteous and kindly to Sam, and their relationship quickly blossoms into a pure friendship. Tolkien presents The Shire as a community rooted in social customs and stations, so for Frodo to be so friendly to Sam shows the kind of hobbit that he is.

I'm sorry to go on ranting like this, but... I can't help it! I don't know how you could be so hideously mean to my darling hobbit, but I hope I have done something to aid you in rethinking your harsh oppinion of Frodo. Sorry to have bored you.

-EternalSummer

12/14/2004 c1 183Jo Madden
I LOVE IT! It's hilarious. I am a LOTR fan (but i prefer Sam) and you've said what needed to be said. Keep it up.

9/26/2004 c1 46AmberSky
I gotta say no to this one, mostly because I love the Lord of the Rings, and especially Elijah Wood. . .because he is so fine. Some parts Frodo could have done more. but the ring was like. . .corrupting him .. .and i'm getting way too into this so i'll stop. (Keep criticizing kerry though! i'll support that.) Please e-mail me and tell me why you found my one poem to be 'another bunch of crappy lyrics' i'd really like to get some constructive criticisim on that one. . .or we could just like different styles of music.