Personally, I don't like Orlando Bloom. I think he is a decent actor and to get such a huge role straight after drama school is impressive, but his voice drives me insane, especially as Paris in Troy. However, I did think that he managed to capture Legolas in a way similar to how I envisaged from reading the books. He has that surreal, inhuman quality that I usually dislike but which seems to suit an elf.
The character which was most ruined, not by the script but by the actor, was Aragorn. Don't get me wrong, Viggo's acting is good. In fact, had I seen it in any other movie, I would have called it exceptional. But, in the shadow of lesser roles such as John Noble, David Wenham, Sean Bean, Miranda Otto, Sean Astin, Ian McKellen, and Bernard Hill, all of whom completely outclass him, his performance seems two-dimensional and withdrawn. In comparison, Viggo appears to suffer from Tom Cruise syndrome- he's the star, the movie's all about him, so why bother acting when sitting there and sweating with a mysterious look on your face will get the fan girls writhing just as much?
I must admit, the script does have something to do with this, and maybe Viggo didn't have much to work with. After all, his character, although human, as portrayed with basically no flaws- his character doesn't really go through as much of an arc as he does in the book, nor does he go through as intense an emotional struggle. Or maybe he does, you just don't know because he is stony-faced throughout. And having three female major characters- two of whom like him and the other is his bride-to-be's grandmother- does little to appease this problem.
Did you know, I hadn't even noticed the little thing between Aragorn and Eowyn in the book until I watched the movie? I thought it was blatant disregard for literature when she fell for him in the theatrical version and didn't even give Faramir a passing glance. They do give it a quick mention in the extended version but it doesn't make sense without the book companion.
Anyway, back on topic, the other character that is ruined, not by the acting this time but by the script, is Frodo. Elijah Wood really does the best with what he's got, I've got to give him that. But the script reduces him to such a wuss that by the bit at Mount Doom he's nothing but a bit of baggage for Sam- literally. In the book, Frodo is at least an assertive and determined character, a hero like Bilbo. But in the movie, he is an antihero like Harry Potter- stuff happens to him, he just weathers it. I must admit, though, this degradation of Frodo does build up Sam's character, who was my favorite out of the two anyway.

I think he did very well! But...

In the books, Legolas was happy, almost always optimistic, and his spirits never wavered when the others were simply despairing. In the film, he seemed to be almost completely emotionless (except on the rare occasion when he smiled or grew angry). However, his fighting is simply to die for in my book.

Legolas' hard exterior might be accounted for by the fact that evil was once again stirring in his homeland. I sincerely hope that if my favorite Elf appears in the Hobbit, they will show a more jovial, perky side to him that was projected in the books.

In the words of Tolkien: "He was tall as a young tree, lithe, immensely strong, able swiftly to draw a great war-bow and shoot down a Nazg’l, endowed with the tremendous vitality of Elvish bodies, so hard and resistant to hurt that he went only in light shoes over rock or through snow, the most tireless of all the Fellowship."

Kudos to Orlando. I think he did well...I simply think there could have been more to the character.

I mostly agree with you, Gandalf. For some reason, I just don't like Legolas in the film. It might be the script, idk. But the movie Legolas has become known to some as "captain obvious." Like the scriptwriters didn't really know what lines to give him, so they just made him state the obvious every now and then. Like, "They run as if the very whips of their masters were behind them!" (Said as he was running past, when no one else felt like talking. I doubt Aragorn or Gimli even heard him.) or "You mean not to follow them?" Well, Aragron's just kinda standing there, flexing his bleeding arm. I don't think he's intending on catching up to them.
Orlando might have been better if he was older. He was just out of film school, and was really just a kid (like Elijah). You can just see it in his eyes every now and then in the film. He's like "This is so awesome, I'm in LOTR!" Other times he's like, "I feel so cool." Don't get me wrong, it doesn't ruin the movie for me. It's the type of thing that's kind of annoying at times, laughable at other times, and sometimes I don't even notice it.

I think the other character I kinda didn't like was Galadriel. She seemed to act like an evil witch until she "passed the test." Once she passed the test, she seemed perfect. Exactly how I imagined her. "You are a ringbearer, Frodo. To bear a ring of power is to be alone." This line and others after the whole "dark queen" deal seemed to hit the nail on the head. I don't really know what the deal was, but she just seemed weird and un-Tolkienish beforehand. Like she was trying to be a mysterious elf who reads minds. But, again, it doesn't really bother me. I think that if, in a movie that big, if you kind of mess up a little bit on only two characters, you've done remarkably well.

I would have to agree with Gandalf and LadyLegolas. Personally, I don't think they made a single mistake in casting--not one. Every part is beautifully played, in a way that stays true to the book, and every character is exactly the way I had imagined he or she would be.

Just to clarify, I did not say I disliked either Aragorn or Frodo in the movie, nor did I say that the movie Aragorn does not go through a significant character arc. However, if you put it all in perspective- Boromir and Faramir far surpassed all expectations I had for their renditions in the movie, with, I thought, characters more developed than they were in the book, despite much less lines. I took more time to get used to how radically different Gollum was from what I imagined, but he is now my favorite character and I don't think he could possibly have been done any better by anyone. Sir Ian McKellen was the empitome of Gandalf- I realized this when I tried to imagine Christopher Lee as Gandalf after finding out it was his life ambition. In short, most of the actors performed their undisbutable best while working on these films, resulting in the three greatest films ever made to this day.
This includes Viggo and Elijah. They give really stirring renditions of believable characters, far better than any of their other work. But, when compared to some of the other actors, and compared also to their literary counterparts, they do seem lesser. Although good, they are overshadowed by others' brilliance, and that's why Aragorn and Frodo are probably my least favorite characters in the film.

I can't say that any character was ruined for me, though I would agree that some important characters are overshadowed a bit by the acting of others, though in the end it felt all balanced out good and proper.

I can't imagine anyone else in the roles that were played by the original cast, they are those characters to me. Orlando as well, he has that elvish quality about him.

Personally, I thought Orlando was perfect as Legolas and as the character (Paris?) in Troy. THe only role he was a little weak in was his Pirates of the Caribbean character. In that particular role he did seem overshadowed by Kiera Knightly and Johnny Depp.

Peace and Long Life
[b:jqjmw6et]Gandalfs Beard[/b:jqjmw6et]

Gandalf , Your Beard agrees. Orlando does have talent afterall. It may have been the direction in Pirates, or simply that the role was unsuited for Bloom. He shone the most when he was freed from his "straight man" role and given some comedy bits

Happy Holidays
[b:dnxlyi5n]Gandalfs Beard[/b:dnxlyi5n]

P.S. As your beard I must ask you.....Please.....brush me a little more often. I have to compete, you know, with Dumbledore's Beard.

I liked Orlando when I first saw it. But watching the commentary, I didn't like his motivations at times.
Let me explain. When Gandalf fell in Moria, Orlando tried to express in his acting the elves inability to fully comprehend death, seeing as they are immortal. I felt that was terribly wrong. The elves, seeing as they live so long, know full well just what death is and means. Be it using the rings of power to try and stop the inevitable or Noldor slaying the Teleri in Valinor (why oh why does the name of the ports there escape me?). Elves have been given very deep lessons is just what death is.
I think there were others, but that one really stuck out to me. Especially if you've ever seen a movie called Death Becomes Her. A character at the end refuses eternal life. Saying that to live forever would mean seeing everyone and everything around you that you hold dear coming to an end. That would make for a very sad eternal life.

[quote="Show":19xewfng]Be it using the rings of power to try and stop the inevitable or Noldor slaying the Teleri in Valinor (why oh why does the name of the ports there escape me?).[/quote:19xewfng]

It is known (if I know what you're talking about) as the Kinslaying at Swanhaven. I think the elven name for Swanhaven is Aqualonde.

Just a quick note: Happy Birthday to Orlando today.

Yeah, this really was Orlando's best role to date. He seems a little out of his depth in the Pirates trilogy, next to Knightly and Depp. Which is odd, because he really has the depth in LotR to match Viggo, McKellan and the rest .

As for cheerful and happy, I think he came across that way in the films. All the other Elves are deadly serious Vulcans, and there he is trading barbs and boozing with Gimli .

[b:30githyv]GB[/b:30githyv]

okay, real quick in case anyone still cares:

I think that at times Bloom's performance is hindered simply by the dialoge he was given... what actor wouldnt sound a little goofy saying things like "there is a red sun, blood has been spilled this night"? Or the "run as if the very whips..." line? Terribly difficult dialoge to say without sounding silly. Just cumbersome imo.

With Viggo, I think that his physicality in the role was amazing. The thing that I feel hurt his performance the most was that so much of the film required ADR. Often times ("You cannot wield it..." his voice just sounds squeeky and weak. But if you watch what he is doing physically, in the moment when he was in the character, he is amazing.

Also, I think that Gandalf the Grey was the single most well portrayed character in all three films. Gandalf the White, however, I found to be rather boring, staunchy, and there simply as an expositional character. He's a bit more charming in the extended versions of the films, but for me hes a bit too perfect. Always knows what to do, what to say... I much prefer the somewhat in over his head Gandalf the Grey. But hey, what do I know?