I LOVE MOVIE! FRODO AND I'M DYING ON THIS HILL
Ok, now that I got that off my chest, let's chat a bit, shall we? Because this hobbit *violently shakes Big Blue-eyed Frodo in their fist* did not go there in hell and back again to receive this amount of slander.
PJ's Frodo has had a historically, um... not great reception in the fandom. From being called a wimp, gay (in a derogatory 2000's way), useless, and 'not the actual hero' (which misses the whole point of Tolkien establishing a whole Fellowship in the first book!!), to being disparaged for not showcasing all of the traits of his book counterpart, the little guy has not seen a day of rest ever since he came back from Mordor in ROTK.
Movie!Frodo's biggest problem as the protagonist of a trilogy full to the brim with badasses and heroic feats reminiscent of legend is that he's a reactive character. In the book he gets to do some cool stuff (like standing up to the ringwraiths) which show that he is brave, knowleadgable, wise, respectable, collected, and has some leadership skills he puts to good use once it's only him and Sam. Book!Frodo is the most mature of the four hobbits, who look up to him in virtue of being the oldest. He has also spent 17 years as the master of Bag End, which grants him a great deal of experience before the quest even begins. He's well-settled in his ways and secure.
The movie never goes to any length to establish that more than a few months have gone by between the night when Frodo inherits the ring, and the moment that Gandalf comes back to check on it. We see a montage of Gandalf on his way to Gondor, then him reading in a Gondorian library, and that's it. For all we know, it's been what, roughly two months? Especially since Sam is still dealing with his Rosie Problems, and no one has aged visibly. It's obvious that the movie is not functioning on the exact same timeline than the books.
All of that to say that Movie!Frodo never gets to become Book!Frodo before he's sent away by Gandalf. He doesn't get over a decade's worth of experience in the dealings of the Shire, and he doesn't get accustomed to being on his own in Bag End long-term with the responsibilities that would bring, and thus, he just doesn't have the same well of knowleadge to operate with that Book!Frodo had. He hasn't grown into himself or his role as Master Baggins. I seriously doubt that the movies intended to make us think he is older than 40, and that would be 7 years too old to still be receiving "don't get into trouble" advice from his elders like he does in the Green Dragon scene.
This shift can look small, but it's nothing short of. It shrinks the age and experience differential between Frodo's character and the rest of the hobbits'. His role is no longer that of beloved leader who also is the trustworthy older cousin and Master. He's lowered to their level, and we're meant to see him the way they do in this version of their dynamic: protectively. Not as a guide, but a friend under a terrible burden. And despite this change, the narrative never makes it seem like he matters less than the others, even as the other hobbits go through more traditional hero journeys.
That is so important to me. We have a Frodo that is just as out of his comfort zone as Book!Frodo, but that lacks age and expertise, and yet, he is given as much respect as characters widely recognized as brave and strong. The narrative is compassionate and understanding of him, and doesn't demand from this young adult to show external signs of worthiness for his story to matter.
So yes, Movie!Frodo doesn't have a show-off. He stumbles more than he fights, like when he just trips on Wheathertop and doesn't even put on a fight. Really, count how many times he trips next time you watch the movies, it's greatly amusing. Nonetheless, what makes Frodo the only one who can take the ring as far as he did is something not measurable or quantifiable from the outside. It's not his wisdom, or dexterity, or being quick on his feet, but his endurance, integrity, and selfless love for others; friends, allies, home.
Book!Frodo is not necessarily better than Movie!Frodo because he better fits what we expect a protagonist and hero to be. Both Frodos have this well of care and inner strength, and that is what makes them both fit to take the ring to Mordor. You can like Book!Frodo more for what he gets to do, or because he's more composed and even more rough around the edges than young, inexperienced, vulnerable Movie!Frodo. But to write the latter off when he's, at the core, endowed with the same capability for love and courage is a disservice to both versions of the character.
And as to Movie!Frodo, I love that we get a protagonist that is allowed to not be infallible (though I'm not saying Book!Frodo is). He cries and trips (a lot!!), and suffers immensely yet shows so little, and the inner battle he is fighting is still as deserving of respect, as is the willpower to go through the fires of Mordor famished, cold and feverish, knowing that he won't come back from it. That's a noble sacrifice, and he's written and acted with such humanity. I am very fond of the writing choice, however controversial, of having a main character that struggles in the way he does. He doesn't have to be a great fighter or possess wisdom beyond his years to be taken seriously. We're asked to empathize with someone that is much more likely to be what we would be if we were tasked with carrying the One Ring, but with a heart and spirit that makes up for it. Like, imagine being yeeted out of the home you love at, say, 20 to confront all kinds of perils and nightmares?
We are tasked with empathizing with that guy. Still guileless, though not untouched by grief. Introverted, loyal, compassionate, and incredibly giving and supportive. He gave himself for the World, and he never got to enjoy his life fully afterwards. And unlike Book!Frodo, he didn't even get to carve out his place in The Shire for 17 years prior to this sacrifice. That should be enough to admire and respect him; the fact that he took a burden no one should carry upon himself, before even fully defining who he would be someday, and have that choice taken by the trauma of what he went through.
It is a beautiful task. Frodo's merit and worth are not based on how well he adjusts to the audience's expectations of what a male main character has to be. It is not dependant on cinematic conventions or ideas of "acceptable" masculinity. The unspoken, invisible emotional labor (a job that is asigned to women according to Western gender roles) of having endured the Ring's sway for over a year is enough proof of his good character as an individual. And sure, we can lament what was lost or changed in adaptation. But Movie!Frodo is not less noble for being different. And I personally really like this recontextualization of his character, I consider it a poignant writing choice. And please, how can anyone ever not appreciate Elijah Wood's job as Frodo?? He's incredible at embodying this younger, but still as admirable version of him.
