first LJ posting
Elijah Wood’s acting: Why you have to think (and look) twice.
Having been a fan of Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings saga for many years, I had always avoided watching the Peter Jackson films because I was afraid they would change my appreciation of the books. However last year, I finally succumbed to the temptation, and I was completely blown away, not the least because of Elijah Wood’s performance as Frodo (my favorite character). Since then, I have become a real admirer of his work. When reading comments and reviews about his various roles I was really struck by how much opinions on the quality of his acting varied. Perhaps this is normal for any actor but in his case the differences of opinion seemed extreme to me. I intend to use the first few entries of this Live Journal to explore this enigma and I hope for some response.
Instead of beginning with Frodo (of which so much has been written already), I thought I’d begin with his recent role as Ryan in Wilfred. In the same week in which he was nominated as best comedy actor for this role by the International Press Academy (Satellite Award), I read a blog review by a Brazilian reviewer who had a very different opinion. He described the performance as sub-standard, mainly criticizing Elijah’s lack of comedic timing, which he attributed to a lack of experience with comedic roles. To me, this is a typical example of how people’s opinions are formed by preconceived ideas. In a traditional comedy you might expect the role of Ryan to be played for laughs. But Wilfred is not a traditional comedy. It is a psychological drama, played out through comic situations. Through the entire series, Ryan is unsure of “who, what, why” Wilfred is. For the character of Ryan, a traditional, sharp comedic timing would be entirely wrong, because he has to think just that micro-second longer to evaluate the situation. So, you really have to think about the concept of Wilfred before being able to judge the performance properly.
I was reminded of my own reaction to an early promo of Wilfred. After Wilfred has said something disgusting, Ryan replies “You’re an animal”. When I first heard this, I thought the delivery was off; that there should have been more emphasis on the first syllable of the word “animal”. Thinking about it now, I realize I was wrong. You would only want to stress the word “Animal” if you thought you were talking to a human. But Ryan knows he’s not. So the neutral delivery is entirely appropriate. It’s a tiny detail but it shows how tricky the role of Ryan must have been to play. What I’m trying to say is that Elijah has captured the “truth” of Ryan; he really “disappeared” into the character, as he did in so many of his other roles.
One of the reasons for the different views on Elijah’s acting may be his wide-ranging choice of roles. People may find it difficult to forget his previous characters, in itself a sign of the strength of his characterizations. More about that in a future entry.
Having been a fan of Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings saga for many years, I had always avoided watching the Peter Jackson films because I was afraid they would change my appreciation of the books. However last year, I finally succumbed to the temptation, and I was completely blown away, not the least because of Elijah Wood’s performance as Frodo (my favorite character). Since then, I have become a real admirer of his work. When reading comments and reviews about his various roles I was really struck by how much opinions on the quality of his acting varied. Perhaps this is normal for any actor but in his case the differences of opinion seemed extreme to me. I intend to use the first few entries of this Live Journal to explore this enigma and I hope for some response.
Instead of beginning with Frodo (of which so much has been written already), I thought I’d begin with his recent role as Ryan in Wilfred. In the same week in which he was nominated as best comedy actor for this role by the International Press Academy (Satellite Award), I read a blog review by a Brazilian reviewer who had a very different opinion. He described the performance as sub-standard, mainly criticizing Elijah’s lack of comedic timing, which he attributed to a lack of experience with comedic roles. To me, this is a typical example of how people’s opinions are formed by preconceived ideas. In a traditional comedy you might expect the role of Ryan to be played for laughs. But Wilfred is not a traditional comedy. It is a psychological drama, played out through comic situations. Through the entire series, Ryan is unsure of “who, what, why” Wilfred is. For the character of Ryan, a traditional, sharp comedic timing would be entirely wrong, because he has to think just that micro-second longer to evaluate the situation. So, you really have to think about the concept of Wilfred before being able to judge the performance properly.
I was reminded of my own reaction to an early promo of Wilfred. After Wilfred has said something disgusting, Ryan replies “You’re an animal”. When I first heard this, I thought the delivery was off; that there should have been more emphasis on the first syllable of the word “animal”. Thinking about it now, I realize I was wrong. You would only want to stress the word “Animal” if you thought you were talking to a human. But Ryan knows he’s not. So the neutral delivery is entirely appropriate. It’s a tiny detail but it shows how tricky the role of Ryan must have been to play. What I’m trying to say is that Elijah has captured the “truth” of Ryan; he really “disappeared” into the character, as he did in so many of his other roles.
One of the reasons for the different views on Elijah’s acting may be his wide-ranging choice of roles. People may find it difficult to forget his previous characters, in itself a sign of the strength of his characterizations. More about that in a future entry.