MovieChat Forums > The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) Discussion > Ring Resistance

Ring Resistance

posted 4 years ago by Ace_Spade (9367)
24 replies | jump to latest

SPOILERS contained within:

Who do you think had the highest resistance to the Ring?

Candidates:

Bilbo - possessed the Ring for decades, remained mostly intact, although he had started to display some signs of decay/corruption/addiction. Worth noting: he was far from Mordor, Sauron was not yet returned to full power, and he used the Ring infrequently and for generally selfless/benign reasons.

Frodo - carried the Ring for years, "owned" it for longer. Brought the Ring (mostly) on his own all the way to Mt. Doom at the height of Sauron's return. He did wind up corrupted, however briefly, at the very end, though.

Sam - was nearby to the Ring for quite some time, never corrupted or displayed signs of corruption. Carried/wore the Ring for a short period of time, close to/within Mordor.

Saruman - never touched the Ring, but desired it and its power. Still, he fought against Sauron and the forces of evil for centuries before being corrupted by a lust for power, and he was using a Palantir.

We could also speculate on Gandalf, other members of the Fellowship, and Galadriel as people who are near or directly offered the Ring. Boromir, Isildur, and Gollum are clearly not front-runners, as they were relatively quickly and totally corrupted by the Ring.

For my money, it's Frodo. He didn't own the Ring as long as his uncle, and he sank further into its sway, but he was also burdened far more than anybody else who claimed it - bringing it at the height of Sauron's power right to his doorstep. I've gotta figure the Morgul wound wasn't helping any.

As pure as Sam is, he wasn't subjected to the Ring's direct will for nearly as long as his beloved master.

[–] Moonglum9 (10726) 4 years ago

Tom Bombadil. He's a merry fellow.

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 4 years ago

You're right, of course. Tom held it, wore it, and was completely unaffected by it. More fool me for forgetting Master Bombadil.

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

The One Ring took one look at Bombadil and skipped ahead fifty pages, just like half the fandom.

[–] billbrown7071 (3193) 4 years ago

Have No Clue what the answer is to your Question

Just wanted to Show my love for this Movie and Trilogy

I Avoided these movies at all costs for almost 15 years ....

In 2014 I watched The Lord Of the Rings Trilogy for the 1st time...It was the single greatest movie experience of my life...

I've since Watched The Trilogy 7 Times and I always Love it just as much every time

I have the opinion TLOTR trilogy is by far the greatest Trilogy ever made and also Literally 3 of the greatest individual movies ever made

I truly wish I could go back in Time and experience these movies in The Theaters as They Originally Came Out, I think thats the only thing That could Top my experience I had watching these films in 2014

Its also worth noting, after watching TLOTR Trilogy in 2014 and having such an amazing experience, I of course immediately wanted to watch The Hobbit Trilogy...

and While I'm in no way saying The Hobbit films are even close to the level of The LOTR films, I must admit, I absolutely enjoy the hell out of The Hobbit films as well, I've watched them 5 times and enjoy them every time...

Peter Jackson did something absolutely Legendary and IMO almost Magical with The LOTR Trilogy.

The Battle of Helms Deep, Is one of my favorite Movie Sequences of all time.

I keep hoping ever since The Covid 19 crisis started and some Movies theaters are playing older movies in absence of New Movies, That I'll read somewhere about a movie theater playing The LOTR trilogy in theaters....I would drive HOURS for a chance to see these films in theaters!

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 4 years ago

I don't know the answer, either; I'm just speculating. Just a little nerdout moment.

Books are brilliant, and I really love the movies, too. If we're only counting "official" trilogies, spinning out one storyline, then Lord of the Rings would top my list, or at least compete heavily with Star Wars, The Godfather, and other top-tier triplets. If they were "unofficial" trilogies, then The Man with No Name would be there somewhere, too, and I'd probably top my list with The Three Colours Trilogy, which is breathtaking.

That said: I agree with you: the LotR films are magical experiences that I will deeply treasure, and I can absolutely see them topping favourite film lists. They're also rare (excellent) epic films and (even more) rare fantasy movies. Everything about them is, uh...precious.

I didn't care for the Hobbit trilogy. It had its moments, but I thought the pacing was way off, it got sidetracked too easily, and the story alterations really hurt it. However, Freeman's Bilbo was note-perfect, and there are lots of things to love. Mostly, I love the scenes when Bilbo meets Gollum and where Bilbo meets Smaug; those are great. I also love the post-combat moment between Bilbo and Gandalf: no dialogue, just this calm after the storm where Bilbo is feeling all this stuff from the fight and doesn't know what to do and Gandalf just starts cleaning his pipe as if to say, "There's nothing you can do; life goes on. This is the way of it."

Helm's Deep was a brilliant sequence. I recommend this video on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn2-PUq1Z84&vl=en

Have you seen the Hobbit cartoon? The Rankin-Bass one from the 70s? I quite like that one. I also appreciate Ralph Bakshi's attempt to film Lord of the Rings, although that's a bit of a flawed gem.

I'm sure that someday, somewhere LOTR will return to theatres and you'll get to see the big screen version.

[–] LetoAtreides (474) 3 years ago

The big difference between Bilbo and Frodo is that the first merely viewed it as a magic ring that allowed him to disappear while the second knew from day one that it was the Ring of Power. I think that made it a lot worst for Frodo.

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 3 years ago

It might have been able to burrow further into his mind, yes, as it would have preoccupied his thoughts and caused him to dwell on its power and purpose more. But that would speak to Frodo's resistance even more. If it were a greater burden, then it follows that his was the greater effort to take on such a thing.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12386) 3 years ago

Actually, believe it or not, Hobbits in general have the highest resistance to the Ring. My brother says it's because Hobbits are an inherently good people, and it apparently takes a lot to corrupt them. Like you said, it took decades for Bilbo to start showing signs of corruption, but then again he wasn't actually wearing it most of the time. He either had it in a box on his fireplace mantle, or in his pocket.

Frodo turned evil after a year because he had it on his person almost constantly, rather than just having it in his house and wearing it once in a long while. That, and like you said, the Ring's power to corrupt was much nastier once Sauron came to power.

Sadly, humans have the lowest resistance to the Ring's power. It took probably less than a few weeks, maybe even just a month for Isildur to start using it and then refusing to destroy it in the volcano.

What is bothersome is what happened during the meeting of Elrond, when people started arguing, and Frodo looked into the reflection of the Ring and saw flames consuming everyone in the room. None of them were even touching the Ring, and yet it was causing all of them to feel anger and sow discord between each other.

I have a feeling people such as elves, or Maiar like Gandalf probably would have had almost no resistance at all, which is one reason they feared it so much, and tried very hard not to touch it at all, or stay too close to it.

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 3 years ago

Certainly I believe it; this lore is pretty well-known in Tolkien's mythos, I think. But I think that has to do with the Hobbits' general lifestyle and outlook, their humble, earthy qualities that make them less boastful and less susceptible to power-lust as a result. If, however, as a species they generally are less-vulnerable, that doesn't mean that there aren't rotters who would drop from the Ring's influence faster. I can't imagine Lotho standing up to the Ring, say, as long as Faramir. Smeagol was once Hobbitish.

Because Elves and Maiar spirits are more in alignment with the spirit world in-general, I think that might have some bearing on their fear of the Ring, as well as its greater influence. That said, I do think Maiar like Gandalf would be able to hold out for some time. Not as long as the simple folk, of course. Maybe this is knowledge, too. Gandalf knows what the Ring can do and what he could do with the Ring, so the temptation to use it is greater. It's a voice whispering in his head, "Use me to remake the world for the good of all..." Gandalf says as much, although at the moment I can't remember if his "I would use the Ring out of a desire to do good," comes from the film or the book. But that's no-nevermind since Tolkien said roughly the same thing in his letters.

[–] SlackerInc (1081) 3 years ago

I would say Sam for sure. I don't understand why he said "I can't carry the ring, but I can carry you", which almost turned out disastrously (Gollum accidentally saved the day). He HAD carried it! He should have just grabbed it, run up the hill, and chucked it into the volcano.

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 3 years ago

I think at that point he knew that if he tried to take the Ring, Frodo would have fought him.

[–] Owlwise (1497) 3 years ago

Yes. And I also like to think that it was also his realization of of the Ring's power, and his own clear-eyed humility & decency, that made him refuse to physically hold & carry the Ring itself. He knew what it was capable of doing to him, not only from his brief moment of using it, but by seeing its effect on both Gollum & Frodo, day after day after day. Frodo was the appointed bearer of the Ring, so he must carry it, not Sam or anyone else. But he could still carry Frodo, even if it took the last of his strength. That humble understanding is what makes him so noble, a word he'd never apply to himself. But he's deserving of it.

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 3 years ago

Yes, absolutely. Sam's just a good person, right down to his fundamental core, and that kinda makes him blind to that fact. He never really considers it "being good" it's more that he views it as "what you do".

[–] SlackerInc (1081) 3 years ago

Frodo did not appear capable of fighting anyone at that point.

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 3 years ago

I think that was largely because he was resisting the Ring. Had he started to fight to keep it, I think he would've found strength the same way that somebody with an adrenaline rush can keep walking after getting hit by a car or lift hundreds of pounds.

Even if he couldn't, though, it would probably be so anathema to Sam to battle his master that he'd rather just carry him.

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

It’s a toss up between Sam and Frodo. Yes Frodo did fail to destroy the ring (at least in the book he did) but he also had to wear the ring the entire journey. While Sam never had any temptation for the ring he also wasn’t the one wearing it

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

I think Sam would have been like Frodo, able to tolerate the damned thing for a while, but worn down to a shadow of his self over time. He might have been able to stick it out a bit longer, as he was more direct and more stubborn than the sensitive Frodo, but it'd have slowly ruined him, too. Saruman wasn't IMHO corrupted by the Ring itself but by his own desire for power, so that means... Gollum probably tolerated it better than anyone. He had it for 500 years, but that was when the Ring was having a sort of extended nap or was too bored by Gollum's lifestyle to do anything to anyone, and it didn't take the trouble to mess with its host.

That is the enduring theme of Tolkien's masterpiece - not that power corrupts, but that the desire for power corrupts. Those who want power the most, are those least to be trusted with it. And that's how Tolkien lived, like a hobbit, he had a wife, family, and work he loved, and had the sense to be content with what he had and not seek power.

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 3 years ago

Excellent point parsing the difference between the lust for power and the power itself. Because, of course, many characters in Tolkien's myth manage to be powerful and benevolent, but none crave power and remain pure.

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

Even the desire to gain power in order to do good can be a path to corruption, which is certainly something that happens in the real world. And yeah, that's one of the things I like about Tolkien, that and his genuine appreciation of the value of humility. That's something that's been pretty much lost in the modern world.

Of course not all his ideas were good, like his ideas about social class, but there's some good stuff going on under all the fantasy and battles.

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 3 years ago

Yeah, it's one of the great, troubling paradoxes that the people who should most have power will basically never be the ones seeking it. This is especially a problem in a democracy you have to step up to become a leader. How to circumnavigate such a hurdle? It's tricky.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12386) 3 years ago

There have been many discussions as to who could resist the One Ring's evil longer. It all has to do with what Middle-Earth race you are, and how much close contact you had with the Ring.

Hobbits had the highest resistance because they are very kind-hearted and good by nature. It's difficult to corrupt most of them, even with magic. Resistance to the Ring also depended on whether you were a good person or not. Evil people fell to its power faster than those who were kind-hearted individuals.

If you take a look, Bilbo was only able to resist the ring as long as he did because he kept it on his fireplace mantle for 60 years, and it wasn't until Sauron's evil began to rise again in Mordor that the Ring's potency was amplified, hence why Bilbo became more obsessed with it in the last few years he had it. Honestly, Bilbo was lucky, because at the time he found, used, and had the Ring, its owner was still very weak.

Frodo was in close contact with the same Ring, and could only resist it for a single year (that's how long it took him and Sam to get to Mordor). His experience in using it was different too, because by that time, Sauron had regained much of his power and could see Frodo very clearly every time he put the Ring on.

Smeagol was an interesting case, as we saw with the flashback where he and his brother found the Ring. It appears he and his brother were not good Hobbits, and he ended up murdering his brother for the ring so he could have his "birthday present." No doubt it took less than six months for him to be totally corrupted by it, but his transformation into Gollum probably took a few years.

Sadly, Humans, Elves, and Wizards had the lowest resistance to the One Ring's evil. Even if any of them had good intentions in using it, they'd always end up having their hearts corrupted by it. Dwarves probably weren't much better. Small wonder people like Gandalf and Galadriel looked at it with great fear, because they knew what it could do, particularly to them. Heck, just watching what it did to a whole room of elves, humans, and dwarves during that gathering was disturbing enough.

[–] sslssg (28202) 3 years ago

If we go by the books Frodo did have the ring for 17 years, so he did resist longer on paper than in the films. But yes, I do think that you've nailed it. It's been awhile since I've read any of the books, but I think Smeagol had the ring for almost 500 years. I don't know if we know how long the transformation took.

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 3 years ago

I did a bit of digging, and it looks like Smeagol had the Ring for ~7 years before being driven out of his home with the other Hobbits and winding up beneath the Misty Mountains. He might or might not have been physically altered in that time, but he must have been warped enough by the Ring's influence to be driven out of his community. ~480 years later, Bilbo takes the Ring from him.

I would assume that the Ring probably didn't start really changing his appearance too much until after he "should have" died. Once it started to stretch his lifespan out, that's when I would expect him to start looking more like a wraith and less like a Hobbit.

[–] Ace_Spade (9367) 3 years ago

I don't think it's so much connected with race as it is with demeanour, outlook, and moral values (and so forth). Hobbits aren't innately more resistant to the Ring because they're descended of the race of hobbits, but because their society just is gentle, laid-back, and appreciates things like "food and cheer above horded gold".

Bilbo's resistance was, yes, due to his minimal use of the Ring, certainly, but I also think it was because of why and how he used the Ring. He became invisible in The Hobbit mostly to help his friends escape spiders or elf-dungeons, or to help defeat Smaug. He never used it for Smeagol/Gollum-like treachery and assassination - selfish things, in other words.

It's also my belief that the costly effort of mercy put forth by Bilbo and Frodo towards Gollum - sparing his life - continued to rejuvenate their souls long enough to resist the Ring. Some of that is, of course, cultural (hence the hobbits' perceived resistance).

Frodo did, as you say, have the toughest job. Sauron was at a strength he had not achieved since his defeat at the hands of Isildur, and of course, Frodo was both a lot closer to the heart of Mordor, and as he was trying to destroy the Ring, I suspect it was putting *effort* into corrupting and breaking him and his will.

I agree with you entirely regarding Smeagol.

Those with power were more easily corrupted, I think, because they had more delusions of grandeur - hobbits rarely do. Gandalf and Galadriel know how much good they could do with that power, so it tempts them, and it's a false thought, because the use of that power would corrupt them. Tolkien speculated in a letter, I believe, on what Gandalf would have done if he seized the Ring, and it's basically that he would (try to) create a draconian "utopia" - forcing goodness on people.

But we do see humans and elves who have no temptation towards the Ring. Elrond and Legolas never seem to be affected (nor is Gimli for the dwarves), and Aragorn doesn't seem to be overly interested. It would be a different story, I'm sure, had he carried the Ring - especially as long as Frodo does!