*TTT - Overall Impressions

[Estelyn Telcontar]

You saw the movie - tell us what you think of it!

[mollecon]

A short first impression - no spoiler! <P>Well, not surprisingly I liked this one a lot. It's different from the first ones in several aspects; It's much more of an action flick than "Fellowship.." - & the battle scenes are amazing! However, the deviations from the book his considerably greater here than in the first one - that goes for both the story in itself as well as the characters & their behaviour/development. I didn't think it ruined anything for me, but it's a matter of opinion how one look at that. In some aspects, it's more Peter Jacksons personal interpretation than the first one I believe.<P>But have no fear about Arwen - she takes up a lot less place in this movie than she does on some of the posters for it.<P>AND! Don't be late for the show - the beginning is fantastic!

[TolkienGurl]

All I have to say is "Where's Narsil?" <P>It truly is a great movie.<P>Except Faramir. And Frodo. And Theoden. Why did they change their roles so much?!? Grrrrrr...<P>Now I just have to see it about 5 more times... <p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: TolkienGurl ]

[Nerdanel]

Sam said it best when he said "Mr. Frodo, by all rights we shouldn't even be here." <BR>Why, oh why did they change the scene at Henneth Annun so much??? Tricksy, False.<P>Also the Gandalf as Exorcist scene was a little over the top. <P>And Haldir the Smarmy at Helm's Deep?<P>But!! The Ents were spectacular and Gollum was wonderful and I loved they byplay that Gimli and Legolas had. Sigh. I am sad about the book deviations, but I have to say the film is stunningly beautiful and I will definitely have to see it a few times. <P>And I agree; the beginning is amazing!

Well, I had a different reaction. My feeling at the end of FotR was "My God! Has it been three hours?" My feeling at the end of what seemed like three hours of TTT, but was only actually one was "My God! Is this thing ever going to end?" Now clearly I am no purist and have no problem with interpreting or adapting Tolkien's work. However, if New Line and PJ went to the trouble and expense of buying the rights to the character and place names from TTT, they might as well have gone all the way and purchased the rights to the actual story.<P>Yes Gollum was pretty amazing and generated the most reaction (generally laughter) from the audience I saw the film with. The battle scene at Helm's Deep was also impressive but I felt contrived and left me distant. I certainly felt no sense of triumph or elation at the eventual victory. Actually, given the characterization of Theoden, I found myself hoping Jackson would make another of his 'minor' changes and the Orcs would win.<P>I also found the dialogue he chose to leave out or not to stress puzzling. It seemed that great opportunities for drama and character development were missed. I am definitely going to have to re-read TTT and see if I can make sense of the choices Jackson made. I am not saying they were wrong but perhaps he is too clever for me.<P>Perhaps it is just that the initial thrill from FotR of seeing these charcters and places come to life is gone. However, in the end my feeling is if this is what I have to look forward to for RotK...I'll wait for it to come out on video.

[Birdland]

Well, I for one loved the opening. I sat there and thought "Oh, <I>that's</I> how it all looked!". I mean after all, Gandalf did battle the Balrog, and that's what they showed. Oh, and hey! Balrogs got tails!<P>I know P.J. and others worried about people in the audience being able to follow three story threads, so why did he have to expand it to five?! As well as the usual three, you also have the whole Aragorn/Arwyn pity party scenes, plus the whole Elven hand-wringing "we got to get out of Dodge, to heck with the Men" sequences, and that ungodly long exposition speech from Galadriel. Plus the throwing Aragorn off the cliff just so he could be out there to count orcs and and report that back to Theoden. (Anyone ever heard of scouting parties?) <P>I guess I resent all these extra moments because it took film time away from Frodo and Sam, and it was needed badly. The whole sequence of Faramir's and Frodo's meeting had a rushed quality to it, and I think P.J. frankly butchered Frodo's character. I know this is going to sound funny when referring to a hobbit, but either the director or the actor chose to emasculate Frodo. There was no strength of character demonstrated by him at all. Where's the Frodo that grew in wisdom and could handle himself in front of the lofty Men of Gondor? Gone completely. All that's left is either a wimpy victim or a Ring-wrought psychopath.<P>If Frodo's falling apart this quick, at this stage of the game, what's he gonna be like when he actually gets to Mordor?<P>I know I probably need to see it again, but there were many times in the film when I just wanted to reach out to the screen and say, "Here, let me do it." <P>There was much I loved about the film. Gollum is fantastic! Amazing portrayal. I even liked the way he "gollums"! And the Ents were a joy to see. Merry's fortitude and the realization of what was at stake was very moving. <P>These are all just first impressions, but all in all right now my feelings are mixed on The Two Towers.<P>P.S. - Is it just me, or is that Haldir one pudgy Elf?<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Birdland ]

[Birdland]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The battle scene at Helm's Deep was also impressive but it felt contrived and left me distant. I certainly felt no sense of triumph or elation at the eventual victory.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>You hit the nail on the head Hama! (BTW - Welcome to the Downs) I did not weep, or feel genuine excitement or tension throughout the whole film. Not at all like my reactions when watching the first film. <I>That's</I> what was missing for me!

[mollecon]

To address some of these issues in the order they appear on this thread:<P>Faramir is certainly changed a lot compared to the book - I'm not too fond of it either, he didn't seem to have any mind of his own at all, until at the very end.<P>Elves at Helms Deep? To tell the truth, I sorta liked that! In the books we're told about other people in Middle Earth fighting during the Ring-war - the Elves in Lorien, Dwarfs & Men at The Lonely Mountain (some of it in the appendices I believe). But I think it would seem very strange to the audience if the Elves didn't involve themselves in some way - I always wondered where the Elves from Riwendel was in the books (apart from Elrond's sons)?<P>One of the reasons for the changes might be Jacksons interpretation of the story as being about genicide. In the books Sauron/Saruman doesn't wan't to <I>destroy</I> mankind - they wanna rule it!<P>It was mentioned that all the other things happening took time from Frodo/Sam (& Gollum). I think that's deliberate & a typical 'movie' solution - by deciding to put emphasis on the action/special effects & general grandeur of things, it's difficult to expect an audience to accept over an hours intimite 'champerplay' between Frodo & Sam. Especially a modern MTV audience with an attention span of aprox. 5 sec's <P>It was mentioned that Frodo's character was butchered. Frodo is actually one of the few characters I found a bit hard to accept already from FOtR - it's a combination of two things: the way Frodo is portrayed from the directors side, too weak in my opinion - + the fact that Elijah Wood is too young & too cute! Having that in mind, his behaviour in this movie isn't strange... But I too have wondered about how he's gonna get later!<P>& it's true - the movie seemed a bit 'messy' narrative wise to me too.<BR>In general, I still liked the movie - not as much as FOtR, but on the other hand that's not a fair comparison since I've seen FOtR 40+ times & this one only once (so far).

[Tigerlily Gamgee]

Many of those feelings are what I felt the first time I saw it. I really had to go home and sleep on it.<BR>I must say that the second time around I enjoyed it so much more, and I saw a lot more... I really felt connected this time. <BR>The same thing happened with FOTR for me. The more I saw it the more I noticed and the more I loved it. This movie seems to be following the same pattern.

[TolkienGurl]

Birdie and hama1:<P>That's exactly the opposite for me! A few tears crept out of my eyes at Helm's Deep, and the last march of the Ents. And I honestly <I>never</I> cry during movies!<P>Yes, Gollum was a bit too funny, yet how do we know if he was a source of amusement or not? All we see in the books are the words; what about the voice? Maybe he <I>was</I> a tad silly at times in the book. We honestly can't tell by just reading the words.<P>Noooooo! Haldir!!! <P>Edit: When I said "I cried," I made it sound like I was sobbing or something. I wasn't. <p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: TolkienGurl ]

[Birdland]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>...by deciding to put emphasis on the action/special effects & general grandeur of things, it's difficult to expect an audience to accept over an hours intimite 'champerplay' between Frodo & Sam. Especially a modern MTV audience with an attention span of aprox. 5 sec's<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I have to disagree Mollecon. You are selling people short. After all, movies used to be called "talkies" for a reason. People do talk. <P>P.J. achieved a good balance in the first film, between the action and the character development, (though it is vastly improved in the extended version.)<P>He lost that in the second film, it was so "action packed" that it verged on the point of gratuitousness. I'm sure there were many good moments of dialog that got left on the cutting room floor so P.J. could shovel in more "action".

I'd like to see more of Frodo, Sam and Gollum caus those scenes were the best in the film. <P>Sum up: More of Frodo and his journy and less from Gimli the Comedian

[Gandalf_theGrey]

<B>Birdland's</B> sentiments here in this thread are the ones that best echo my own, and to a lesser degree, <B>hama1</B> speaks for me as well. * bows in appreciation of the eloquence of these two *<P><BR>Now here's what I noticed: Well, it only happened twice, but it happened twice in several hours ... so is it a fluke, or an indication of a larger trend?<P>I wonder how strongly the average moviegoer in the United States, as opposed to the average intense Tolkien fan of the sort found here at Barrow Downs, relates The Two Towers to September 11th?<P>I heard two guys today in two separate environments refer to the film as "The Twin Towers!" In the first case, I happened to overhear someone mention the movie as "The Twin Towers" in the theater as we waited for the film to begin. In the second case, I met a neighbor in my parking lot. Seeing me in my unmistakable grey cloak (which seemed to have an effect opposite to invisibility today), he struck up a conversation when I explained I'd just seen "The Movie." His response was that he too would have to go see "The Twin Towers" soon.<P>Gandalf the Grey

[Massharpoon]

I must say I have not digested it yet. I'm at home flipping through TTT and I just can't figure out what part PJ read. Sorry to be negative but I just don't feel that the movie captured Frodo at all. The Elves Deep was Impressive to see but not the way it was written. I do think Sean Astin has captured Sam perfectly and the Ents were great as well. I'll go see it again and hopefully have a better outlook on the whole thing.

[Túroch]

When I first sat down in the theator two hours before it was scheduled to show I could hardly sit for my anticipation. I was soo hopefull and excited when I saw Gandalf battling the balrog. I was elated to see my favortie charater, Eomer for his first appearence. Little did I know we was to be hardly seen through the rest of the movie. <P>To be completley honest Peter Jackson has prostitued TTT. He's degraded it, rewritten it, and turned into a movie where I was wondering if I should ask for a refund. My mother read Tolkien to me practicly over my crib. I grew up with the books. As soon as I could read I started my annual reading of the series. These books have been withe me for years. How could they be twisted like this. My God that was my favorite book in the seires and look what that.....that.....foul servant of Morgoth did to it. How dare he! Whats this about Osgiliath, it was a ruin by then, there was no battle there. And Faramir wasn't like that, how could they distort his character so. He took my Eomer and wrtoe him out of the story, Liv Tyler had more screen time. How can a character that isn't even in TTT have more screen time then the heir to the throne of Rohan? Ooooooo. <P>And Elves and Helms deep? Oh come on. One of the big grievances I had is that they made the Riders of Rohan seem like a bunch of wimps. WHERE IS ROHAN'S ARMY? They made it look like the whole country was made of old men and babies.....oh....oh help us elves we can't defeat the big bad orcs by ourselves cause we're a bunch of wet noodles!!!! Grrrrrr.<P>This makes me sick, all of it. At the end of the movie I almost shouted that Peter Jackson's days were numbered. He destoryed my favorite book, this is what he makes the average public think TTT is. He has made a classic look like a dime novel.<P>Besides butchering characters right and left (Theoden, Frodo, Faramir) or leaving them out almost totally (my favorite character Eomer) the movie did have some good points. The ents were done well and the battle scenes were quite visually amazing.<BR> <BR>How could that.....that....snake PJ make FoTR soo good and then drop the ball. I wouldn't be so made if you changed the constitution, or add a new book to the bible. This travesty that PJ put up in place of the real TTT sets me boiling.<P>What makes him think that his rewriting of TTT is better then Tolkiens original. Such arrogance is overwhelming. Who the hell does Jackson think he is, God? <P>Iwould be very much appreciated if someone could give me the e-mail or phone number of the screen writes so I could vent some of my anger on the proper sources.<P>Sorry about the Vehemence of my post, I just got out of the TTT which my whole year has been leading up to. After some time passes i'll probably cool down, but right now that movie angered me, not that the movie was terrible, but that he chnged what could of been one of the best movies ever. What a waste.<P>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Túroch ]<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Túroch ]

[Child of the 7th Age]

I agree with what Bird is saying. I would say that PJ's TTT is a grand martial epic and an amazing technical achievement. However, it lacks the charm, enchantment, and gentle affection that were interwoven through the first film. Partially, that is the fact that the second book has a different focus and setting. But it's also the choices PJ made in emphasizing action, peril, and suspense at the expense of developing his characters the way JRRT actually wrote about them in the book. <P>As such, I just didn't connect with it emotionally on the same level as PJ's Fellowship. Never once did I find myself fighting back tears. And to be truthful, that happened at least twice in the first film. It just didn't tug at my heart in the same way. I got a tiny bit of that in the last minute between Sam and Frodo, but even that didn't have the same pull for me as the ending of the Fellowship.<P>Were there things I liked a lot? Absolutely! I actually thought Eowyn and Aragorn were handled well. I liked PJ's portrayal of Sam. Gollum and his two personalities were compelling. We also had more insight into the friendship between Legolas and Gimli. There were even a few changes from the book that PJ made that felt "right" to me--Merry and Pippin's discussion about how the Shire would eventually be destroyed unless they did something, the presence of the Elves at Helm's Deep, how Merry used his wits to 'persuade' the Ents. <P>I've come to think of the movies as PJ's fanfiction, and an amazing fanfiction it is. I'm willing to shift things around, to put in new scenes, or even expand on Arwen's role. But the one think I have trouble with is changing the characterization in such a way that it actually goes against the spirit of what Tolkien was saying.<P>There are two cases of that in this movie. PJ didn't get his "F's" right, and I don't mean the word you're not supposed to say in public. I mean Frodo and Faramir. <P>I'm one of those who ranted a good deal about Frodo's depiction in Fellowship as a spineless wimp, with everything left out that showed he had a backbone. e.g, the BarrowDowns, his tabletop song at the Pony, his agressive beahvior at Weathertop. <P>This time we have the same problem magnified even further. The amazing thing about the book Frodo is that there are two sides to his soul, and they're both becoming stronger. On the one hand, he is falling under the spell of the Ring. But he is also growing in gentility and grace. The light in Frodo's face--the sign of an Elf-friend-- becomes stronger. He has visions, and is able to show true pity towards Gollum. PJ takes the latter sentiment, and implies that Frodo's mercy arises solely from the fact that he was scared witless at the thought of having the Ring turn him into another Gollum. <P>Was there some of that in Tolkien? Yes, but it's not the whole story. I never got a sense from TTT of how Frodo's 'mercy' related to his earlier discussion with Gandalf, which was a critical point in the writings, i.e. mercy which is pure and unadulterated rather than merely self-serving.<P>The scenes between Faramir and Frodo are among the most amazing in the book. They show the nobility of spirit in both of these characters, although each is portrayed in a very different way. PJ has swept this entirely away, in favor of creating more conflict and suspense. I actually found it difficult to see the changes he made in Frodo and Faramir. Once or twice, I just looked away from the screen and mentally plugged my ears. <P>Faramir was the one character in LotR whom Tolkien identified with most closely. I can't imagine what he would say about PJ's portrayal. It was light years away from the gentle man of Gondor. Instead, Faramir came within a hair of being Boromir #2. <P>Overall, did I like it? Yes, but not to the same degree as PJ's Fellowhip, which kept creeping into my mind for days (even weeks) after I first saw it. I have to admit I'm disappointed. Will I see it more than once? I've already got tickets for Saturday night. But, after I see it, I'm going home, taking out my well worn TTT, and rereading The Window on the West and The Forbidden Pool to remind me that the 'real' Faramir and Frodo are still there, very much alive and well!<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]

[Mintyztwin]

Yeah. I can't figure out what part he (PJ) read either!! <P>Warning: I am really mad. I don't have many good feelings for this movie, so I bet I make several of you mad too. No offense ment.<P>Warning again: This is an absolute spoiler. Haven't seen it, please don't read it!<P>I am absolutly furious! The opening was cool, yeah, but it went stedily downhill. <P>Several points that REALLY bugged me:<P>Saruman actually POSSESING Theoden, and Gandalf saying "Leave him!" or whatever, like he's, well, an exorcist! <P>The orc following Pip and Merry into Fangorn. <P>The ents deciding NOT to go to Isengard!! And having to have Pippin trick Treebeard into going there, and THEN Treebeard gets mad! And suddenly, there's 'bout a thousand Ents coming out of the trees, when only about 8 or 10 were at the Entmoot. <P>Eomer not being at Helm's Deep until the very end. <P>Haldir arriving at Helm's Deep with elves, and then dying.<P>Aragorn falling asleep and waking up with Arwen. <P>Gimli talking about dwarf women to Eowyn. I thought dwarves didn't talk about that much?<P>Legolas "surfing" down the steps on a shield. Cool move, but I thought it wasn't really something an elf would do. <P>Faramir: I won't even go there.<P>Frodo is so depressed and everything, that I don't think he's gonna make it at all! Also, I think PJ hinted (via Galadriel) that he's gonna DIE. So, I'm not happy with that. <P>Frodo going to Gondor. <P>I'm only semi-satisfied with four characters: Gandalf, Legolas, Eomer and Sam. I'm really happy with Sam though, he's exellent! Yeah Sean Austin!<P>Other than that, I did not like it. I don't think it kept in the spirit of ME at all. A lot of the language was really modern, and used nowadays. I really liked FotR, but the movie TTT is not nearly as good, and doesn't stay nearly as close to the books as FotR did.<P>Edit: I remembered some more stuff, and tried to rant less.<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Mintyztwin ]

[Pookabunny]

Peter Jackson faces a challenge larger than most filmakers do. He's putting to screen a masterpiece story that took a genuis over 14 years to write. He is challenged to visually express what has mentally stimulated more people than any other book has ever done (besides the bible). PJ is subject to the opinions of a super vocal, very dedicated and eccentric fanbase. And for that all that, he has immense respect from me.<P>The Two Towers ROCKED. Yes, the story did divert from the books (and in many cases, REALLY OUT THERE diversions), but overall, I was thrilled with the outcome. I LOVED this film - and it's going to take a few more viewings for me to totally grasp what happened. I swear I missed a good portion of the film between tears - I've never cried so much during a movie!<P>The Two Towers was my favorite book in the series, and at times it pained me to see some of my favorite scenes deleted, or the characters behaving differently (I still can't figure out what the hell was up Faramir's a**). But, overall, the theme of the Towers was maintained - it's a story of darkness and unpreventable, eminent darkness. That's why I LOVE this story! It jacks people! It's crazy like that! And I believe it is essential to change certain things to communicate that on the screen - and to get people who didn't read the books (or understand them) a better grip of the tale.<P>Remember, movies and film and just two ways to express a story. I'm sure people would have issues with a mime interpretation of Lord of the Rings (even if it is 15 hours long and true to the story ). You know what, that was out of line. Mimes suck and need to die. Sorry about that <P>I'm a huge Tolkien fan, and a huge fan of the movies. I agree that the films divert, I agree that there are some unnecessary differences, but overall I'm pleased. I'm just thankful that someone had the balls to bring Lord of the Rings to the screen, and for that I'm truly grateful. It's entertainment and I'm game for that!

[TolkienGurl]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Remember, movies and film and just two ways to express a story.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>We all need to remember that before jumping at Peter jackson's throat.

[Coral]

Well, from looking at some of your replies, I think that some people should stop looking for changes from the books and complaining about them. You should try and and evaluate it for the film that it is, but we all have biased opinions...so oh well...

[AddictedtoRumil]

I enjoyed it very much but there were two things in the movie that i didn't like here they are:<P>1)that scene where Aragorn thinks he is dreaming and he sees arwen and she says "Then it must be a good dream then" or something like that, that scene was so dumb!<P>2)Haldir's death i mean that broke my heart for real! i don't think it was fair that he died in the film.<P>other than those two reasons TTT rocked! I loved all the jokes!! I will go see it again soon!

[Lindolirian]

Overall: Quite good.<P>They had some really bad changes (SPOILER WARNING)with the Ents, Faramir, and Eomer being gone the whole time. Also Gimli's attempt at humor was good, but I felt that it did not fit in at all.<P>Thast the bad stuff. The battled rocked, Legolas was way cooler, Gollum was SO real, Merry and Pippin are much better, and its so sad when you see the little kids suiting up for battle. I almost cried...<P>Anyways, as a movie for nonreaders, it was better than FotR, although nonreaders will be VERY confused about the Ents, but as for us book addicts, it can be a little worse than FotR in the fact that it varied from the books more.

[Nalana]

Pookabunny, I agree with all that you said. that's EXACTLY how I feel with what you said. I'm sorry, but some of you seem to get out of line, putting down PJ in anyway possible because of certain scenes, characters, etc. altered. <P>I think that PJ has done EXTREMELY well. Some things are confusing, yes, but also remember that this is a 3 hour movie, and not literally speaking, some important parts in the movie needed to be dealt with a little bit differently. And some scenes were deleted, which bummed everyone somehow. <P>It was also mentioned that there will most likely be Special Edition disc, and not that your fav. scene or character will show up, but there's always a chance.<P>Please remember that some parts of the audience haven't read the book or don't understand it. Everyone has an opinion, like I mine, but there's a line between input/criticism and being overly offensive. I admire all the actors, directors, and producers that have to deal with that kind of criticism. <P>Bottom line: I think some of you are taking this a little <B>too</B> seriously.<P>Whew! Well enough of my rambling. I did not intend on replying to this thread this way, but when certain members get overly offensive, it offends me.

[AddictedtoRumil]

Yeah but they asked for our opinion and they got it i'm not trying to be rude but that's my honest opinion i can't change that.

[Nalana]

Oh no AddictedtoRumil. Not you. In fact, I didn't mean for my message to tell anyone to not tell their opinions over the movie... how <B>some did it was offensive</B>. All they have to do is simply state what they didn't like and why... they did that plus saying how terrible PJ was and everything. that's rude. But much love to all of you members.

[Túroch]

I agree that taking it as just a movie it isn't that bad. I'm a little biased towards any fault that Peter Jackson had in creating TTT because i've lived with the book so long. But still if he wanted to have his movie he shouldn't try and pass it of as Tolkien. This movie had several huge defects from TTT. As a run of the mill movie standpoint, it wasn't that bad, but it wasn't the TTT. If one atempts to put Tolkien to film he should attempt to stick closer to the book and not invent scenes and reinvent characters not always for the better. It's not as if I want a 15 hour epic, but I think some few critical changes coul have made TTT imeasurabley better. At that riles me. The movie PJ made is either a terrible rendition of Tolkein or a movie that really isn't that bad but isn't TTT.

[Gandalf_theGrey]

Within the range of the batch of posts in between my last post and this one, the people whose viewpoints resonate most closely with my own are:<P><B>Child of the 7th Age, Mintyztwin, </B> and <B>Lindolirian.</B><P>All I can do is echo your sentiments, the way I've echoed those of <B>Birdland</B> and <B>hama1</B> previously.<P>I would also like to say though, <P>... that at one point, I found myself asking, "Where's Frodo? Isn't he supposed to be in this movie? Did the director lose him?"<P>... and that the only time I laughed in this movie was at the Dwarf-tossing reference ... just like, the only time I laughed in FotR was at the Dwarf-tossing reference. (But indeed, I'm sorely disappointed that Gimli was treated like some comic sidekick rather than as a warrior deserving of well-earned respect.)<P>... and that I loved the scene where Legolas surfed down the steps on that shield! <P>Gandalf the Grey

[Nalana]

I agree with you guys too. I would just like to apologize for my outburst. I think I'm just a bit tired. I saw the movie last night at like 10 til 1 in the morning. I was so happy i got to see it before it was opened officially to the public. There were some moments i didn't quite understand/like about the movie, as a reference to the book, but oh well. I just learned to realize that when people make a movie from a book, it's really difficult to please some, considering for the most part, some of us interpret the book differently. But I'm looking forward to seeing the movie again and a again...and again lol.<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Nalana ]

[Coral]

What I thought of the movie...hmmmm...Well it was a pretty big departure from the books in some parts, (Still mourning Faramir *sniff*) but overall, as a film, I loved it! I know, I'm easy to please...

[Iarwain]

I despise this film!<P>Throughout the entire movie, I was thinking at the characters "JUST SHUT UP!!!". The bit with Elrond and Arwen made me especially mad. My thoughts: "Why don't you just leave her alone, loser? She's made up her mind, respect her opinion. You aren't the only one who can think of the consequences behind your actions! Just look at your great-grandparents! They did the same thing, and your were the product." <P>They practically took Treebeard out of the story, and the Entmoot was a complete failure. How did the armies of Isengard get into Helm's Deep? The Hurons should have been there to help! <P>Theoden was NEVER even proposed to be posessed by Saruman, and a completely different transformation occured when he met with Gandalf. <P>Frodo was a complete idiot, as was Sam. The mere thought of Frodo approaching a Nazgúl and offering it the Ring is contrary to all logic. And then there was the idea of Faramir taking them captive. They clearly took the dramatization of the story far beyond what they should have. <P>I realize I am angry, but the movie was simply preposterous .<P>-My boots were slashed last year, and I'm loosing sight of Middle-Earth today,<BR>Iarwain<P>edit- i just read the other posts, and realize that most of this stuff has already been comented on. I took no time to read any posts, I had to comment right away.<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

[Coral]

Now calm down, what were the movies made for, they weren't made just for the fans...they were made so people who hadn't read the books could enjoy them also...So don't go all up in arms over this movie, it's not worth it...<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Coral ]

[Gandalf_theGrey]

Well met, <B>Iarwain:</B><P>* bows a greeting * <P>Many of your points I can relate to, as I was nodding my head in agreement while reading your post. And alas, what a loss to us that a merry meeting in the Old Forest was bypassed a year ago.<P>Now a question: I am wondering what it is about Sam's portrayal that you object to?<P>At your Service,<P>Gandalf the Grey

[Iarwain]

Oh, but it is worth it. When you make a film soooo confusing that many people ignore more than half the detail and can barely hang on to the thread of the story, you would think that it was produced exclusively for the fans. Then, in a sequel, PJ (along with others) makes the story soooo corny and far from the original that you could almost call it a cheap remake if it weren't for the effects and scenery. <P>With each blow to the defense of Helm's Deep, and each step Frodo took <I>away</I> from Mordor, I looked ahead in my mind to the RotK, and watched the white tower of Minas Tirith crumble, and the armies of Gondor shrivel and fail. I fear now that Frodo will fail in his quest, and that the Morgul army will get past the second circle. Arwen will set sail, and Faramir will be excecuted by Denethor. <P>Oh the <B>infinite</B> possibilities for failure.<P>-Screaming for Goldberry,<BR>Iarwain<P>as for sam: I don't object all that much to his portrayl, except for the point where Sam jumps up in front of the Morannon and falls down the hill.<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

[GreyIstar]

I just saw it at a 3 to 6 showing and I will start my review with this as I did with the Fellowship.<P>This is a movie BASED on a book by J.R.R Tolkien it is not THE book by J.R.R Tolkien. If you do not like it then read the book. Its a great book but it isn't a movie.<P>I treat the movies and book as two separate entities there by not flipping out, as some do, over any changes. And having read the book again after seeing the first movie I found it didn't cheapen my reading.<P>There is my premise going into this movie and that in mind I loved it. Visually it was stunning and middle-earth never looked so good in my mind. I went in expecting changes and also heard some peoples complaints over the changes and I found those complaints for the most part over exaggerated.<P>Faramir: Yes he is different. But is he really different? I don't think it is Faramir being different but PJ placing more emphasis than Tolkien did on the corruptive power of the ring on men. It tempted Aragorn in the first movie so would it not be out of place to have it not tempt Faramir at all? That would make him more noble than the Noble King of Gondor would it not? And in the end Faramir proved to be better than his brother by letting Frodo go. Alls well Frodo, Sam and Gollum head to Mordor Faramir goes to aid in the defense of Minas Tirith.<P>Elves at Helms Deep: Of all changes this is the most questionable. Having thought through some kind of reasoning I have thought of only one thing. If it is PJ's intent to not show the other battles with the elves in the war of the ring, then this is a way to show that the Elves do take a role in this war. It is very heart breaking to see elves die though because you know that had they not fought they would never die. Its not enough to ruin this movie because the good far out weighs the bad.<P>The whole sequence with Elrond, Arwen, and Galadriel seemed forced. It was more like LOOK AT US we are still in the movie!! It will be interesting to see how these scenes play out in the extended version. Id guess a lot will be changed.<P>Those are the only things that really were obvious. The rest is details that could have happened or were probably interpreted differently.<P>I liked a lot. The Ents and the Entmoot. The storming of Isengard was awesome. The battle of helms deep was unreal. I liked the competition between Legolas and Gimli. Gollum was GREAT!!! Absolutely the best part of the film. I liked the Shakespearian debates he had with himself. The Eowyn Aragorn interaction was much better than I expected it to be. Gandalf and the Balrog was too short!!! I need more!!! Please extended DVD have more!! Not enough Gandalf in general but there will be a lot more of The White Wizard in Return of the King. Generally I can't say there was not enough of this character or that character because over the course of 3 movies and one story the screen time will vary. I think most people aren't thinking in the terms of the whole story but just in the terms of one part. I loved when the Ent that was on fire bent down to put itself out in the oncoming water. That was so logical it was funny, and I laughed out loud.<P>Ok in conclusion this movie cannot, and isn't meant to stand on its own. It must be taken into account with the Fellowship and it stands on that base great. Both have changes but still hit the mark on feel and theme. They also find their way to the expected point for Return of the King. Frodo and Sam are on their way to Mordor, Aragorn is preparing for his trek to the Paths of the Dead, and Gandalf is ready to take Saruman down and rush to Minas Tirith's defense. Two Towers accomplishes its part in the story and is a lot of fun. I have to see it again soon.<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: GreyIstar ]

[Túroch]

Now now Iarwain, I can understand your grievances. I still have hope that RoTK will be up to the standards of FoTR. It seams that LoTR suffers from the sequal syndrome that so many others sucumb to. I do think that Sam jumping in front of the Morannon is pretty silly and out of character for the reserved Sam. If it had only been up to the standards of the first movie I would of been satisfied. I could forgive PJ many things (sam's in front of the gate, the gandalf exocisim, and the ents surprise that the trees were destroyed), however when he starts to rewrite the plot, it get angry.<P>Question: If you don't make a movie for the fans, whom do you make it for? I (as an fan who is really into this too much) want a movie made for the people who enjoy the story and read the book, not for people who just want a thrill ride or cool effects. I crave plot, not rewriten either.

[Iarwain]

I agree with you completely Túroch. If you don't make a book into a movie for its fans, you must have a very twisted mind. This reminds me (though it is <I>utterly</I> incomprable to TTT) of another book/film: The Count of Monte Cristo. If anyone here has read it, they will understand the unbearable nature of the film, as opposed to the book. And while they are completely different, TTT and Monte Cristo were both butchered almost beyond recognition. <P>TTT, unlike Monte Cristo, did however have a few enjoyable moments. The ents (exempting Entmoot) were fairly well presented, and the opening seqence was quite exceptional. <P>HOWEVER, though my ranting is over, I still find it hard to believe that they cut the movie off half way through each Book (by books I mean III and IV). I was looking forward to an amazing scene including Torech Ungol and Sam's fight with Shelob. The issue of the Palantir of Orthanc was never touched because instead of fetching Treebeard to help at Helm's Deep, Gandalf went to Eomer (who was already supposed to be there, and should have been fighting throughout the entire movie)! Merry and Pippin are left waiting at Isengard, when I was SO looking forward to a closing scene with Gandalf and Pippin riding Shadowfax to Minas Tirith at dawn. Oh well, I suppose all we can do is wait and hope that this disaster is fixed, and the third is as good as the first.<P>-Waiting within my bounds for the world to change,<BR>Iarwain<P>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Iarwain ]<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

[GreyIstar]

What I find the most ironic and somewhat funny is that some people are clammering over this was in Two Towers book but won't be seen until ROTK movie and so on.<P>Why do I think that is funny? Because Tolkien originally never wanted the book split into 3 parts. So if he had gotten his way and they were making 3 movies now the directer could split it anyway he wanted and with no qualms.<p>[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: GreyIstar ]

[Losthuniel]

Bad, bad, BAD PJ. VERY BAD. Honestly, the movie deviatied so far from the book, I was expecting Shadowfax to sprout wings, and the laws of gravity to buckle completly.<P>1. SMAYGOL, not SMEEGOL. (my 2 friends and I kept echoing every SMEEGOl with SMAYGOL)<P>2. Frodo is not a simpering idiot, who suddenly tries to kill his best friend. he's completly one dimesional here. I won't elaborate<P>3. Sheild surfing: One orc with a well placed pike, and bye-bye Legolas(and fangirls!)<P>4. I am going to kill Liv Tyler. That WAS NOT Arwen. Maybe Arwin or Arwyn, but I wasn't Tolkien's Arwen. And I certainly did NOT appreciate Aragorn/Arwen make-out scene. So much for chastity.<P>5. Faramir: I am still reeling. Ow. Poor Tolkien is turning in his grave. I am not even going to go into it.<P>6. Aragorn-falling-off-cliff-just-to-see-orcs plot device: Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid! Oh yes, and TOTALLY plausible.<P>7. Elrond-is-a-jerk scene: No he's not! Yeah, ok, he can be, but he just seemed really heartless. And they ignored the fact that Arwen would become mortal. Oh, poor Arwen and Aragorn. Elrond is so mean to them. Boo Hoo<P><BR>Not to metion the wierd camera angles, complete lack of emotion in most spots, and just..argh.

[Tigerlily Gamgee]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>This is a movie BASED on a book by JRR Tolkien it is not THE book by JRR Tolkien. If you do not like it then read the book. Its a great book but it isn't a movie.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Well met, GreyIstar. I agree completely. I find it sad that people must bash the movie so much. You can't go to any movie based on a book and expect to see the exact same thing you read. They are different mediums and must be handles differently.<BR>I love the books, I love the movies... but each different from one another. I don't really put them into the same category...<BR>When I saw the movie the first time I was a little on end about how I felt about it beacause I had just re-read TTT. But, then I slept on it and realized that they are not the same thing and they never will be... so I went in the theatre the second time last night and the movie was so much better.<BR>Wow, sorry if that sounded confusing.<P>I understand why people have grievences, but hopefully you will see the movies with a new light later on. Love the books, they are great.

[GreyIstar]

"1. SMAYGOL, not SMEEGOL. (my 2 friends and I kept echoing every SMEEGOl with SMAYGOL)"<P>God that would be annoying. Id be like shut @#@$ up!!