Two Towers - SPOILER Thread - Page 2

[JessicaS]

I am annoyed they seem to want dwarves to appear comical..in Tolkien's world they are very dignified..

I haven't seen the movie yet but in the book they did have to rile up the Ents..they aren't idiots by any means but they dislike acting "hastily" it is just their way.

That is horrid about making the children fight. That is absolutely not in the book it never happened in the book and was clearly pointed out in the book as not happening. They menioned that Beregond's son was still at Minas Tirith but all the other children were sent off with the women. They said that several times.

As for the accents. The hobbits are from different parts of the Shire, Frodo and Sam are from one area and Merry and Pippin are from another.

I read a little bit on them working on the accents before the movies came out and they talked about having different accents for different places but that didn't seem to work very well....Arwen doesn't sound like Elrond..Galadriel and Celeborn sound different as well (course Celeborn and Galadriel didn't always live near each other) Gandalf and Saruman sound different too...but they are both from the undying lands and work for totally different people and probably didn't see each other much..

With all movie made form books there are changes..some do a good job with the changes while others are utter crap (anyone see the Scarlet Letter UTTER CRAP!!) LotR is one of the most read books in history and if Peter Jackson doesn't expect criticsm when he makes MAJOR changes to characters or plot he is nuts.

IMO the glimpse of Gondor in the Two Towers is a huge mistake, I feel that there were reasons we didn't see Gondor until the third book..it does add a sense of mystery to the place..you read about the wonders, beauty and majesty of Gondor and then in the third book you finally see it..While Lothlorien and Rivendale are amazing places elves are immortal, Elrond established Rivendale and there he is still in charge..but with Gondor and Rohan they are cities that have seen generation after generation pass and seem older as a result.

In the first two books you see lands of elves, dwarves, ents, mia (Tom Bombadile) but you dont see the lands and places of man until the last book, which takes place almost entirely in the lands of man, IMO this is to get a sense that the third age the age, of men is approaching and is reached at the destruction of the ring, and the last of the ships to the undying lands leaves.

IMO he did it because he didn't have as many cinamatic opportunities in the Two Towers as in the Fellowship.

amywillow that was hilarious, I can just picture you looking at everyone's noses in the theater..

[Viola]

Originally posted by abimommy
I am annoyed they seem to want dwarves to appear comical..in Tolkien's world they are very dignified..

Exactly what my husband said.

Maybe the Ent thing was not that far out of line, but my memory was that they talked in that long, slow way while Merry and Pippin waited, then decided that they would help. I remember in the book being a bit surprised yet excited that they did decided to help even though I knew they would eventually. In the film they told Merry and Pippin that they had conferred and were not going to do anything to help and that they advised the two hobbits to return to their lives in the Shire. Treebeard offered to carry them to the western edge, but Merry told them to take them to the southern edge. Treebeard asked why when that was more dangerous as it was near Isingard, and Merry gave a little song and dance about it being less dangerous being right near the danger. Treebeard acted like since that confused him, it must make perfect sense, so he went along with it. It wasn't until he saw the destruction that he decided to help.

I can see why they did it this way for the movie, but I thought Treebeard had been a little more willing to extend himself of his own free will for the sake of doing good.

Faramir looked vaguely like a girl that I know. At one point I thought he looked like Cate Blanchett, so maybe it was those associations that made me think he wasn't as good looking.

They didn't really have the young children fighting, just boys who looked to be old enough. They were clearly pre-pubescent, probably around 12 or 13, but I think it was supposed to be a "reality of war" type of moment.

[JessicaS]

well I havent seen the movie (heh still playing on the spoiler thread) so I dont know how they did it in the movie..if it is as you say then your right that does sound weird..

[Greenfrogs]

Been away from a computer so coming back late...

I agree with everyone here about faramir, I not quite sure why the writer choose to change the personality of Faramir.

As to the dwarves sense of humour. I remember that from the book. I remember legalos and gimili bantering and joking with one another. So I like the characterization.

I think why a liked the scenes of the woman and children was to show the horror of war not necessarily to show the weakness of woman. Also the taking of the "strong lads" to fight was a typical ancient war practice and is not uncommon in places today. So to me it was especially poignaint.

Why can't I spell today :

[JessicaS]

But they had Gimli falling down and rolling around, stumbling over his words...yes Legolas and Gimli do joke a lot but Gimli is still very lyrical in his speach and portrayed by Tolkien as dignified in his demeanor.

[fw5blue]

I personally really enjoyed both movies for the movie sake, mostly the sets. I'm into filmaking and was just so impressed. Rohan (spell?) took 8 months to build and what a location! All those shots were without much special effects because the whole place was made.

Helm's Deep was a horrid shot for the cast and crew. It was real rain and it everyone was up at night in the rain for months fighting.

Gollum was amazingly portrayed. The guy who did his voice also did every scene with the hobbits so they could really act (as oppsed to Dobby in Harry Potter which was just a ball on a string--you can tell it was hard to act well with it) and then the guy did every scene over in a studio where they could record his movement on computer to do the special effects character.

As a fan of the books, I just laugh at the way they massaquered some characters. Other people on this thread have examined that angle and I totally agree. (I loved the Ents in the book...) Peter Jackson himself said this was his least favorite of the three movies, his favorite being the last. He said the studio had too much of a say on the second for his taste. If the people with the money would just let the artists do their job...

I read in a screenwriting magazine that the ending is not at all the same as the book. They didn't give it all away,but they hinted that it would end with the end of the war and the wedding, without going into the hobbits returning home. I just wonder if they will have Frodo go with the elves in the end of the movie so at least that follows the book.

sigh...I have to wait a year...

[Goosefeather]

Originally posted by fw5blue:
Peter Jackson himself said this was his least favorite of the three movies, his favorite being the last. He said the studio had too much of a say on the second for his taste.

I didn't know that ...thanks, I understand a little better now !

[merebear]

And really, what is better then a 20ft high Viggo in your face for 3 hours???

Mmmm.... a 6 foot Viggo in my bed for 3 hours?

Oops! Did I say that??

[Goosefeather]

:LOL:LOL:LOL:LOL

[sarenka]

well if you hadn't said it, merebear, I was going to!
I can't remember the book (read it about 20 years ago) and when he went off the cliff I considered leaving the cinema - then figured he was too good looking to die so soon!!
(I'm a philistine, i know. But now I'm inspired to read the book again..)

[kama'aina mama]

Okay... finally saw it last night and I am ready to join the rant-fest! Discussing it on the way home DH and I realised that an awful lot of the big changes, the objectionable ones, had to do with taking the wisdom and strength of secondary characters and giving it all to the members of the Fellowship. And actually only a few members of the Fellowship. There is sort of a pecking order of importance that seems to come down to
1. Aragorn
2. Gandalf
3. Frodo
...and lots of others after that.
Consider:
Aragorn is constantly in the lead during the hunt for the orcs despite the book saying that Legolas was ever in the fore. Aragorn must appear to be stronger, better, more heroic at every turn than anyone else.

In Fangorn rather than Merry and Pip's obvious goodness winning over Treebeard (and them paying enough attention to know they can trust him) Gandalf steps in and smooths the way, substituting his wisdom for all of theirs. After that of course, the Ents have no wisdom and must have their course all but forced upon them. I'm not sure which I found more shocking, that the very nature of Ents is tossed aside so they can make a snap, emotional decision or that Pip, who is really not calculating at all could be interpreted as having intentionally manipulated Treebeard.

Faramir, of course, lacks the wisdom to have seen his brother for who he really is and know what must have happened. Sam has to lecture him about the facts of life to open his eyes so he will let the Hobbits continue on their quest.

They even robbed Grima Wormtongue of his power. If Saruman was possessing Theoden then what purpose does Grima serve? Grima should have enough power, either in sorcery or simply of persona and persuation, that he has taken control of Theoden, not Saruman. If that isn't the case then Grima is reduced to a minor spy, a role that could have been played by a footman rather than the kings advisor.

There are lots of other examples but that is my basic thesis. The filmmakers didn't want to confuse the world by having lots of people who were good and wise and strong (or even strong in their wickedness) they want a few clear cut heroes , a couple of major villians and a crew of buddies to support them. This bothers me far more than other changes that are clearly the product of changing from word-based to picture based story telling.

That said, I really enjoyed the movie. I still like Eowyn far better than Arwen, but that has been true since I first read the books. The fact that Liv Tyler sucks every last bit of life out of any scene in which she appears just makes it more true. I have great respect for Peter Jackson in that he never lost the human aspect of the story even in the huge, long battles. I love that he is letting the actors really work, that he lets the camera rest on them for a nice long shot while emotions slowly play across their faces. The scene between Grima and Eowyn was so charged that I was on the edge of my seat just from the sheer strength of the performances. And Grima, with the stricken look and the single tear as he watches the hordes of Orthanc go.... just amazing.

I will quibble and debate but I will gladly purchase this on dvd and will eagerly await the third film. But if they skip the scouring of the Shire, Jackson may need a bodyguard.

[Goosefeather]

Wow kama'aina mama !!!!!!!

That was so great, I really liked everything you wrote and I really clarifies things for me. I think you are right on !

I keep thinking about the movie, wishing I could go see it again (I guess I took a chill pill :LOL) but will wait for the DVD for financial reasons.

Thanks !!

I was sad to see that it has slipped to fourth place over the week-end so that Kangaroo Jack could have the first place :

[Arduinna]

I finally saw the movie today, we brought our new puppy home from the breeders just before the movie was released and so we waited.

Anyway, I'm glad I didn't reread the books before the movies were made. I haven't read the trilogy in 20 years. I made the mistake of rereading Mists of Avalon before it was finally made into a movie and I hated every change from the book.

So I really enjoyed the movie :-) can't wait for December!!

[kama'aina mama]

Oh, another thing. My husband and I disagree over Pippins motivation for asking Treebeard to take them south. I think he was honestly resolved to find some way to do some good rather than go back to the Shire and await the dreadful end should the Quest fail and the war be lost. My husband is convinced that pip intentionally brought Treebeard to Isengard so he would get mad and do something. But how could Pip had known? I forget, did Gandalf talk about the desolation surrounding Isengard? Of course in the book Treebeard knew all about it before he met the hobbits and it was a factor in his decision but not the only thing.

[MysticHealerMom]

I just wanna share something, if it's ok?

I haven't read the books

But, I just saw the movie - and i'm all 24 weeks pg here - and my little bundle was pile driving the heck out of me! I couldn't get into it at all. I had to sit back and think to myself - "it's a movie, these are special effects", instead of getting lost in the suspension of disbelief - humph. And Golum (sp) - totally freaked me out, we were sitting way too close, and his eyes are so big! MAN! I had to get up for popcorn.

And I'm diggin your critiques of the movie.

I cheered when they flooded Isengard (sp)!!

And I wanna see that spider thing, too!