What people think of Two Towers (*SPOILERS*)

[squinteyedsoutherner]

Crickhollow, your sig gets me everytime. That Waterhouse painting is on my wall right behind my computer

[crickhollow]

why, thank you

now, in order to seem mildly on topic:

Thanks for your thoughts, Coolismo. That definately is a new way to look at the film. It does need at least a second viewing. I've only been once.

I have to say that I enjoy the movies. What I don't enjoy is when people call PJ a Tolkien purist, because he is obviously not. I'm talking about people like Time Magazine, NOT THE PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD!!! I dislike it when the New Line people try to tell us how close PJ stuck to the books, and how they consulted Tolkien between every shot, because even if they did consult it, they disregarded it shortly thereafter. The least they could do is 'fess up (like they did for TTT, but did NOT for FotR) and tell us that the movie is going to be very different.

[Black Breathalizer]

Jackson was writing and directing three 2-3 hour movies, not a 20 hour mini-series. There was no way in the world ANY screenwriter/director could have done a strict interpretation of Tolkien's trilogy in the amount of time Jackson had and put anything decent on the big screen.

It's easy to sit back and say Jackson wasn't true to Tolkien. The truth is, no one in the world could have done better. I'm just sorry for people who take everything so literally they can't see or appreciate the underlying themes that Tolkien himself would have been proud that Jackson captured so P E R F E C T L Y.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Jackson was writing and directing three 2-3 hour movies, not a 20 hour mini-series. There was no way in the world ANY screenwriter/director could have done a strict interpretation of Tolkien's trilogy in the amount of time Jackson had and put anything decent on the big screen.

It's easy to sit back and say Jackson wasn't true to Tolkien. The truth is, no one in the world could have done better. I'm just sorry for people who take everything so literally they can't see or appreciate the underlying themes that Tolkien himself would have been proud that Jackson captured so P E R F E C T L Y.

I agree that TTT was well done. I also think that no-one could have captured every detail in the book, that would have lead to a 4000 hour mini-series.

However I disagree on a couple of points. First, though TTT was very good, it wasn't perfect. Second, I don't think that Tolkien would have liked any movie at all being made of the books. This opinion is not based on any statement Tolkien made, it's just the impression that I get from what I suppose to be his views of technology.

Thirdly, and most importantly, the scenes that I have issues with in the movie TTT are ones where I feel that the spirit of the book was lost. This is my opinion in a nutshell.

Slightly off topic, but I recently had a debate with my friend and it was very informative. After a long discussion where we shared all our ideas plus examples to back them up - much like we have done in this thread - we summarized our opinions into one sentance.

The point of this little story is to ask all of you to sum up your issues with TTT or with things people said about TTT into one sentance. This would help us understand one another much better.

Essentially, I have an issue with any scene in the movie where the spirit of the book is lost or altered, especially where I feel it could have been maintained.

Of course, where the spirit of the book is and is very subjective.

[azalea]

Originally posted by squinteyedsoutherner
...that Nazgul ... was forced to retreat because of the elves approach.

Now that would have been cool.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

If the spirit of Tolkien is killing, fight, slashing, and archery with some dialogue thrown in, then he captured in perfectly.

Not to say that I disliked the movies. Indeed, I loved them. But they are not Middle Earth or Lord of the Rings, in my opinion, and the opinions of many others. They are, however, good movies.

[eowyngirl14]

originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem

If the spirit of Tolkien is killing, fight, slashing, and archery with some dialogue thrown in, then he captured in perfectly.

I thought the dialoge was well chosen and meaningfull! I especially liked the scene with Aragorn and Eowyn...

Eowyn: The women of this country learned long ago that those who do not weild swords can still die by them. I fear neither pain nor death.

Aragorn: What do you fear my lady?

Eowyn: A cage. Being trappen behind bars untill use and old ages accept them and all chance of valor is beyound reach or recall.

Aragorn: You are a daughter of kings. A sheild-maiden of Rohan. I would not think that to be your fate.


Oh! I love it! I love it! I love it! HEee HEee HEee! I like reciting it under my breath when I read and I know people are watching me... FUN FUN FUN!!

[LuthienTinuviel]

Originally posted by eowyngirl14
Oh! I love it! I love it! I love it! HEee HEee HEee! I like reciting it under my breath when I read and I know people are watching me... FUN FUN FUN!!

weeeeee!

2. Theoden plays a similar role to Aragorn in the scene of Gandalfs fall. Notice the similarity of the dialogue here again worth replaying the scene after Gandalfs loss to see similarities. This draws out another theme: to rise you must fall. Ascension is prededed by a descent.

a conversation:

Me: what comes up muct come down, right?
Physics Teacher: Of course.
M: then what goes down has to come up?
PT: no, i don't think that's possible.
M: but doesn't every action has an equal and opposite reaction....?

If the spirit of Tolkien is killing, fight, slashing, and archery with some dialogue thrown in, then he captured in perfectly.

Exactly.

It's easy to sit back and say Jackson wasn't true to Tolkien.

Exactly.

What was stopping PJ from sticking pretty darn close to the book like he did in FoTR?

Exactly.

Jackson was writing and directing three 2-3 hour movies, not a 20 hour mini-series. There was no way in the world ANY screenwriter/director could have done a strict interpretation of Tolkien's trilogy in the amount of time Jackson had and put anything decent on the big screen.

Exactly.

The truth is, no one ...could have done better.

Exactly.

I'm just sorry for people who take everything so literally they can't see or appreciate the underlying themes that Tolkien himself would have been proud that Jackson captured so P E R F E C T L Y.

have you read letter #210, BB?
i think your precious movie might be in jeopardy. so sad, so sad.

This is partly my fault since I was harshly critical of some aspects of TTT.

Were you here for the last bought of this? i thought you were, well if you weren't, just know that this happens at least twice for every single tiny facet of these films. It's not your fault for stating your opinion. If you feelthat you've ticked someone off, then it's thier fault for making you feel that way.

oh and,

Hey, BB!
when are you going to get your nose out of the air and look at the rest of the world. Since when has a seventeen year old been the supreme authority on anything Tolkien or PJ?
I want some of what your mom must have smoking when she was pregnant with you, cause it must have been good. What is wrong in your head?

He's your God not mine.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I certainly think that it could have been better, if done by someone with a true passion for Tolkien's works, who knows them intimately, and would be more interested in preserving the stories than in pleasing the crowds. Because, let's face it, that was the reason for a large number of his changes. But as I've said before: the crowds have thousands, or even millions of movies; can't we have 3? (I'm sure that the fact the last thread was closed directly after I said it wasn't due to that!)

Now now, there's no call to be so rude. If you must insult someone, please refrain from including their mother.

EG14; Yes, some of the dialogue was well-written; just because the film seems to be more about fighting than dialogue doesn't mean that it can't be good. But it still doesn't capture the spirit of Tolkien. Especially the Arwen scenes (anyone else notice that she's schitzophrenic? sp)

Again, I loved the movies; they rank highly on my All-Time Favorite lists. But they are not Tolkien to me.

And, as long as the deity of PJ is brought up, let me point that he DOES have the body of a god.

[LuthienTinuviel]

edited... im having a bad day

[eowyngirl14]

I do think that Arwen was screwed up... she didn'teven belong in the TT. But how is she a skitsophrenic? (I know I spelled that wrong... I sounded it out!)

[Gwaimir Windgem]

To me at least, she seemed to be two different characters in the two different movies. In FotR, she was a confident, strong, independent, and wise warrior princess; in TTT, she struck me as a blubbering teenager who didn't have any idea what she was doing, and had to have Daddy tell her.

[Nurvingiel]

That's what PJ gets for blowing her character out of proportion - he had to make 99% of that stuff up!

[elendili]

in TTT, she struck me as a blubbering teenager who didn't have any idea what she was doing, and had to have Daddy tell her.

Almost makes you dread what's going to hapen in ROTK doesn't it?

They killed Haldir *sob* PJ must pay

Wasn't gollum cute ???

I'm not so sure about Faramir he wasn't as i imagined
Wormtoungue was though

[viggosbeard]

Gwaimir - in my humble opinion....you are very wrong.

Changes are unavoidable, making 3 films for fans only is silly ( are you going to pay for it ? )most of the changes were made by an obviously well read tolkien fan and are in the spirit of tolkiens work. Ive been to see ttt 3 times now, and though I was quite shocked at some of the changes, i can see why for most of them ,
and though I prefer fotr as a movie and I do like ttt more at each veiwing. Maybe if you try and get into the characters head, you might realise the pain that Arwen is going through, decisions she has to make etc etc - is this another wind up that I havnt got again !?

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by viggosbeard
Changes are unavoidable, making 3 films for fans only is silly ( are you going to pay for it ? )

Pretty sure we did. How many people bought movie tickets, DVDs, etc only because the title was Lord of the Rings?

*raises hand numerous times*

I'm quite sure part of the pitch to backers was the picture of an army of Tolkien fans lining up, cash in hand.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally posted by viggosbeard

...Maybe if you try and get into the characters head, you might realise the pain that Arwen is going through, decisions she has to make etc etc - is this another wind up that I havnt got again !?

Who cares about Arwen's pain? She's not in the book!

I felt that some of the changes made in TTT were only done because PJ wanted it to be different, not because he had to for the movie format. PJ has the movie making skills to have stayed truer to the book.

I think ROTK will be as good as FOTR in sticking to the book, and as good as TTT for action! The best of both worlds... (there is still hope! hehe)

[Celebréiel]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
PJ has the movie making skills to have stayed truer to the book.

yeah thats what Ive always thought! It seems like some of the changes would have taken the same time, same amount of money and still made sense if he kept it true to the book. I just dont understand with most of the changes made.
~ Celebréiel

[entss89]

i think it was great and also i love the part when smeagol is fighting with himself!

[entss89]

i think it was great and also i love the part when smeagol is fighting with himself!