The Two Towers

[low_delta]

Okay, I'm going to write about the movie.

Don't read this post if you haven't seen it yet.

And don't read this post if you don't want to hear anything critical of it.


Walking out of the theater, I felt that the good stuff was overshadowed by the stuff that wasn't like the book.

I didn't have this feeling with the first movie. Well, except for that one part with Aragorn and Frodo on the rock in Moria. But that was not only unlike the book, but unecessary - bad storytelling. There were things that were changed, but it all seemed reasonable. First of all, you have to condense things. Second, nothing in FotR seemed totally made up. Sure they made a character out of Arwen, and even gave her important things to do, but it seems like that story was there all the time - like it just needed uncovering.

Anyway, I walked out of FotR happy. I had few compaints. I walked out of this one unhappy. I read the book this summer. I thought, this is gonna be great! This story is so audience friendly, they won't have to mess with it much. I guess I succumbed to high expectations.

Okay, so what did they add?
Theoden was literally posessed by Saruman. That was annoying, but I guess in the interest of keeping things simple, they kept things simple. I think Tolkien's story was far more interesting (and believable), but oh well.

Why were there flames hovering in the Dead Marsh? Kinda took some of the mysticality out of the place.

Treebeard and the Ents were portrayed as a bit uncaring, so that Pippin could save the day by showing Treebeard Saruman's devastation. I was also disappointed that the Ents' battle with Isengard was not more detailed and protracted. And that they didn't show up at Helm's Deep.

And Elrond sending an army to Helm's Deep bugged me a little. Like they needed to add a moral. What's wrong with having the elves remain uncaring bastards for a little while longer? Even the Ents didn't care until it was their own people cut down.

And what was the deal with the side door to the gate at Helm's Deep? Very Cheesy.

Now what the hell was that crap with Faramir taking the hobbits to Osgiliath? In the book, Faramir was a proud man who didn't succumb to the temptation of The Ring, like his brother did. In the movie, he... well, he wasn't like that at all. Okay, so why did they do that? I guess because they didn't have the time to set up Faramir's character like he was in the book. And why were the Nazgul floating around like that? So given that they're that close to the ring - one of them actually saw it - what will they do now? One would expect Sauron to send all his armies to the Osgiliath area, and flatten the entire countryside looking for It. Why do I have the feeling that's not going to happen. I guess this little scene was so that everyone could see Frodo's inner struggle.

I was really disapointed we didn't get to see the spider. After looking forward to that scene, the conflict at Osgiliath was a rather anticlimactic climax. I could have sworn I saw her in a commercial.

Okay, I guess it wasn't that bad. Thanks for bearing with me.

What did I like about it?

Gollum was well done. One of the few characters with a full range of facial expressions. After all these years of reading the books, and wondering what that gollum noise in his throat would sound like, I actually heard it. They earn lots of points for that.

I liked Wormtongue. Brad Dourif made a great Grima.

The Ents were pretty well done. It seemed strange that Fangorn forest was a soundstage, though.

I liked the orcs. Not the Uruk Hai, but the little Mordor orcs. Very well done.

And those things I described that bothered me were... well, it was personal. I recognize that it was still a pretty good movie.

And on other notes...
Was Eowyn allowed one of the magical Elf Potions of Bathing? She was the only non-elf in the whole movie who remained ungrimy.

Did Gimli get shorter as the movie went on? He was under four feet by the time of the battle.

I kept waiting for Gandalf to say, "engage." Or, when he met them in the forest, say, "it's good to see you, Number One."


Edit:
I forgot to mention the part where, after the fight with the giant hyenas, Aragorn fell off a cliff, floated down a river, was picked up by his horse, and rode back to join the group. What was the pint of that?

And I was really impressed by the floods at Isengard. The water was amazingly well done.

Comments

[specificocean.livejournal.com]

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I think you raised some valid points.

I was hesitant to even go see FotR. I'm a longtime fan of Tolkien, and all other fantasy writing must measure up to the almost impossible standards he set, in my opinion. I've probably read the Hobbit and the trilogy at least 20 times. I tell people who HAVEN'T read them that Tolkien transcended writing, and created a whole universe that lies in between the covers, waiting for the reader to tap into it. Every one has his/her own vision of how that universe flows, how the characters/scenes look, and so on...

Having said all that, FotR was marvellously well done. I'm going to go into TTT with an open mind...

[zonal.livejournal.com]

You're the second person on my friends list who's read the books (I haven't) to review TTT (ragdoll's is here (http://www.livejournal.com/talkread.bml?journal=ragdoll&itemid=610142)), and I'm really enjoying reading comparisons; my fiancé had mentioned several differences here or there throughout the film as well.
The battle scenes and the flood scene completely blew me away, as did Gollum; he seemed so unbelievably real. I cannot wait to see it again.

[banana.livejournal.com]

I didn't read your post because I'm not that interested in the film.

[eyelid.livejournal.com]

I completely agree. I had exactly the same problems you had. I don't mind some changes, but WHY did they change the things they did. It would have been much easier for them to show Faramir like he really was, and to make the Ents do things the way they were supposed to. I actually felt that the Ents seemed stupid. And they REALLY weren't.

Why oh why no huerns?? *cries*

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

A friend of mine suggested that they might have shown Osgiliath, and the battles going on there, to set the stage for the final showdown, and show that Sauron's forces really are out there and doing damage. ??


There were many things that I thought were choices between keeping true to the story, and making the movie come in under six hours and keeping the story easy to follow.

For example, making the Ents appear as wise as they are supposed to be would require too much time to set up. They were sacrificed for a watchable movie. Sad but true. And Treebeard's wisdom was also sacrificed so that Merry and Pippin would have something to do. And not merely something, but they were able to make a huge contribution saving the world. You can't have two of the main characters not make a difference. Not that I would have noticed...

[eyelid.livejournal.com]

But M&P make a difference LATER! & I don't think it would take that long to set the Ents up as wise... just have them know what's going on in their own forest!! I think they just succumbed to the temptation to make the ents into a humorous interlude.

As for the Faramir bit... my money is on that they just wanted to do some more pretty graphics. Whether for the sake of the graphics or just because they thought it would sell better if they got to do more fell beast & ruined city closeups. It would've been much much shorter if they hadn't put in that long detour.

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

Yeah, maybe they felt that with the battle in Rohan, and everything, the movie needed to have a little more lightheartedness in it.

What bugs me most about that is that now the Nazgul have seen the ring. How the hell is Frodo going to get away from there?

[eyelid.livejournal.com]

I think the idea PJ's selling is that the Nazgul can't REALLY see the ring unless Frodo puts it on.

[ravenfeather.livejournal.com]

Ok, NOW I can read this entry. I haven't read the books in twenty years.. and I could pick out the changes.. that is pretty bad. I agree it is a pretty good movie, although I don't see how anyone who HASN'T read the books can even follow the story. That was my complaint with the first movie; the characters were never really introduced, and you didn't know their history OR their racial habits. With what little was said and shown (and misportrayed) in this movie.. how is ANYONE supposed to know what an Ent really is?

I agree with all of your negatives, but I would add the Arwen thing in strongly. Just because you have a famous actress playing a character does NOT mean you need to add another story line when you are having to cut out so much that IS ... valid to the story. Not every movie HAS TO HAVE a love story line.

I was also very disappointed that the "quenching of Sarumen's fires" was not made more of a focal point. That was a biiiiiiiiiiig deal in the war. As you said however... the flood was well done.

I also didn't like the way they made Gimly comic relief without showing his serious side. Yeah.. some of it was funny, but the bit about not being able to see over the wall wasn't.. yeah, he was hobbit height by that time.

Didn't even NOTICE the bit about clean Eowyn.. and that is usually something I do notice.. thanks for pointing it out. I have to see it at least once more.. but if I could get out of it I would.

I don't remember realizing while reading the books that Gollum was schizoid and talking to two different sides of himself. I am not sure because of the length of time since I have read it if it wasn't there, or if I just didn't pick up on that, at any rate, I liked that part, it made sense. Yes, Gollum was very well done.

Why can't elephants be elephant size? Aren't they are big enough.. particularly to someone as small as a hobbit? Why was it necessary to have city-sized elephants that hold hundreds of beings on each back?

I am not going to say anything about this next part, because I do not want to ruin it for anyone who has not seen the movie, but Halodur.. NO NO NO NO NO NO!!

I am glad I got to see the movie, it was interesting enough.. but it is NOT the book.

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

If you read the description carefully, you realize that the Maumakil really are much bigger than our modern day elephants. But not that much bigger. I can understand the desire to make everything in the movie fantastic, but I thought those beasts were fantastic enough. They just got so big I had trouble maintaining the illusion. I did like how Sam stayed to watch as long as he could. They couldn't add the whole poem and fascination parts, but it was a nice touch for those of us who knew.

I thought the the Elves help out at the battle at Minas Tirith in the end, but I guess they didn't. They had their own battles to fight, since Sauron's forces pretty much attacked everywhere, even though that was not really included in the narrative. I didn't mind the addition of Arwen. It seems like a story that was happening, but not shown. I've always felt that the wedding between Aragorn and Arwen just kind of came out of nowhere. The part that I didn't care for was the part where Galadriel convinced Elrond that he should send troops. It was just a sort of moralizing for the audience.

There were many things that I thought were choices between keeping true to the story, and making the movie come in under size hours and keeping the story easy to follow.

For example, making the Ents appear as wise as they are supposed to be would require too much time to set up. They were sacrificed for a watchable movie. Sad but true. And Treebeard's wisdom was also sacrificed so that Merry and Pippin would have something to do. And not merely something, but they were able to make a huge contribution saving the world. You can't have two of the main characters not make a difference. Not that I would have noticed...

It was only when the additions did not seem to add anything that they really bothered me.

It really wasn't that bad. Try to enjoy it the second time. ;-)

PS

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

Gollum really did have that dialogue with himself, though it wasn't as pronounced as they made it seem. Sam overheard such a conversation, at one point. He named the two personalities Slinker and Stinker - Stinker being the one who was trying to kill them.

Re: PS

[ravenfeather.livejournal.com]

I do remember him talking to himself.. but it seemed (from what I remember) to just be talking to himself... not a different self. I am going to wait until AFTER I see the third movie next year until I read the books again.

As far as the elephants were concerned.. the illusion was not done well. I looked at the height portrayed by the SIZE of the beings on the ground.. then the SIZE of the beings on their backs. supposedly roughly the same size as each other, and it just didn't match up in my mind. If you have five of something walking along and fitting into a space at its feet, then 40 of that same something walking around in that space on its back, even with an expanded "saddle"... Even with everything else going on, it was noticable enough to bother me.

I will see it again, I don't have a choice, unless there is another three hour movie showing at the same theater as the one I am taking my daughter and her friends to on her birthday.. an unlikely event. When I saw FoTR the second time, I was able to pick out more detail, which I liked. I am hoping to do the same with this one.

Re: PS

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

Well, it's not really a differnt self. I mean, what would the be, exactly. You can picture someone having that same conversation with himself, but without the camera angle cuts, and it seems perfectly normal. Just a little overdramatic effect.

[tully-monster.livejournal.com]

I waited to read your comments until I'd actually seen the movie. While I was bothered a bit by some of the changes, I had been wondering, after I'd read the book, how they were going to handle the episodic quality of the story. I felt as though it wasn't easily adaptable to a three-hour movie. The book gave me the sense of a kind of interlude...various characters and groups going from battle to battle, with the ultimate goal of all converging on Mordor, which wouldn't happen until the third volume.

My only real concern was that if they were going to play fast and loose with the plot, dammit, they should have armed the women. If, as Eowyn implied, all women were trained to handle themselves with a broadsword, why the freakety freak did they have them all cowering in the basement with the children while boys who didn't know what they were doing were given weapons and helmets? If you can't tell, this really irritated me. It was just a reminder that ultimately all fantasy is aimed at thirteen-year-old boys and that women are as unwelcome there (except as set decorations and love interests) as they were in the Bodleian in Tolkien's time.

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I noticed that too. (seems like I discussed that with someone.)

The Eowyn part doesn't bother me as much, since she does get a chance to show she can handle a sword, in the next movie. And since she was annoyed at having to babysit in this one, you can bet they'll make a big deal out of it.

The rest of the women being herded off like that bugged me more. There was not one female on the ramparts? Get real.