<strong>could they have named the characters Bob, Jim, Fred?
****ing dorktastic character names make me want to vomit. Galadriel? Fantasy shit like this makes me want to put my eyes out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
AS much as I share the same feelings with you over Fantasy shite I think you are being really over the top regarding names.
<strong>i was under the impression that Galadriell would 'diminish' because she wore one of the Elven rings and the rings lose power when the one that binds them dissapears....?!?!?!? hmmm . . . gess I skipped that part of the Appendix.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You are right about the Three, they do lose their power when the One is destroyed, but even besides that the Elves that remain in Middle-earth are doomed to fade anyway ... that was true even before the rings were even forged.
[quote]<strong>I also thought that Arwen didn't die but rather just sort of faded into part of the landscape . . .hmmm?!?!?!</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, after Aragorn's death she goes to Lorien and dies. It's in LOTR Appendix A.
[quote]<strong>wasn't it the ents eating away at the rear flanks that won Helm's Deep?!?!?!
hmmm?!??</strong><hr></blockquote>
In the book Erkenbrand and his Westfold men save the day, much the same way Eomer and his troops do in the film. The Ents (or Huorns or whoever) just gobble up all the fleeing orcs.
<strong>So I think I understand it all better... but why exactly aren't the elves that were leaving in TTT able to go back to middle earth? If the Valar allowed them would they be able to?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't know whether they "can't" per se, but they don't want to. Valinor is sort of their "promised land," in a way. And they understand that Men are destined to rule Middle-earth, for good or ill. There is no more they can do there.
<strong>could they have named the characters Bob, Jim, Fred?
****ing dorktastic character names make me want to vomit. Galadriel? Fantasy shit like this makes me want to put my eyes out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
At least if you lost your eyesight you'd still have that vivid imagination. No one can take that away from you.
just came back from seeing the movie. It was worth it. I could of read the<a href="http://themoviespoiler.com/Spoilers/lordoftherings2.html"; target="_blank">spoiler</a> but i really didn't want to spoil it for myself. I have never read a lord of the rings book and i still don't mean to. I will watch ROTK though.
Saw it yesterday and loved it (duh). Can't wait for ROTK. I had the same feeling watching it that I have when reading the books - "I'm on page 300. Cool there's 800 more pages to go!"
The Faramir change didn't bother me, perhaps because I've heard so much about it. The test has to be "was it good for the story," not "different from book = bad." This did further the drama of the story - it made their trip to Mordor more difficult than it would have been, it further showed the power of the ring over men, and it sets up Sauron's belief that the ring is going to Gondor. So it was a way of increasing the drama in that part of the story - the whole Frodo/Sam story would have been too easy without that part, especially since they left Shelob for ROTK. They could have made Shelob the main action in TTT, but it seems like they wanted to avoid the cliffhanger, and also make Shelob/the capture by the orcs the main story for Frod/Sam in ROTK. I can understand that - otherwise there's not a lot of excitement for them in ROTK considering that's really the most important part of the story.
The one thing I wonder about is how Faramir and Eowyn are going to get together in ROTK. Now that they've made Faramir kind of a jerk, and played up the Eowyn-Aragorn thing, it's going to be disappointing to see Eowyn get with Faramir unless they rehabilitate his character further in ROTK.
On the other hand, the Elves going to Helm's Deep seemed a gratuitous change, unless something happens in ROTK to tie it together. Pretty minor though. I also liked the change where they implied Arwen was leaving.
Things I liked:
? Gandalf and the Balrog
? Eowyn
? Aragorn reading the tracks at the Orc-Rohan battle and following Merry & Pippin into Fangorn
? Eowyn-Aragorn-Arwen
? The exorcism. I liked it more than I thought I would. Good visual portrayal of Theoden's change.
? Everything about Rohan. Loved it. Especially Eowyn.
? The portrayal of Frodo cracking under the power of the Ring.
? Eowyn
? The Gimli humor. Didn't bother me at all and thought it was well done.
? Wormtongue
? Did I mention Eowyn?
Things I didn't like:
? Gollum. Everyone said it was so fantastic and the best CG character ever, but it was still stuck out to me. I liked the Ents better in a lot of ways. I think the problem is that we know that Gollum is supposed to basically look like a really old Hobbit, so when you see him interacting with the other hobbits, the contrast between real and CG is jarring. I did love how they portrayed the split personality though.
? The Ent plotline. Clearly they wanted to give Merry and Pippin a bigger role in causing the Ents to attack, but it seemed backwards. First they had the moot, then they decided against attacking, then all of a sudden they attacked. It just didn't make sense. The idea of Pippin saying "let's go South" was great, but it should have come before the moot. 1. Ents find Merry & Pippin. 2. Ents take M & P South and see destruction of trees. 3. Ents moot. 4. Ents attack.
Things I'm really looking forward to for ROTK:
? The paths of the dead
? The battle of Minas Tirith, the rescue by Rohan and Aragorn, and "Dernhelm" and the Nazgul
? Seeing how they off Saruman
? Aragorn becoming king and Arwen surprising Aragorn with her return
? Sam taking over the ring
? Will they have Aragorn confront Sauron with the palantir? I hope so.
? Will they show at least some of the Hobbits going back to the Shire, even if Saruman isn't there? I hope so.
<strong>could they have named the characters Bob, Jim, Fred?
****ing dorktastic character names make me want to vomit. Galadriel? Fantasy shit like this makes me want to put my eyes out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Gollum is my favorite character in the series and they did a PERFECT job. I was so happy when he started to debate himself I thought I might piss myself (of course, the super-tanker of coke I had been drinking had a lot to do with that sensation).
Hooray for the coney scene. "They ruins it!"
*squeals like a little girl*
The ents were quacktastic.
The whole movie was fantastic, absolutely beautiful. The CG work was top-notch (I damn near shit myself the way Legolas pulled himself up onto that horse).
Gollum was given perfect attention, he is the lynchpin character in the book. I can't wait to see it again just to delight in how wonderful his depiction was. I'm getting vechlempt! Talk amongst yourselves!
God, what a fantastic movie.
Bitches, being the LotR nerd I am:
- NO ELVES AT HELM'S DEEP! My companions were moved and I was pissed when they showed up.
- Way too much time on Aragorn and Eowyn. grrr
- Not enough time with the ent battle (see gripe 2). Mostly my bitch here was that he didn't repeatedly call the hobbits "hasty". I loved that from the book.
- Merry and Pippin aren't growing. They are supposed to be drinking ent-draughts and getting big.
The Twin Towers was a great second chapter. I don't think it contained the beauty of FotR but it does contain the Brawn.
Loved seeing the Balrog again. I love that creature and would love a poster of the flaming Balrog Briquette lol.
I think they missed an opportunity to really shoot some eery scenes when they must travel through what was it Fangorn Forest?
Eowyn- Obviously she has much more work to do but TTT reduced her to an Aragorn Groupy. The book portrays Eowyn as a somewhat headstrong Woman...one who could serve as Queen if need be. Her attraction to Aragorn was undeniable however her eagerness to join battle was not shown at all. Let's hope they give her some chutzpah in RotK.
Meeting Theoden- After the showdown with Eomer in Rohan I just knew that more fireworks were coming. For those that haven't read the books when Theodens guards ask for Aragon, Gimli, Legolas's weapons. Let just say they weren't as lenient as portrayed in the movie. Aragorn carries the very sword that cut the ring from Saurons hands. He doesn't yield his sword at just anyones whim. I'm just looking for consistency here.
Theodon was never under Sarumans control save for Grimas proxy. While it made for good visual effect the book shows an inner strength that Theoden gains rather than spell bindery.I was moved that Theoden in the book gathered his strength one last time and rode with his soldiers.
Ents- Slowed the story down. They made a fatal flaw as well. Pippin never visited Isengard so he would not know that the trees have been torn down. The palantir never showed him so this was a reach.
Elves in Helms Deep- nice I don't have much of a problem with it because in teh context of the movie it hurts nothing.
Gollum- was not overdone. He was in every scene that he should have been. PJ accurately showed the internal battle of Gollum/Smeagol. A fight to keep his word despite his "crackish" desire for the ring. The CGI was great IMO.
Grima- Dourif you a$$. Nuff said he was great.
Aragorn/Arwen- What no sex scene?? j/k I actually liked this sequence. Elrond gives one of the best speeches of the movie. Gotta love that Elf love.
Faramir- Oh how this bothered me so much more than many of you. Faramir, as Casecom mentions, is the opposite of Boromir. He is level headed and thoughful. The verbal exchanges between Frodo and Faramir in the book are stellar. Yet here we have Faramir "demonized" beyond recognition. I expected much more...aye that I did.
Osgiliath was poor- I cannot see the point it served when the 6 minutes or so could have been used in so many other more beneficial ways. Samwise Gamgee's speech was just out of character. Sam is the brawn Frodo's the brains of the outfit...always been that way.
Peter Jackson has made another great movie that keeps the story moving. There WILL be a Directors cut with more scenes added in and that will be on my purchase list. I do wish that the dialogue was more attended to. I loved Tolkiens repartee more than his discriptive worlds. I miss some of that dialogue but it's a movie for everyone and I understand.
Bring on RotK! <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
[quote]Pippin never visited Isengard so he would not know that the trees have been torn down. The palantir never showed him so this was a reach. <hr></blockquote>
Couldn't Gandalf have told them? They seemed to be about to have a meeting (the White Wizard will know what to do) at the end of one of the scenes.
I won't bother with a full review I loved it for many of the reasons stated.
One point-Gollum's "conversations" with himself played like comedy to some in the crowd I was in. I didn't see it that way, but maybe he was too cute in his Smeagol mode?
God, I can't believe anyone would compare him to Jar-Jar, though.
One opportunity I thought was missed in the Ent sequence was Merry's great description in the book of the Ents breaking through the gates of Isengard:
[quote]"An angry Ent is terrifying. Their fingers, and their toes, just freeze on to rock; and they tear it up like bread-crust. It was like watching the work of great tree-roots in a hundred years, all packed into a few moments."<hr></blockquote>
Wouldn't that have been great to see on screen? Instead we just see them throwing boulders and squashing orcs with their feet.
Holy crap! :eek: TTT is way ahead of FOTR's pace at the box office. $61 million for the weekend, and a total five-day take of $101 million!
[quote]LOS ANGELES (AP) -- The "Lord of the Rings" sequel dominated in its debut weekend, taking in $61.5 million -- 30 percent better than its predecessor did last year, according to studio estimates Sunday.
Altogether, "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" has grossed $101.5 million since opening Wednesday, compared to $75.1 million by "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" in the same period and $47.2 million in its first weekend.
"The Two Towers" opened in 3,622 theaters, an 8 percent increase over "Fellowship," and averaged a whopping $16,980 a cinema over the weekend, compared with $14,055 for the first film. <hr></blockquote>
Saw it this weekend (I think it was illegal in some states to not see it) and I must say I had spent the day with my friends preparing for the moment. About five hours before we were to see the film, we watched the extended cut of Fellowship, which finished just in time for us to jump in the car and jump in line.
Overall, I think the movie was great. I do remember feeling a sense of disappointment with the film, though, after it ended. I tried to think of why I'd be feeling even remotely disappointed yet still feel this was one of the best epics ever and I think it comes down to these few things:
1) Ten thousand orcs strong you think would be enough to overrun Helm's Deep. At least I thought so. I mean, throughout this entire adventure (and I have not read the books and refuse to until AFTER RotK) it seems like the bad guys get souped up to be this unstoppable force only to get beaten at the end. I honestly thought this movie was going to be a bit darker, the ending a bit more savage then it was, to give us something to look forward to (like a "men coming together and rising above" storyline) for the third film. I mean, in the Empire Strikes back at least the Death Star took out a planet! It's like, even though there's these overwhelming odds the good guys still manage to win, even if it doesn't seem logical. I don't know. Maybe it's just me, but I'd like to see the bad guys win every once and a while, too, if only to set them up for the big heroic push at the end.
2) I felt there wasn't enough character development in this film. I want to know more about what makes the characters tick, and I want to see it displayed on screen. (I suppose, though, I only feel this way because I had just watched the Fellowship extended version, and I'm sure there will be more development in the extended Towers cut.)
3) I'm starting to think that Aargon and Legolas and Gimli are just untouchable in battle. It's getting to the point where I think all three of them could have taken the orcs on at Helm's Deep by themselves, even if the orcs were armed with gatlin guns and the three heros were chained together and given toothpicks and shoe string for weapons. There's one thing to be GOOD, but to be THAT GOOD is almost ridiculous.
4) I think the biggest disappointment, though, was that it ended. I really wanted to see more. Three hours or not, this movie flew by. It's actually amazing.
I loved the character of Smeagol/Gollum. He was both funny and sad at the same time, and the first schizophrenic scene he had was skillfully done. (It reminded me of the Pixar short Gerri's Game, where an old man plays chess against himself for his dentures.)
Gimli as comic releif was also pretty funny. "Toss me, but don't tell the elf!" It didn't take away from the story at all and helped keep a positive and hopeful tone about a positive outcome of the Helm's Deep battle. (I think I was subconsiously hoping that Gimli's funny moments were actually setting us up for the human's defeat at that battle, which I thought would be more dramatic.)
Great film, though, and I can not wait for the finale next year.
<strong>could they have named the characters Bob, Jim, Fred?
****ing dorktastic character names make me want to vomit. Galadriel? Fantasy shit like this makes me want to put my eyes out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This is one of those instances where I'm --SO-- happy that I've read all the books before I saw the movie because I simply cannot imagine reading the books AFTER being shown someone else's version of events.
Gambit, when you go to read the books be SURE to ply through every last drop of the Appendices (yes there are several) at the back of Return of the King. After that turn to the Silmarillion if you want to truly comprehend the heritage of the people of Gondor. Aragorn is a pure blood descendent of the Numenoreans and the inheritor of their glories and their follies. Knowing the AMAZING back-history of Middle Earth lends a sad shadow to the events of the story of The Lord of the Rings simply because there were even more glorious and remarkable times in Ages Past.
You sense just a glimmer of that when you see the arrival of the elves at Helms Deep. Even if it isn't canon to the story it helps to reinforce the idea that there was a Grander Age before the one seen in these films.
Fair enough on the reasoning for reading the books first, but I choose not to read them so I don't get disappointed by the movies and so I don't know what happens and what I should look for. (For instance, I was shocked when I saw Jurassic Park after reading the book first. It was a good movie, it just wasn't the book.) Same thing with LOTR: they're great movies, I'm sure they're not the book though. Although I've read that the books themselvs are unfilmable as they have been written, and that the movies are as close to the source as can be possible.
We saw it opening day in Montreux after spending the previous nights on the 4 DVD set of the first movie as a warm-up.
Since it's a kind of skeptical-of-CGI household, the bits with Gollum were a bit uneven to enjoy. The wolves were pretty lame compared to the rest of Jackson's meticulous and totally enjoyable vision.
Eowyn (the only female character in the books that seems real) will have to wait till next year to show her stuff!
David Bowie wanted to play Elrond...that would have have been interesting, no?
Most of all, we were just tantalized by the world created, and wished some game company would develop a Myst-like game to get lost in.
And for everyone who was disappointed by Faramir...yeah. I'm really missing Sean Bean's Boromir here.
Wouldn't that have been great to see on screen? Instead we just see them throwing boulders and squashing orcs with their feet.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh man I agree. I had this vision that the Ents would put their hands on the walls, their fingers would grow roots into the walls and when they lifted their arms everything would just fall part like a ball of lose dirt.
But instead we get hulks tossing rocks. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
The Faramir change pissed me off.
Ents not crushing things at helms deep pissed me off.
I hope RotK has Pippen and Merry look into the ball. THAT'S!!!!!!! what misdirected Sarun. NOT fordo getting sidetracked by Faramir.
Some of the changes piss me off because they server\\ no purpose. Why not have the Ents at helms deep? Why does Faramir have to be different?
[quote]<strong>In the book, for example, Faramir is very pure and very noble, but here in the film, he's got this evil touch. He's even tempted by the ring.
Peter Jackson: </strong>For a short time, yeah. We made that change, just to use that example -- and this is really where being a filmmaker differs from being a writer. You make decisions as a filmmaker and, rightly or wrongly, you change things if you think they need to be changed. We wanted the episode with Faramir in this particular film to have a certain degree of tension. Frodo and Sam were captured. Their journey had become more complicated by the fact that they are prisoners. Which they are in the book for a brief period of time. But then, very quickly in the book, Tolkien sort of backs away from there and, as you say, he reveals Faramir to be very pure. At one point, Faramir says, "Look, I wouldn't even touch the ring if I saw it lying on the side of the road."
For us, as filmmakers, that sort of thing creates a bit of a problem because we've spent a lot of time in the last film and in this one to establish this ring as incredibly powerful. Then to suddenly come to a character that says, "Oh, I'm not interested in that," to suddenly go against everything that we've established ourselves is sort of going against our own rules. We certainly acknowledge that Faramir should not do what Boromir did and that he ultimately has the strength to say, "No, you go on your way and I understand." We wanted to make it slightly harder, to have a little more tension than there was in the book.<hr></blockquote>
So basically, I guess, they thought they were improving on the book. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
The battle with the Ents was a little disapointing : just hurling rocks, nothing to do with the original description of Tolkien, who was one of the best part of his book .
I was surprised in the attack of the Helm fortress, that the front door was not more protected. Any medieval fortress have a front dore much more protected. But it's just a detail.
Comments
<strong>could they have named the characters Bob, Jim, Fred?
****ing dorktastic character names make me want to vomit. Galadriel? Fantasy shit like this makes me want to put my eyes out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
AS much as I share the same feelings with you over Fantasy shite I think you are being really over the top regarding names.
<strong>i was under the impression that Galadriell would 'diminish' because she wore one of the Elven rings and the rings lose power when the one that binds them dissapears....?!?!?!? hmmm . . . gess I skipped that part of the Appendix.</strong><hr></blockquote>
You are right about the Three, they do lose their power when the One is destroyed, but even besides that the Elves that remain in Middle-earth are doomed to fade anyway ... that was true even before the rings were even forged.
[quote]<strong>I also thought that Arwen didn't die but rather just sort of faded into part of the landscape . . .hmmm?!?!?!</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, after Aragorn's death she goes to Lorien and dies. It's in LOTR Appendix A.
[quote]<strong>wasn't it the ents eating away at the rear flanks that won Helm's Deep?!?!?!
hmmm?!??</strong><hr></blockquote>
In the book Erkenbrand and his Westfold men save the day, much the same way Eomer and his troops do in the film. The Ents (or Huorns or whoever) just gobble up all the fleeing orcs.
<strong>So I think I understand it all better... but why exactly aren't the elves that were leaving in TTT able to go back to middle earth? If the Valar allowed them would they be able to?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't know whether they "can't" per se, but they don't want to. Valinor is sort of their "promised land," in a way. And they understand that Men are destined to rule Middle-earth, for good or ill. There is no more they can do there.
<strong>could they have named the characters Bob, Jim, Fred?
****ing dorktastic character names make me want to vomit. Galadriel? Fantasy shit like this makes me want to put my eyes out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
At least if you lost your eyesight you'd still have that vivid imagination. No one can take that away from you.
Saw it yesterday and loved it (duh). Can't wait for ROTK. I had the same feeling watching it that I have when reading the books - "I'm on page 300. Cool there's 800 more pages to go!"
The Faramir change didn't bother me, perhaps because I've heard so much about it. The test has to be "was it good for the story," not "different from book = bad." This did further the drama of the story - it made their trip to Mordor more difficult than it would have been, it further showed the power of the ring over men, and it sets up Sauron's belief that the ring is going to Gondor. So it was a way of increasing the drama in that part of the story - the whole Frodo/Sam story would have been too easy without that part, especially since they left Shelob for ROTK. They could have made Shelob the main action in TTT, but it seems like they wanted to avoid the cliffhanger, and also make Shelob/the capture by the orcs the main story for Frod/Sam in ROTK. I can understand that - otherwise there's not a lot of excitement for them in ROTK considering that's really the most important part of the story.
The one thing I wonder about is how Faramir and Eowyn are going to get together in ROTK. Now that they've made Faramir kind of a jerk, and played up the Eowyn-Aragorn thing, it's going to be disappointing to see Eowyn get with Faramir unless they rehabilitate his character further in ROTK.
On the other hand, the Elves going to Helm's Deep seemed a gratuitous change, unless something happens in ROTK to tie it together. Pretty minor though. I also liked the change where they implied Arwen was leaving.
Things I liked:
? Gandalf and the Balrog
? Eowyn
? Aragorn reading the tracks at the Orc-Rohan battle and following Merry & Pippin into Fangorn
? Eowyn-Aragorn-Arwen
? The exorcism. I liked it more than I thought I would. Good visual portrayal of Theoden's change.
? Everything about Rohan. Loved it. Especially Eowyn.
? The portrayal of Frodo cracking under the power of the Ring.
? Eowyn
? The Gimli humor. Didn't bother me at all and thought it was well done.
? Wormtongue
? Did I mention Eowyn?
Things I didn't like:
? Gollum. Everyone said it was so fantastic and the best CG character ever, but it was still stuck out to me. I liked the Ents better in a lot of ways. I think the problem is that we know that Gollum is supposed to basically look like a really old Hobbit, so when you see him interacting with the other hobbits, the contrast between real and CG is jarring. I did love how they portrayed the split personality though.
? The Ent plotline. Clearly they wanted to give Merry and Pippin a bigger role in causing the Ents to attack, but it seemed backwards. First they had the moot, then they decided against attacking, then all of a sudden they attacked. It just didn't make sense. The idea of Pippin saying "let's go South" was great, but it should have come before the moot. 1. Ents find Merry & Pippin. 2. Ents take M & P South and see destruction of trees. 3. Ents moot. 4. Ents attack.
Things I'm really looking forward to for ROTK:
? The paths of the dead
? The battle of Minas Tirith, the rescue by Rohan and Aragorn, and "Dernhelm" and the Nazgul
? Seeing how they off Saruman
? Aragorn becoming king and Arwen surprising Aragorn with her return
? Sam taking over the ring
? Will they have Aragorn confront Sauron with the palantir? I hope so.
? Will they show at least some of the Hobbits going back to the Shire, even if Saruman isn't there? I hope so.
I'll stop there.
<strong>could they have named the characters Bob, Jim, Fred?
****ing dorktastic character names make me want to vomit. Galadriel? Fantasy shit like this makes me want to put my eyes out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, Jon.
[ 12-22-2002: Message edited by: ShawnPatrickJoyce ]</p>
Hooray for the coney scene. "They ruins it!"
*squeals like a little girl*
The ents were quacktastic.
The whole movie was fantastic, absolutely beautiful. The CG work was top-notch (I damn near shit myself the way Legolas pulled himself up onto that horse).
Gollum was given perfect attention, he is the lynchpin character in the book. I can't wait to see it again just to delight in how wonderful his depiction was. I'm getting vechlempt! Talk amongst yourselves!
God, what a fantastic movie.
Bitches, being the LotR nerd I am:
- NO ELVES AT HELM'S DEEP! My companions were moved and I was pissed when they showed up.
- Way too much time on Aragorn and Eowyn. grrr
- Not enough time with the ent battle (see gripe 2). Mostly my bitch here was that he didn't repeatedly call the hobbits "hasty". I loved that from the book.
- Merry and Pippin aren't growing. They are supposed to be drinking ent-draughts and getting big.
- Faramir was not so weak.
- Sam's stirring speech with montage. Gaaaaaaay.
Loved seeing the Balrog again. I love that creature and would love a poster of the flaming Balrog Briquette lol.
I think they missed an opportunity to really shoot some eery scenes when they must travel through what was it Fangorn Forest?
Eowyn- Obviously she has much more work to do but TTT reduced her to an Aragorn Groupy. The book portrays Eowyn as a somewhat headstrong Woman...one who could serve as Queen if need be. Her attraction to Aragorn was undeniable however her eagerness to join battle was not shown at all. Let's hope they give her some chutzpah in RotK.
Meeting Theoden- After the showdown with Eomer in Rohan I just knew that more fireworks were coming. For those that haven't read the books when Theodens guards ask for Aragon, Gimli, Legolas's weapons. Let just say they weren't as lenient as portrayed in the movie. Aragorn carries the very sword that cut the ring from Saurons hands. He doesn't yield his sword at just anyones whim. I'm just looking for consistency here.
Theodon was never under Sarumans control save for Grimas proxy. While it made for good visual effect the book shows an inner strength that Theoden gains rather than spell bindery.I was moved that Theoden in the book gathered his strength one last time and rode with his soldiers.
Ents- Slowed the story down. They made a fatal flaw as well. Pippin never visited Isengard so he would not know that the trees have been torn down. The palantir never showed him so this was a reach.
Elves in Helms Deep- nice I don't have much of a problem with it because in teh context of the movie it hurts nothing.
Gollum- was not overdone. He was in every scene that he should have been. PJ accurately showed the internal battle of Gollum/Smeagol. A fight to keep his word despite his "crackish" desire for the ring. The CGI was great IMO.
Grima- Dourif you a$$. Nuff said he was great.
Aragorn/Arwen- What no sex scene?? j/k I actually liked this sequence. Elrond gives one of the best speeches of the movie. Gotta love that Elf love.
Faramir- Oh how this bothered me so much more than many of you. Faramir, as Casecom mentions, is the opposite of Boromir. He is level headed and thoughful. The verbal exchanges between Frodo and Faramir in the book are stellar. Yet here we have Faramir "demonized" beyond recognition. I expected much more...aye that I did.
Osgiliath was poor- I cannot see the point it served when the 6 minutes or so could have been used in so many other more beneficial ways. Samwise Gamgee's speech was just out of character. Sam is the brawn Frodo's the brains of the outfit...always been that way.
Peter Jackson has made another great movie that keeps the story moving. There WILL be a Directors cut with more scenes added in and that will be on my purchase list. I do wish that the dialogue was more attended to. I loved Tolkiens repartee more than his discriptive worlds. I miss some of that dialogue but it's a movie for everyone and I understand.
Bring on RotK! <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Couldn't Gandalf have told them? They seemed to be about to have a meeting (the White Wizard will know what to do) at the end of one of the scenes.
I won't bother with a full review I loved it for many of the reasons stated.
One point-Gollum's "conversations" with himself played like comedy to some in the crowd I was in. I didn't see it that way, but maybe he was too cute in his Smeagol mode?
God, I can't believe anyone would compare him to Jar-Jar, though.
Jeff
[quote]"An angry Ent is terrifying. Their fingers, and their toes, just freeze on to rock; and they tear it up like bread-crust. It was like watching the work of great tree-roots in a hundred years, all packed into a few moments."<hr></blockquote>
Wouldn't that have been great to see on screen? Instead we just see them throwing boulders and squashing orcs with their feet.
[quote]LOS ANGELES (AP) -- The "Lord of the Rings" sequel dominated in its debut weekend, taking in $61.5 million -- 30 percent better than its predecessor did last year, according to studio estimates Sunday.
Altogether, "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" has grossed $101.5 million since opening Wednesday, compared to $75.1 million by "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" in the same period and $47.2 million in its first weekend.
"The Two Towers" opened in 3,622 theaters, an 8 percent increase over "Fellowship," and averaged a whopping $16,980 a cinema over the weekend, compared with $14,055 for the first film. <hr></blockquote>
Saw it this weekend (I think it was illegal in some states to not see it) and I must say I had spent the day with my friends preparing for the moment. About five hours before we were to see the film, we watched the extended cut of Fellowship, which finished just in time for us to jump in the car and jump in line.
Overall, I think the movie was great. I do remember feeling a sense of disappointment with the film, though, after it ended. I tried to think of why I'd be feeling even remotely disappointed yet still feel this was one of the best epics ever and I think it comes down to these few things:
1) Ten thousand orcs strong you think would be enough to overrun Helm's Deep. At least I thought so. I mean, throughout this entire adventure (and I have not read the books and refuse to until AFTER RotK) it seems like the bad guys get souped up to be this unstoppable force only to get beaten at the end. I honestly thought this movie was going to be a bit darker, the ending a bit more savage then it was, to give us something to look forward to (like a "men coming together and rising above" storyline) for the third film. I mean, in the Empire Strikes back at least the Death Star took out a planet! It's like, even though there's these overwhelming odds the good guys still manage to win, even if it doesn't seem logical. I don't know. Maybe it's just me, but I'd like to see the bad guys win every once and a while, too, if only to set them up for the big heroic push at the end.
2) I felt there wasn't enough character development in this film. I want to know more about what makes the characters tick, and I want to see it displayed on screen. (I suppose, though, I only feel this way because I had just watched the Fellowship extended version, and I'm sure there will be more development in the extended Towers cut.)
3) I'm starting to think that Aargon and Legolas and Gimli are just untouchable in battle. It's getting to the point where I think all three of them could have taken the orcs on at Helm's Deep by themselves, even if the orcs were armed with gatlin guns and the three heros were chained together and given toothpicks and shoe string for weapons. There's one thing to be GOOD, but to be THAT GOOD is almost ridiculous.
4) I think the biggest disappointment, though, was that it ended. I really wanted to see more. Three hours or not, this movie flew by. It's actually amazing.
I loved the character of Smeagol/Gollum. He was both funny and sad at the same time, and the first schizophrenic scene he had was skillfully done. (It reminded me of the Pixar short Gerri's Game, where an old man plays chess against himself for his dentures.)
Gimli as comic releif was also pretty funny. "Toss me, but don't tell the elf!" It didn't take away from the story at all and helped keep a positive and hopeful tone about a positive outcome of the Helm's Deep battle. (I think I was subconsiously hoping that Gimli's funny moments were actually setting us up for the human's defeat at that battle, which I thought would be more dramatic.)
Great film, though, and I can not wait for the finale next year.
<strong>could they have named the characters Bob, Jim, Fred?
****ing dorktastic character names make me want to vomit. Galadriel? Fantasy shit like this makes me want to put my eyes out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And Hannibal, Face and B.A. are better?
Gambit, when you go to read the books be SURE to ply through every last drop of the Appendices (yes there are several) at the back of Return of the King. After that turn to the Silmarillion if you want to truly comprehend the heritage of the people of Gondor. Aragorn is a pure blood descendent of the Numenoreans and the inheritor of their glories and their follies. Knowing the AMAZING back-history of Middle Earth lends a sad shadow to the events of the story of The Lord of the Rings simply because there were even more glorious and remarkable times in Ages Past.
You sense just a glimmer of that when you see the arrival of the elves at Helms Deep. Even if it isn't canon to the story it helps to reinforce the idea that there was a Grander Age before the one seen in these films.
Rock on ROTK.
All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by the frost.
From the ashes a fire shall be woken,
A light from the shadows shall spring;
Renewed shall be blade that was broken,
The crownless again shall be king.
-The Riddle of Strider
-B.Baggins c.1402 shire-reckoning
Since it's a kind of skeptical-of-CGI household, the bits with Gollum were a bit uneven to enjoy. The wolves were pretty lame compared to the rest of Jackson's meticulous and totally enjoyable vision.
Eowyn (the only female character in the books that seems real) will have to wait till next year to show her stuff!
David Bowie wanted to play Elrond...that would have have been interesting, no?
Most of all, we were just tantalized by the world created, and wished some game company would develop a Myst-like game to get lost in.
And for everyone who was disappointed by Faramir...yeah. I'm really missing Sean Bean's Boromir here.
<strong>
Wouldn't that have been great to see on screen? Instead we just see them throwing boulders and squashing orcs with their feet.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh man I agree. I had this vision that the Ents would put their hands on the walls, their fingers would grow roots into the walls and when they lifted their arms everything would just fall part like a ball of lose dirt.
But instead we get hulks tossing rocks. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
The Faramir change pissed me off.
Ents not crushing things at helms deep pissed me off.
I hope RotK has Pippen and Merry look into the ball. THAT'S!!!!!!! what misdirected Sarun. NOT fordo getting sidetracked by Faramir.
Some of the changes piss me off because they server\\ no purpose. Why not have the Ents at helms deep? Why does Faramir have to be different?
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
[ 12-31-2002: Message edited by: Scott ]</p>
<strong>Some of the changes piss me off because they serve no purpose. Why not have the Ents at helms deep? Why does Faramir have to be different?
<img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
I read an <a href="http://www.greencine.com/article?action=view&articleID=62&pageID=104&"; target="_blank">interview</a> with Jackson recently that asked him about the Faramir thing:
[quote]<strong>In the book, for example, Faramir is very pure and very noble, but here in the film, he's got this evil touch. He's even tempted by the ring.
Peter Jackson: </strong>For a short time, yeah. We made that change, just to use that example -- and this is really where being a filmmaker differs from being a writer. You make decisions as a filmmaker and, rightly or wrongly, you change things if you think they need to be changed. We wanted the episode with Faramir in this particular film to have a certain degree of tension. Frodo and Sam were captured. Their journey had become more complicated by the fact that they are prisoners. Which they are in the book for a brief period of time. But then, very quickly in the book, Tolkien sort of backs away from there and, as you say, he reveals Faramir to be very pure. At one point, Faramir says, "Look, I wouldn't even touch the ring if I saw it lying on the side of the road."
For us, as filmmakers, that sort of thing creates a bit of a problem because we've spent a lot of time in the last film and in this one to establish this ring as incredibly powerful. Then to suddenly come to a character that says, "Oh, I'm not interested in that," to suddenly go against everything that we've established ourselves is sort of going against our own rules. We certainly acknowledge that Faramir should not do what Boromir did and that he ultimately has the strength to say, "No, you go on your way and I understand." We wanted to make it slightly harder, to have a little more tension than there was in the book.<hr></blockquote>
So basically, I guess, they thought they were improving on the book. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
I was surprised in the attack of the Helm fortress, that the front door was not more protected. Any medieval fortress have a front dore much more protected. But it's just a detail.