LOTR- The Two Towers

Discussion in 'Milwaukee, WI' started by MiladyJ, Nov 23, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TheWampas1138 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 2, 2002
    star 4
    I must agree with Dwayne (go figure). I loved Fellowship and thought Towers was really good but marginally weaker. Folks jump on the convenient and newest bandwagon and while I do think that LoTR is going to be amazing in completion it will not have the pop culture umbrella effect that Star Wars has. I mean even in Reign of Fire (yes I did see it this weekend) there is a blatant and blaring SW reference.

    So I won't go out there and say that LoTR is my favorite trilogy. I like it. I like it a lot but I still love Star Wars after 25 years. I can't say that about LoTR..ask me in 25 years.



    M


    Oh and here is my problem (actually our problem) ...The villians in LoTR lack a certain amount of personality on the screen. Protagonists are defined and formed by his/her adversary be it themselves, environment or the antagonist. In Star Wars, we see Vader but Sauron/Sauroman are sort of creepy but in a Mob boss sort of way rather than a hands-on sort of guy (RE: Open sequence where Vader is choking the Rebel soldier). And then when we saw the creepiest guy around KNEELING I know I thought...uh, crap? I just think the villians are sort of weak on screen and it's hard to have really good characters that I care about with dead fish villians. I don't think there are going to be a herd of fans who say Sauroman/Sauron are going to be their favorite characters.
  2. Bishop76 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 1, 2002
    star 3
    I agree with Dwayne and Marcy.

    I love Tolkien's novels and they've already proven that they'll stand the test of time, but I don't think that LOTR is the best movie trilogy. I do still think that Star Wars holds that honor (obviously I mean the original trilogy). Why? Jackson is converting something that's already time tested to a different format, whereas the original SW trilogy was just that - original. Again, agreeing with D&M, I think it's just everyone getting caught up in the moment. Hell, I know people who walked out of AOTC saying that they absolutely loved it and now have turned a complete 180 (you know who you are).

    I also must say that I find it very difficult to believe that so few people have seen the numerous problems with TTT. Before y'all jump down my throat, I thought it was a good movie, but by no means as good as Fellowship. It seemed too Hollywoodized to me. Gimli has become nothing more than a punchline on feet, the Arwen bits seem to be added just to make sure the romantic crowd gets their fill, and please please please tell me that someone else was bugged immensely by the "secret door" out of the front gate of Helm's Deep that Aragorn and Gimli used to get to the mob of baddies at the gates.

    Okay, I'm done now - best leave before I'm lynched.

    Jeff
  3. TheWampas1138 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 2, 2002
    star 4
    Don't worry, they'll be lynching a bunch of us. I liked Fellowship a lot more. I found too many flaws in Towers. I'm not saying that I hated it because I didn't. I just liked Fellowship more. I'm still bugged by Gollum. As a kid he scared the bejesus out of me and probably most of those who read it. (yes I read it when I was a kid..geeze I'm a nerd what do you all expect) I saw him on film, I didn't feel sorry for him and I wasn't afraid of him. He just sort of annoyed me the same way Pauly Shore bugs me actually...it isn't Empire... no way, no how.

    M
  4. Kylash_327 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2002
    star 1
    Or the way Jar-Jar did... :p
  5. Skywalker1138 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 7, 2002
    star 3
    We saw LOTR: TT for the 3rd time this weekend and I bought the soundtrack. There were 4 hours of music written but only 3 hours produced. I'm hoping that when the extended version comes out that the last hour of music will be inserted. There are other lyrics written of songs _not_ included on the score in the book included with the CD. The CD also holds other cool things: icons, trailer, pictures, etc.

    Red05 also got the LOTR: FOTR Extended Ver. for Christmas and we saw that again too.

    I must say, this trilogy is the best since SW!
  6. CaptMereel Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 11, 2002
    star 3
    So, do you really think any of the SW books will be as popular in the future as any of the LOTR books? I don't think so. The majority of SW books will not be as popular 50 years after they were written like Tolkien's works but don't get me wrong here - I love the SW books (well, most of them anyways - some are so poorly written that they are awful) but I really don't think the majority will stand the test of time because they aren't of the same caliber.

    Now, as to the recent SW movies (E1 & E2), I loved AOTC but have gotten tired of GL's same-old-same-old. I know he still thinks the majority of fans are 13 year-old boys and that's the problem...he needs to write these things for adults who are the fanatical fans and who really want a deeper story. (I saw AOTC only 5 times in the theater which is the lowest amount of times for me for any of the SW films but I've already seen TTT 3 times in 10 days.) Special effects are nice but there has to be a very good story to compliment them or they become nothing more than eye-candy of a different sort.

    SW had a great effect on the original generation who saw it the first time around - I was one of them. But, I can also say that LOTR has had a similar effect on me today. And, yes, Peter Jackson has created these films from an established phenomenon but how many other films have been made from books that were considered classics and weren't conveyed to film or appealed to the public nearly as well as LOTR? Quite a few. Jackson took Tolkien's written words and created another form of art - film.

    While I agree that FOTR was probably the better film, TTT is definitely a close second - sometimes too close to tell which one really was better sometimes. While TTT does have it's faults, it is still a great film. Do you really want me to start listing the faults of TPM or AOTC? I don't think so....it would be a long list. As to the villians in LOTR films not being seen etc, sorry but a flaming eye scares me more than seeing an unhelmeted Vader in ROTJ - it was so disappointing to see Uncle Festus as the evil villian in black because I never ever wanted to know what he looked like - the imagination is always more frightening. Also, how many of you, thinking back about ANH, thought it was the greatest film the first time you saw it? Probably quite a few if you were old enough to understand the impact it had on a genre and a generation. So, really, folks, give LOTR the credit it deserves...it will be one of the greatest, if not the greatest, film trilogies ever made (ranked up there with the original classic SW trilogy but the prequels, as a trilogy, will not be considered anywhere close to those, IMHO).

    Yeah, you could say I am one of those who has switched from SW to LOTR (and I'm not afraid to admit it) but I was a fan of LOTR years before SW:ANH appeared in theaters so it's not like I am a new convert. I just think that these films deserve as much praise and as much loyalty as SW because they are a great accomplishment and a great visualization of Tolkien's world.

    Enough said - so when does my lynching start?


  7. Kylash_327 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2002
    star 1
    I think the reason LOTR is becoming greater than the Prequel trilogy at least, is because it has that awe, amazement, and entertainment value that the original trilogy had...something we have all been missing from the prequels.
  8. Skywalker1138 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 7, 2002
    star 3
    My favorite character is Legolas, and I'm slowing developing a primitive HTML page on my Medieval to Mark Hamill site to honour his character.

    The elves are terrific!

    In fact, if you're an elf fan, see what kind of elf you're most like:

    http://www.orlandobloom.co.nz/elftest.html

    I tested out as a Tranquil Elf (like Legolas)--I definately see the parallel of Legolas and Luke. They are both spiritual, strong characters. The only difference is, an elf can sing too :)
  9. CaptMereel Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 11, 2002
    star 3
    I agree with what Kylash says...it definitely has more of everything than the prequels.

    Hey, Beret, I took the elf test and I am a Warrior Elf! Go fig! :)

  10. Bishop76 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 1, 2002
    star 3
    Almost immediately ;)

    Okay, the Star Wars novels were never in question here at all - they're trash and they'll always be trash. In 50 years, you're right, no one will remember them at all. No arguments here. Not even in the same ballpark as any of Tolkien's works.

    Also, the prequel trilogy was never defended by me. I did enjoy AOTC (not so much with TPM) a lot, but it's by no means close to the original trilogy or the LOTR trilogy. And, of course there are problems with it. I complained about TTT being too Hollywoodized, but I never said that TPM and AOTC weren't suffering from the same problem. And the love story in AOTC? God, what a pile of crap... At any rate, know that my argument is not for the prequels, but rather the original trilogy.

    As for multiple viewings, I guess I'd much rather read the book multiple times than see the movie. There's so much about the book that was better. Faramir, for example. The Entmoot, as another. I'm not a purist, but I really think some of the things Jackson changed should not have been changed. And the things he added should not have been added. Like elves at Helm's Deep.

    As for the effect it had, I can't really argue against how people feel from a movie, but I can at least say that I was nowhere near as affected by TTT as I was by New Hope or Empire. In fact, I'd probably say TTT was like AOTC to me, effect wise when I walked out. I thought it was cool, but that's about it. I'd rather, once again, read the book. And while I think Jackson is an able director, I really don't think that years from now this will be considered a work of art by any means. Fellowship, maybe, not TTT...

    As far as villains go, I'm somewhere in-between. I love the Nazghul, but I tend to agree that Saruman doesn't really do it for me. The Uruk-hai are just too "cannon fodderish" to like. Sauron is pretty cool, but I have a feeling that he may be made as uncool as Vader in ROTJ by the end of ROTK.

    I too have always been a fan of LOTR, and I've also always been a fan of SW and I must say that it really makes me sad to see so many people forsaking the original trilogy (go ahead and forsake the prequels all you want).

    Okay, I'm done for now. If I have any more random thoughts concerning this, I'll make sure to post them.

    Jeff
  11. Mauler_II Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 13, 2002
    star 3
    I strongly agree with Captain and Kylash. I have not read the books, so I come at this from a slightly different point of view. So far, the LOTR movies have much better stories, much better acting, and deeper characters than the new SW trilogy.

    The feeling I got while watching TTT was the same feeling I'd hoped to get while watching TPM and AOTC.

    I also agree that the unseen enemy is MUCH scarier than the one you see all the time. I also completely disagree with the Wampas about Golum - 1/4 of the way in I forgot he was CG. I totally felt for him in a way that I have never "felt" for a CG character. Perhaps we can discuss this more on Tuesday. :)

    It is a very bittersweet admission for me that I'm not sure what I am looking forward to more - ROTK or the last SW movie.

    <sigh>


    EDIT: I thing the original SW trilogy is in a class by itself - I am not comparing LOTR to that.
  12. Skywalker1138 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 7, 2002
    star 3
    Hi (laughs) I'm Jenni (not Beret)... Beret is LeiaYT1300, but I suppose anyone could get us mixed up since we're best friends. Congrats on being a cool elf! :)

    I guess we have consensus that Legolas' eyes appeared to be Orlando's contact-free brown ones in the first movie and coloured blue in the second from another LOTR postboard I'm on. Interesting enough. I love how they glow (almost like some vampires' eyes) when something's about to happen.

    I agree that LOTR has something that's missing in AOTC, but please remember that LOTR has a greater element of fantasy and AOTC has a greater element of science fiction. I think your genre preference also effects your movie preference. I'm just in the LOTR hype right now, and admit that overall I have a greater heart for fantasy than sci fi, but Star Wars is a little of both and I still hold true to the Classic Trilogy. Also, don't forget, the cast of LOTR is superb!!!!!!
  13. Mauler_II Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 13, 2002
    star 3
    I have always been more of a Sci-Fi guy than a fantasy guy, so my admission (see previous post) was all the more difficult to make.

    [face_plain]
  14. Kylash_327 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2002
    star 1
    Bishop- You sure like writing full out term-paper replies dont you :p
  15. SySnootles Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 13, 2002
    star 3
    It sounds as though we're comparing apples to oranges.

    For me, what made Star Wars so magical and memorable is that it had never been done before. It was new... fresh. I didn't know what to expect. Trying to recapture that freshness is an oxymoron. You can't do something for the first time... again! SW came out of the blue, with little fanfare, and became a phenomenon. It's impossible, by definition, for the prequels to be as good as the original trilogy. Sure, they could be a lot better, but were we really expecting TOT again? I sure wasn't.

    LOTR (I'm talking about the franchise in general here, not the movies) had all the same stuff going for it. Even before the movies, look at what it had become. It basically began the RPG industry, didn't it? (Well, it seems to be the strong foundation of the industry.) If it didn't, it certainly revolutionized gaming. The characters are universal. But until these movies, it had a very limited audience (by comparison to SW, that is). Absolutely the movies have brought an entirely new audience to the fold. Tons and tons of exposure to groups of people who have never done any RPGing or read any of the books. And I feel that's a wonderful thing.

    To compare SW to LoTR isn't plausable. There is no equal footing. LoTR has been established for decades. SW was nothing before 1977. Think of the Academy Awards. There is a category for Best Original Screenplay and a category got Best Adapted Screenplay. There's a reason for that.

    Does LoTR deserve accolades? Absolutely!! They're probably the most breathtaking films I've ever seen. The story has been brought to life like I could never have imagined. It's a masterpiece of adaptation film making. It's in its own category to me. Does it have its problems? Sure. What film doesn't? And it's a testament to the grandeur of the film that I am able to look past those flaws (the secret door of Helm's Deep irked me, too) and just love it for what it is.

    As far as the lastability (yes, I know that's not a word, but it's working for me right now), again, apples to oranges. LoTR had a presence before the movies. There have been references to the books for decades. By definition it will last longer than SW, simply because it is older. LoTR isn't going anywhere. Time has proven that. But SW isn't going anywhere either.

    It's all a matter of personal taste. I have to confess, when I first saw SPEED, I tought it was one of the best movies I have ever seen. It was the adrenaline rush. Now it's eight years later, and while I still have an affinity for the flick, I wouldn't pay to see it thirteen times (don't you judge me!).

    Here's an interesting point to ponder. If adjusted to today's dollars, what would be the top grossing film of all time? Anyone?

    Gone With the Wind.

    Kinda makes you say hmmmmm.....

    p.s. -- I always liked the essay questions better. Can you tell?
  16. Bishop76 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 1, 2002
    star 3
    Ah, but it's only the biggest grosser because it was in theaters for like 30 years.

    Oh, and Tolkien pretty much invented the fantasy genre. Obviously not all aspects of it, but he created fantasy as we know it today, and you're right, D&D is without a doubt based almost entirely on his works.

    At any rate, you're right, Catie - original vs. adapted, apples vs. oranges. I'm just arguing because I'm annoyed by people "converting" to LOTR.

    Jeff
  17. Kylash_327 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2002
    star 1
    Annoyed? Can't we do what we want? And another thing, are we forgetting that SW was partially BASED on LOTR?
  18. Skywalker1138 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 7, 2002
    star 3
    Yikes--reposted by accident...see below for true post.

    MTFBWY
  19. Skywalker1138 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 7, 2002
    star 3
    Maybe it's because I've gained patience as I've gotten older, but I've been really interested in the LOTR maps and history. I am not interested in EU maps and history. I have had this book called "The Dictionary of Fantasy Places" and it's really more like an encyclopedia of everything Tolkien and otherwise fantasy. Looking at the maps, last night Red05 and I tracked the hobbits' and Legolas', Aarogon's and Gimli's footsteps since LOTR:FOTR through LOTR:TT. Because the books were written first, everything that comes forth is more believable. When I have a question about where Legolas came from or how old he is, it was already there--it was already written, so I can't headbutt that. He's over 2,000 years old! In fact, I know what's to come for him, for Gimli and for Aaragon and I'm LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. For those who have read the entire LOTR series previously, I've heard nothing but good things--no one has felt they left "too much out" of the movies, and wherefor the extended versions are anyway.

    I'm not comparing SW to LOTR as far as which is "better" because, as formentioned it's silly and it's really based on opinion. But, I am most definately more interested in the thoroughness and even in the elvish languages than I am in SW's identical areas. And although, no one will ever take the place of how I've identified with Luke, I find myself identifying with a character in LOTR too. LOTR:movie knows without doubt that they have nothing to lose by making the movies back-to-back and gaining all publicity without bringing out millions of toys to rake in the cash. I commend them for this. It is a strong story. A strong movie. Well casted. Well created. Without a doubt.

    The best generated CGI I've seen so far in this day was Gollum. No offense to ILM, but "what did you miss creating CGI in AOTC." Although, any CGI is still obvious to me, it was very well portrayed and was much more believable to me (as the muppet Yoda was to me before he turned CGI).

  20. SySnootles Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 13, 2002
    star 3
    Kylash, I think you just proved my point.
  21. Bishop76 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Apr 1, 2002
    star 3
    Yes, annoyed, Kylash. Sure you're free to do and feel what you want, and so am I. And I'm annoyed.

    Jeff
  22. Mauler_II Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 13, 2002
    star 3
    I don't know that it is a matter of "coverting" to LOTR. One does not "choose" to like something - you either like it or you don't. You can fool others or even yourself into "liking" something, but deep down you know the truth. (Oddly enough I've made the same argument about faith, but we probably don't want to go down that road again. :) )

    I am simply sharing "my own truth":

    LOTR has stirred deeper feelings and has been more enjoyable than the new SW trilogy. While the histories of the stories are completely different, the LOTR trilogy triumphs (for me) in many of the same places that I had HOPED the prequels would triumph.

    I am NOT happy about this, and I blame Lucas more than commend LOTR. In our own conversations I think we have come up with more creative / interesting ideas than what Lucas has done so far.

    I also think my feelings may be tainted because in my mind LOTR had nothing to lose. If it sucked, I would have thought "Oh Well, I will always have Star Wars". However, in my mind SW had EVERYTHING to lose. I went into AOTC thinking "Pleeeeeease be good!" I was thrilled after seeing AOTC for the first time beacuse it "didn't suck". That's no way to watch a movie.

    What it comes down to is that like all of you, I had very high hopes for the new trilogy - I've learned (the hard way) that I've had to scale those back quite a bit. Since I had no personal investment in LOTR when it came out I was able to be "suprised" by how good it was.

    I will always be a SW fan first and foremost because I grew up with it. It is by far the greatest "escape mechanism" of my life as a child and for that I will ALWAYS love Star Wars.
  23. Kylash_327 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 2, 2002
    star 1
    I think this is sort of a silly thing to get annoyed about :p
  24. LeiaYT1300 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 7, 2002
    star 3
    I agree that comparing SW with LOTR is like comparing apples to oranges.

    But...

    I don't know. My feelings on it is that I am a SW fan, first and foremost; even with such a problematic prequel trilogy, I will always have the classic trilogy.

    And I have enjoyed seeing the two LOTR films thus far. There are things that do touch me deeply about it. But it just doesn't strike me as deeply as a whole as SW does. Indeed, I get the same feeling with the Aragorn/Arwen relationship as I always have with Han/Leia. And there is a similar sense of wonder with the topography, the sweeping landscapes and the grand symphonic soundtrack. But SW just holds that much more for me.

    When we got out of TTT the first time, when Bob and I went with Jenni and Kevin, we discussed our thoughts after the film. I said it was good, but it just didn't thrill me like SW, even to the point of finding ridiculous things about it (like the villains--they seem almost cartoonish at times, imho). Needless to say, I really ticked Bob off with my commentary, as he thought I was bashing LOTR. I wasn't, but it just doesn't hit me as it does him.

    Maybe that's because I had such a bad experience with the books. In short, I couldn't stand them. And I have always preferred the "human" stories to ones of elves, and dwarves, and I find hobbits to be rather annoying (the big hairy feet thing doesn't help). Plus, I found Tolkein's writing to be very tiresome, even with the understanding in mind that he was trying to create modern mythology in the similar bent of Beowulf and other Norse/British mythology (and I love Beowulf...).

    I don't know... Maybe I'm just one of those kids of my generation with a short attention span or something. But it just didn't grip me the way it did Bob, and others.

    SW did grip me. But I'm not so pretentious as to dare claim that SW is better. LOTR has alot of what SW is sorely lacking, and if GL ever received inspiration from LOTR, maybe he should go back for a refresher course. But frankly, unless Aragorn's story was on-screen, I found myself somewhat bored and fidgeting through the film. SW does not do that to me. I'm interested in everyone and everything. There really is no character that I cannot get into--even JarJar, I can handle a little bit.

    *sigh* I doubt any of this makes sense. It's just that even though I prefer SW over LOTR in the long run, I can see where LOTR clearly ranks heads above SW, and why people so deeply love LOTR, why it has become such an intricate part of their lives. But SW will always have my heart, even in the current dark times of the atrocious EU and the stumbling prequels.

    I don't know... Just had to get all that out, I guess...



    Oh, and sorry--essay questions were always my forte in college. [face_blush]
  25. TheWampas1138 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 2, 2002
    star 4
    I read the Tolkien books for the first time when I was 12. While I've seen the movies the characters that I envisioned when I read the books the first time are still the ones I see. The only two that have hit the mark for me were Aragorn and Gandolf. I had pre-conceived notions of the characters so I like watching the movies on the big screen but it will never be as good as the first time I read it. It's the same principle as Dune..none of what was done lives up to the books. The books established my personal expectation and while I loved LoTR movies, they won't ever be as good as the books because that's how I got the story first.

    Now with Star Wars, the first experience was movies. I'm agreeing with Jeff SW EU books are horrible..I read them and promptly forget them. So I'm not disappointed with the movies but I'm horribly disappointed with the books with the single exception of the Zahn Trilogy.

    I like them both but SW will always be my favorite as a whole.

    And I'm sorry but after you see Final Fantasy: The spirits within all CGI looks like crap. There is some beautiful CGI. (Go Square!)

    I think it's a moot point that is going to have staunch supporters in each camp and quite frankly it's a silly argument. If you like LoTR better knock yourself out. We can go ahead to disagree.


    M



Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.