The Official ?I have seen The Two Towers? thread (TTT first reaction thread)

spoilers:














Gandalf goes since he is a wizard, Frodo and Sam Because they both bore the ring, Legalos since he is an elf, and Gimli goes since he is great friends with Legalos(and I think it mentioned something about Galadriel) Aragorn, Merry, and Pippin dont go and die of old age in middle earth, and Borimir doesn't go because, well, duh....














end spoilers

 

Going to see it agian today (3rd time). I cannpt wait. I love this movie.

 

Hey... umm... well.. I thought this might be the right place for me to deposit my 'thoughts' on TTT....

Well - let me start by saying that I have never read the books, and am not really 'well versed' in the Tolkien world, and that being said, I think you need to be to really appreciate these movies... and it's not just me, I saw FOTR and TTT with my wife and brother (who, like me have never read the books) and we came away from both movies with a sense of confusion...

That being said - I have a bigger purpose for writing this message... I'm at a complete loss as to why fans of the Tolkien movies say that 'This is the movie Star Wars should have been'

they have absolutely NOTHING in common, and I for one, don't see the co-relation at all... I don't see how someone can walk away from watching TTT and draw a parallel to SW? They have no points of comparison to me - they should be judged and evaluated on their own merits...

Anyway - the one technical point I'd like to make about the movie - the animation on Gollum was amazing - I thought it was well done EXCEPT his eyes... his eyes really bugged me, they looked like something out of Toy Story - but whenever I didn't see his eyes, he was a very convincing digital character...

So anyway - I'm waiting until after I see the next movie to read the books - I kinda don't want to know what's going to happen, but I'll rejudge these movies after that, and maybe then I'll have a better appreciation for these movies...

 

I just got back from seeing TTT. It was the best movie Iv'e seen since... well... Fellowship Of The Ring! I'm definately going to have to see it a second time during Christmas Break. I may have enjoyed AOTC, but I must admit that I thought TTT was better. And this is coming from a big Star Wars fan. Yes, I do consider myself a fan, a fan who knows that he likes another film more than AOTC. I didn't think that AOTC was horrible, I like it a lot, I just like TTT more and I do respect the opinions of those who consider AOTC to be their favorite. Don't expect to see me attack AOTC.

I will say that TTT was not perfect. The love scenes between Arwen and Aragorn were a little too long for my tastes, and I don't like how they changed Faramir's character. I thought Gollum and Treebeard looked great. Gollum didn't look exceptionally real, but he did look like a puppet which is as realistic as CGI can probably get these days.

Oh, and to correct a post above, Sam does not go to the Grey Havens. Frodo, Bilbo, and Gandalf go along with the Elves. Sam stays in the Shire to live in Bag End, although he does go with Frodo to say goodbye.

 

Also, sorry to say this, but Legolas eventually becomes so infatuated with the sea, builds a ship, hops on it with Gimli, and tries to make their way to the Undying Lands. They get there, but as Gimli is a Dwarf, he is not allowed entry. Until, Galadriel steps in and speaks of his valour. Apparently obtaining great valour can get you in the Undying Lands.

 

Talking points from one who ?doesn?t get it.?

It looks like Peter Jackson learned a few things about CG during his trip to Skywalker Ranch (Gollum was very well done), but he didn't learn anything about editing together multiple climaxes. Anytime the Helm's Deep battle gained momentum, that momentum was crushed by seeing, repeatedly, a plodding tree debating with himself the same things over and over, and very slowly. I understand the slow nature of the Ents, but it would have been a far better decision, from a cinematic standpoint, to conclude that aspect of the Ents before the battle at Helm's Deep, and instead, intercut Helm's Deep with Shelob and the attack on Orthanc. This was a major, major blunder in my opinion.

As was the "cliffhanger" of Gollum saying "she will...", as opposed to Tolkien's choice were Frodo's life is in doubt as he and Sam are separated. Audiences would be much more interested in coming back if a character they are invested in is in peril, rather than wondering who a mysterious "she" will turn out to be.

You know, for all the criticism levied against TPM for lack of character development, I?m amazed TTT gets a pass, while it?s the second film in the series, whereas TPM was the first. But alas, it seems that all the main characters fully develop in FOTR, and then TTT is treated as a "continuing adventures of..." sort of afterthought. I think you have to stretch pretty far to characterize the witticisms of Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli as strong character development. Particularly Gimli - three hours of cracking wise does not constitute a deep character. Legolas plays as a typical action-movie hero. Aragorn was already portrayed as the sensitive, tempted but noble knight in FOTR. TTT gave us more of the same, highlighting the fact that he is categorically invincible in battle, no matter how badly he is outnumbered.

To quote from this thread: "I have a theory that enjoyment of this film is directly proportional to length of attention span." This theory is haughty and misguided. Such self-important accusations cannot cure the film of an incredibly and unforgivably slow-paced first two hours. Especially given the source material given to Jackson. He took a book that was actually shorter than FOTR, removed the ending, and stretched it into a film of the same length. Three hours later into the saga, Frodo and Sam have made no progress in their quest, save for Jackson's taking liberty in making Frodo pull a sword on him. Their quarrel breaks no new ground from the final scene of FOTR.

King Theodon's transformation was treated as a monumental occasion, and works fine in the novel, but its presented by the film in a manner that fails to recognize the audience has absolutely nothing invested in his character. Even with his personal struggles later on, you?re still trying to figure out the significance since we know nothing of his history.

I might be wrong on this, but - didn't Tolkien's epic focus on the inherent weakness of mankind, and use the hobbits as symbols of how we can aspire to overcome that weakness? I don't get that sense from Jackson's version at all.

You can only do the "he's dead... no wait, he's alive!!" trick so many times before the audience doesn't care anymore.

I don't understand why the animatronic Ents were used. The CG was fine, and it was distracting to jump back and forth between the CG and the obvious animatronic. Jackson should have taken the lead from Lucas, who successfully used all-CG clonetroopers, even when it would have been much easier to use a man in a costume, to avoid that clash.

Fans of the LOTR film should be ready to be taken down a notch. Despite the critical praise (at least to this point), a backlash will begin. The film will not gross as much as its predecessor, and will be a memory by the spring. Really, much of this was inevitable even if the movie was perfect. But the general public will not be enthused by this less-than-inspired effort, and their reaction will be felt. No matter what kind

 

I saw the movie yesterday, and was glad to see that it wasn't 3 hours of hugging, like the FOTR

 

you sound pretty confident about that, Fierce... almost too confident

Well I LOVED this movie. And I think that it's much better than AOTC, which I was looking forward to a lot more than TTT. But, it's 2 totally different movies, so you can't compare them too much. The acting was great (so much crying!), and I I'm beginning to think that Liv Tyler is annoying and that the blonde chick kicks ass . I'm definitly planning on seeing it again.

 

There should be no overall reviews of any LOTR film until ROTK is released and the whole story can be looked at.

This is not a movie trilogy, but a single story in three parts. These three parts depend on one another.

Faramir should not be judged until we see him in ROTK. This is because the writers wanted to make him seem less static a character.

PJ's adaptation skills should not be judged until ROTK has been released.

I also do not think TTT should be compared to FOTR. This would be equivalent to comparing the Tatooine part of ANH to the Death Star part of ANH.

I will not criticize PJ or NL until I have watched the Extended Editions of all three movies in a row.

Then and only then will I see decide whether or not LOTR was a success.

 

"There should be no overall reviews of any LOTR film until ROTK is released and the whole story can be looked at."

Oh come on, now. This is folly.

LOTR is one giant story consisting of many smaller stories. There are a vast number of aspects of the series that can be fairly judged at this point. The final judgement can only be made when all three films are complete.

 

DarthLuxor, Gollum was like a hobbit, but he wasnt actually a hobbit

I know it's not really important, but it just bugged me

 

Smeagol's species was closely related to a hobbit. Then he had the Ring, and he lived for 500 years, and turned into Gollum.

 

I watched it at the 12 midnight showing with some friends... I liked it alot. But was disappointed that it was not like the book very much.

 

GAH!!!! BUNNIES!!!

just got back from my first seeing of it, and there's no way I'm reading through this whole thread to see if my comments have been posted before.

It's a great movie. Really great. I loved pretty much everything. The actors were brilliant and so were the characters. And the dialouge, can I say how much I love the dialouge? "Then it is forfeit." I also loved how Aragorn stood up for Gondor. A real 360 from the last movie when he tells Boromir that there is no help in Gondor that can avail them.

Speaking of Boromir, I was glad they had him in, even if it was only for a second and in flashback. And Faramir, Faramir was great, though I really didn't like that he took Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath. Wasn't Faramir supposed to be above that?

Haldir. Haldir was great, superb, amazing. Mwah. His death... and to die in Aragorn's arms...everyone seems to be doing that lately. First Boromir, now Haldir...maybe it's something about being a king of men?

Speaking of kings of men, I love the "old" shot of Aragorn, dying in Minas Tirith. Didn't like, though, that Aragorn was never mentioned to be the Heir of Isildur. During that scene where Theoden was pretty much like "who's the king here, me or you?" I kept waiting for somebody, Legolas maybe, to say, "Hey, Theoden, here's the king of Gondor!" I mean, he's Aragorn son of Arathorn. Boromir knew what that meant and he was from Gondor...Rohan really isn't that far from Gondor, and they're allies in a lot of things. And didn't Boromir come into Imladris with a horse from Rohan? Allies, even friends. Speaking of that, loved that we got a glimpse of Theodred, and Eomer was terrific. Loved him.

Elves. Legolas was yum. He was great. He was sublime. And his friendship with Gimli was right out of the book. I looved that they kept the competition in. And Legolas had some great stuff with Aragorn. "You're late. You look terrible." Real dynamic. I kinda read into the "giving back the necklace" scene that Legolas was apprvoing of Aragorn's relationship with Arwen.

Some favorite lines, just off the top of my head:
"Toss me." "Don't tell the elf." "Not a word."
"You're late....you look terrible."
"Then it is forfeit."
when Theoden calls him "My lord Aragorn."
"You would be dead before you drew your sword."
"Would you like me to describe it to you? Or shall I fetch you a box?"
"His bodygaurd?" "His gardener."
"Seventeen!" [kills two] "Nineteen!"

 

I saw it last Thursday! And..WOW!!! I thought it was awesome! Ooo, and I thought the split-personality of Gollum was funny as well as the Gimli parts!

 

I think I also fall into the minority who liked the Arwen/Aragorn scenes.

 

Actually, Aragorn is nearly 90 years old during TTT.

 

know i'm in the minority but i actually liked the Arwen/Aragorn parts

I like it too, but it might be that yummy dress Arwen was wearing.

"Then it is a good dream..."

Oh yeah, if you got Liv Tyler in your dream wearing that dress, it is a good dream indeed!

Of course, if they put Eowyn in that dress, I'll probably faint...or drool..or both.

 

Yeah, I loved that scene when Elrond was telling Arwen what would happend if she stayed. The music was just perfect for it. By the way I believe on the soundtrack it is called Evenstar.

I would also like to post my favorite lines...
-"Not highly do the leaves of Lorien fall"
-"Gandalf? That's what they use to call me. Gandalf the Grey. That was my name. I am Gandalf the White."
-"Be Silent! Keep your foul tongue behind your teeth! I have not passed through fire and death to bandy creud words with a weakless worm"
-"But Master is our friend--you don't have any friends"
-"Stupid fat hobbit!"
-"Then it is forfit"
-"You're late. You look terrible."
-"You could have picked a better spot"
"Oh come on! We can take em!"
"It's a long way"
"Toss me"
"What?"
"I can't make the jump by myself, you have to toss me! Don't tell the elf."
-"I won't have an elf outscoring me!"
-"Let this be the hour where we draw swords together"

 

All parents should follow "Elrond's patented method of getting your rebellious daughter to listen to you!", soon available in paperbacks! Remember, the key is visual aids!



Also, when Eowyn saw Legolas give the jewel back to Aragorn, was she thinking...

1--"Darn, he's still in love with the woman!"

OR

2--"Oh my God, the 'woman' is Legolas...Aragorn and Legolas are..."

 

saw it again last night! still a great movie. still brings tears to my eyes. i just noticed last night, however, that the elvish rope and the elvish cloaks were briefly explained in the very scenes that they were used. it is safe to say that viewing FOTR-EE is not necessary to watch TTT without getting completely lost... just pay close attention to every scene and every word spoken. i still believe that FOTR is a bit better that TTT, but TTT is still a damn good kick-ass sequel!

sam is the true kick-ass hobbit! sam rocks!

cheers!

 

It`s a sad movie.
I think we shouldv`e had Shelob in it.

 

Dayda
you sound pretty confident about that, Fierce... almost too confident

Well, I think the initial enthusiasm will be short-lived, and TTT will go down the same path as sequels before it. For the reasons I described, I just don't think this is the be-all, end-all of movie-making, as some people would have us believe.

 

Yes but Shelob would have only made it more sad. If they do her by the book and not by Poetic Licesning it wil be a very saddening part.

 

Right, I can see it now!

Purists: "Oh no, wrong number of legs for Shelob! Wrong skin! PJ has raped the book!!!"