The Two Towers

[SculptedCold]

Saw it yesterday too, and it kicked ass. The thing I liked best was that it was an expansive movie. The reason I didn't really like the first was because it was extremely linear. I've not read the books, so my opinions are purely based on the movie value of them. But anyway, the first one bored me because all it was was the fellowship's trek. The movie just put these guys through a series of ongoing fights and storytelling narrative scenes; the structure didn't allow it to be as grand as it should have been. And of course, their many day perilous journey through the vast, complex Moria mines was about 15 minutes long and looked very simple. Where were the dark, tense, cramped tunnel scenes? Maybe the book didn't have them, but the movie was a perfect opportunity to take advantage of it. Basically, I saw the Fellowship as a single straight timeline with big scenes and setpieces going along one after the other.

That's why I like the second one! It's expansive; it covers multiple storylines and different locations in a non-linear fashion as the party split-up and follow seperate paths. Everything was just done so much better; it's best moments were more depressing and tragic than the first, as were the glorious, triumphant moments, the dialogue was better, the graphics were better (Golem - ), the battles were better. It was just a far more interesting film, and far less conventional than the first one.

 

[Nightmarez]

I'll agree to an extent it didn't follow the books, but like nafnikufesin pointed it, no movie could follow it accurately until one runs 100 hours or more. But maybe a mini-series...?

Either way, if you still count the way "it didn't follow the book as it should have". It was a fantastic movie none-the-less.

 

[spaffe]

Originally posted by SculptedCold
But anyway, the first one bored me because all it was was the fellowship's trek. The movie just put these guys through a series of ongoing fights and storytelling narrative scenes; the structure didn't allow it to be as grand as it should have been. And of course, their many day perilous journey through the vast, complex Moria mines was about 15 minutes long and looked very simple. Where were the dark, tense, cramped tunnel scenes? Maybe the book didn't have them, but the movie was a perfect opportunity to take advantage of it. Basically, I saw the Fellowship as a single straight timeline with big scenes and setpieces going along one after the other.

yes i felt so too, but after seeing the version that's 30 minutes longer that feeling has been greatly reduced, because in that version there are alot of nice stuff in between, for example when galadriel gives the fellowship a gift each and when merry and pippin eats lembas/waybread, it made me chuckle and and the feeling of walk - fight - walk - fight - walk some more, was reduced

 

[NAD]

Originally posted by spaffe
yes i felt so too, but after seeing the version that's 30 minutes longer that feeling has been greatly reduced, because in that version there are alot of nice stuff in between, for example when galadriel gives the fellowship a gift each and when merry and pippin eats lembas/waybread, it made me chuckle and and the feeling of walk - fight - walk - fight - walk some more, was reduced

Oh good, I haven't watched the extended version yet, but it always pissed me off that Galadriel's gifts were not explained in the movie!!!

SculptedCold: yes, the first book is rather linear.

 

[SlaughterofSoul]

I FINALLY saw it two days ago, and it indeed kicked ass.

 

[Aggressor]

Originally posted by spaffe
yes i felt so too, but after seeing the version that's 30 minutes longer that feeling has been greatly reduced, because in that version there are alot of nice stuff in between, for example when galadriel gives the fellowship a gift each and when merry and pippin eats lembas/waybread, it made me chuckle and and the feeling of walk - fight - walk - fight - walk some more, was reduced

We in Ovss reenactment group rented the cinema in Halden, where we viewed the extended version, and I really have to agree with you that it was great.
But still no Tom Bombadil

 

[NAD]

Originally posted by Aggressor
But still no Tom Bombadil

D'OH!

 

[Aggressor]

Originally posted by NAD
D'OH!

Hahaha so true, but still very sad...

 

[spaffe]

Originally posted by Aggressor
We in Ovss reenactment group rented the cinema in Halden, where we viewed the extended version, and I really have to agree with you that it was great.
But still no Tom Bombadil

hehe no that's sad and true, at least treebeard was there even though he didn't get so much time.

one other thing about the movie which perhaps is a minor detail but still something i thought of when seeing it was when the nazghul was shot with an arrow at osgilath, if my memory serves me well i belive that gandalf said in the second book that they can't be wounded with arrows , ´don't know about you guys but such details bothers me
anyway i must say that the nazghul looked awesome, like some black kind of fearsome flying worm, really nice.
hopefully shelob will be as equally gruesome and disgusting

 

[Goreripper]

I don't believe the Nazgul was shot, the Winged Beast was. The Nazgul can't be killed 'by the hand of man' I think is the phrase.

 

[Aggressor]

Originally posted by Goreripper
I don't believe the Nazgul was shot, the Winged Beast was. The Nazgul can't be killed 'by the hand of man' I think is the phrase.

Yes it was the Nazgul's "beast" (as you say) that was shot, if you remember Fellowship of the Ring (the book not the movie) Legolas kills one of the "beasts" with an arrow, near Amon Hen...

 

[stormy]

well i just got back from(Finnnnally) seeing TTT! i loved it and think i could watch it 10 more times

 

[ffanatic]

Yeah it was a great movie, Peter Jackson has done a wonderful job on this, which makes me sad that if The Two Towers makes onther Oscar appearance, it will more than likely get shafted again (A Beautiful Mind for best Picture? WTF?)

Peter has admitted in interviews that he strayed away from Tolkien's vision the most for the film The Two Towers, but really, he had no choice. The first book in The Two Towers (correct me if I'm wrong on any of this, it has been a long time since I read LOTR) is all Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, Merry and Pippin's stuff, and the second book is all Frodo, Sam, and Gollum's stuff. This timeline simply wouldn't work for a movie, and since the events are occuring at the same time, the transitions from one group to another won't throw anything off (btw, the switching in the movie is perfect, it comes along at the right time, every time). Next is the acual sequence of events. The Battle at Helm's Deep (I think) occurs near the end of the first book. Well, the movie can't climax one third of the way into itself, so this needed to be moved to the end, and what an end it was. The ent attack being moved up helped as well, providing the viewer with a nice compliment to the Battle at Helm's Deep. As for the absense of Shelob, that angered me...a lot. It's gonna have to happen pretty near the beginning of Return of the King now, and I don't know how that will payoff, but I'm sure that movie will rule nonetheless.

 

[FailingAcension]

I'm waiting for the next Special Edition. Watching the Apendices from the first one shed lots of light on where and why they changed stuff from the book. I highly reccomend them!