This Is Ridiculous...

[Ascamaciliel]

i was just searching around the internet when i found this site.

http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_583722.html

now, i know Sept 11 should be remembered and respected, but it's just a movie title! and the title was made long before Sept 11. i think it's ridiculous to even consider renaming it, your opinions?:confused:

[Anamatar IV]

is clearly meant to refer to the attacks on the World Trade Centre

"When I learned that there apparently was to be a sequel, I was overjoyed. However, Peter Jackson has decided to tastelessly name the sequel The Two Towers

"In this post-September 11 world, it is unforgivable that this should be allowed to happen. The idea is both offensive and morally repugnant.

That is rediculous. Hey moron---try reading the books. Probably thinks the movies came first :rolleyes:

[Talimon]

That is dated to May 8'th. Luckily for us that petition (which was supossedly started by actual Tolkien fans) was closed down. I just hope non of the media sources make the comparison. That would be getting very low...

[Ascamaciliel]

oh, guess i didn't read that part, still it sounded really stupid

[Sam_Gamgee]

whoever says dumb **** like that is ignorant and should be banned foerm the earth for thier stupidity. and making the world that much more stupid.

[Mrs. Maggott]

The World Trade Center used to be called The "Twin" Towers, not the Two Towers. However, with 9/11 still fairly clear in everyone's mind, some people are miscalling TTT as "Twin" rather than "Two".

Yes, it's sad that this matter should even arise, but it's better to point out that the film's title is taken from the author's book which was written long before the Towers were ever considered, never mind built, never mind destroyed.

Say a prayer for those people who are still so traumatized by 9/11/01 that any mention of "Towers" hurts. As Tolkien afficianados, we should be more kindly to such people - the author would have been.

[Talimon]

While I'd hate to make this too political, I'd even argue that some of the themes in the TTT are very applicable to what's happening in the world today, particularly Sarumans betrayal, the lust of Gondor for the ring, Gollums devide... Make the comparisons as your tastes allow. :)

[Mrs. Maggott]

You might also add to that list the ongoing theme of Tolkien's work, that most of the "good folk" of Middle Earth sat around on their collective shanks doing nothing while evil was growing and flourishing. I believe it is Elrond who points out that if Gandalf had not been continually "busy", the Ring might have been retrieved by the Dark Lord before the rest of Middle Earth even knew it had been found!

However, by the same token, Gandalf admits that he suspected the hobbit's Ring, but never followed up by finding Gollum, or, in fact, doing what he eventually did, going to Minas Tirith and discovering other possible proofs of the identity of the Ring. So even Gandalf, busy as he was, was far too complacent given the world in which he lived.

Thomas Burke once pointed out, "It is sufficient for evil to triumph when good men do nothing." This was a main "under-theme" in Tolkien's work, motivated, no doubt, by the long sleep of the English between the wars. If they had been not only more wary, but more willing to put a stop to the development of a great evil, perhaps they would not have suffered as they did in WWII.

9/11 was a "wake up" call that this nation is no longer protected by our oceans, nor by the might of our military since it cannot prevail against the type of enemy now ranged against us, an enemy that hates us not for perceived wrongs, but for having the temerity to exist at all. If we continue to act as if the world has not changed since the cold war, there will be many other and possibly worse 9/11s in the future.

[Talimon]

Hm...that's an interesting way of looking at it. Remember though that Tolkien despised allegory and denied his book had anything to do with the war. So take any such comparisons with a grain of salt. And as for 9/11 and terrorists, I'd look at the world today (Bush going into Iraq) and why before declaring set notions of "good vs. evil". That's why I agree with Tolkien that allegory is both dangerous and ultimately futile... any idea of "good" and "evil" is completely relative to any given time and action. It is just as likely that what you consider "good" others consider "evil", and who's to say which "good" Tolkien was reffering to and which "evil".

[Mrs. Maggott]

Oh, dear! I must STRONGLY disagree. I do not believe Tolkien was a relativist, especially given his Christian background.

LOTR was not an allegory about the war, but the author's position on what constituted good and evil cannot be seen as relative to any particular time or to change when the times changed. What was good was good whenever and wherever it occurred and the same applied to evil. Courage, kindness, pity and love were good. Cowardice, cruelty, mindlessness and hate were evil. To betray one's cause or one's friends for gain was evil. To be willing to sacrifice all for a just cause was good. No, Tolkien was ANYTHING but a "relativist".

However, he did assert that certain things were "neutral" in that they could be used either way. Knowledge was one such element that in itself had no intrinsic morality. But great knowledge did not denote goodness and sometimes, in the effort to gain knowledge, even for good reasons, the seeker sacrificed his moral principles and fell into evil (Saruman and Denethor to name two).

As for the "under-theme" of watchfulness, even if LOTR was not an allegory, that does NOT mean that Tolkien did not utilize what he could easily discern as the danger of apathy in the face of evil. It is hardly a "new" concept, after all.

Mrs. M. :)

[Talimon]

I think you misunderstood. I was replying to your take on September 11, where you made the US to be the "good" and the terrorists to be the "evil". I was just going to say that, depending on whose point of view you chose, many conflicts have no "good vs. evil", even by Tolkiens criteria. You say "Courage, kindness, pity and love" are good. I'm sure that if you were to ask many suicide bombers if they believe in those ideals, they'd say they do. Indeed, they might even argue that they fight for what they fight because those very ideals are being violated. To take the current situation with US and Iraq, I think it paints too simple a picture to say US=good Iraq=evil. I believe Tolkiens tale is deeper then that. The fact that so many "good" charachters are corrupted shows that the line between good and evil wasn't always so fine.

[Mrs. Maggott]

One of the things that must be accepted by those who believe in objective goodness (and truth) is that one may NOT perform an evil act even in an attempt to do "good". The ends simply NEVER justify the means. In WWII, many of the German people, sickened by the Nazis, were clearly considering the morality of remaining loyal to their country. Then the allies bombed Dresden, a city filled with civilians, POWs and without any military value whatsoever. Hundreds of thousands of people died and the Germans who were questioning remaining loyal to an immoral government decided that since EVERYBODY was equally immoral, they at least would remain loyal to their homeland.

The terrorists who attacked on 9/11, however justified they felt themselves to be, did not wage war against a military objective (except the Pentagon), but against innocent people who had never wronged them. Furthermore, their "war" against this country has to do not with perceived or actual wrongs committed against them, but with the fact that they simply DO NOT WANT US TO EXIST! You cannot reason with people like that, you cannot placate their justifiable anger (since their anger is NOT justified), in fact, you cannot do anything but defend yourself to the best of your ability. If you don't, they will only kill and kill again until they bring about the kind of world they want without any concern for the desires of the rest of mankind. It is sad, but that's how it is. :(

[Samwise_hero]

I was just surfing the net for LOTR sites and i came across this petition. I warn you now that it has extremely foul language in it and i was throughly foul language in it. You amy read it if you wish but i advise you not to. I notice as a briefly leaved through the pages that at least 90% of the signatures say that the person who started it was an idiot of they stood up for Tolkien. I don't understand why people would stoop as low as to blame PJ for their sorrow.
Here's the site if you want to check it out.
http://www.petitiononline.com/twotower/

[Anamatar IV]

that was hilarious! how the people who signed the petition called the starter a moron every single time!!! So funny. So so funny.

[Ariana Undomiel]

This issue has been discussed in the past. Don't worry, PJ obviously wasn't affected by any stupid petitions because the movie is still gonna be titled The Two Towers.

~Ariana

[Galadhwen]

Maybe it's just me but I keep calling the "Twin" Towers the "Two" Towers!:D