The Two Towers Reviews

[Mrs. Maggott]

Originally posted by DGoeij

Honestly, I do hope things turn out differently, but, together with skipping the Scouring of the Shire, I'm afraid the focal point of Jackson's view on the Ring-legend switched focus from the Hobbits onto Men.
Please go back and read many, many of my posts about these films in which I said that this was the major deviation of the films from the beginning. It was because of this change of focus that Tom Bombadil, the Old Forest, The Barrow Downs and the Scouring of the Shire werre omitted and the reason for the terrible mis-characterization of Merry and Pippin. It was also the reason that Jackson saw fit to bring the "romance" between A&A into a "lead" position in the story (and then saw fit to ruin it once there!) and make Arwen Undomiel into Arwen, Warrior Princess who holds a knife to her erstwhile lover's throat!

So, Jackson not only changes the focus of the story from hobbits to men (and occasional elves and wizard(s)), but he then takes the one male-female relationship he has to work with and eviscerates it! Go figure.

[DGoeij]

Oh, I read this in your posts and many others too. It was after a second viewing of TTT, that I couldn't really get the thought out of my head you had a major point to say the least. Something that did not happen when I watched FOTR for the x-th time.

In FOTR, I was bothered by things that IMO didn't work out properly, sometimes in a basic movie sense, and sometimes as compared to the real story. And this only happened after I had seen it enough times to get used to the great visual effects of landscapes, sites and clothing. (apart from the Tyler Incident, which seriously annoyed me from viewing #1)

In TTT, I was prepared for the visual show, yet still very pleased. But when the Three Hunters come to meet Theoden in the Golden Hall, I bacome more and more annoyed with the diversions in the tale and totally different behaving characters.

To summarize it more clearly: Last year I went to a cinema-marathon, in which they showed FOTR first and TTT immediatly after that, at 0:00 o'clock. I was seriously annoyed I had to go to the bathroom during FOTR, but still went, because I had seen it numerous times and didn't want it to happen during TTT.
May there be a marathon again this year, I know exactly when I will leave for a private moment. During the Phoenix-Aragorn/flashback to Tyler scenes and if needs be, during the appearance of the Elven warriors in Helms Deep. Because the physical relieve will have an added bonus of missing the worst part of the movie. :p

[joxy]

Originally posted by DGoeij
In TTT, I was prepared for the visual show, yet still very pleased. But when the Three Hunters come to meet Theoden in the Golden Hall, I became more and more annoyed with the diversions in the tale and totally different behaving characters.
Here we have it yet once more, and thank you DG!
TTT is two separate films: 50 minutes of excellent scenery and storytelling, making sense within itself and in relation to its source; then to Theoden, to be followed by 2 hours of unremitting nonsense, bad material thrown together badly.
You've seen the point of cleavage as clearly as many before you. It does happen, and all we need to know now is WHY?!

[meneldor]

i am now a firm believer in that he basically sold out to accomadate simpletons who can't sit for five minutes without major action happening. i have two kinds of cinema friends, one can watch a movie with a deep plot and great communication between actors. a movie that you can watch 5 times and still discover things you hadnt before. maybe no car chases and people hanging from buildings, but in depth story. now the other friend cant sit for more than five minutes without wanting bridges exploding and car chases and steven seagal. i really believe peter jackson is mending the two together, not so much in the first than the latter. i disagreed somewhat with the FOTR ( mainly the characterization of a few characters ) but thought it to be a good movie. now TTT, after the three characters arrive in edoras all hell is bent into making it into something that JOE BLOCKHEAD, who has never read the trilogy, able to sit and say " awww, man did you see that guys head fly off!!" then he might say " awww, man i got to see the next one." hence the almighty hollywood dollar, " bring 'em all in, pay your money, we'll take it!!" they already know that the purists will be there no matter what. now lets bring everyone else. however one could argue that a good strategy to make mass amounts of $$$. i wish that they had just let it be.

[Mrs. Maggott]

I cannot, frankly, understand Jackson's relationship with his audience. Plot and characterizations aside (and that's saying a lot, I know!), he appears to respect their intelligence by revealing some subtle, deep and profound moments - only to turn around and ruin the mood with some adolescent assininity. It's almost as if he cannot stand to be really serious for more than five seconds at a go! As a great example of this, we have Gandalf's fall in Moria followed by the reactions of the Fellowship outside the "back door". Great moments of profound emotion (even if one doesn't like Frodo's "tear"). But no sooner do we feast on this adult scenario than as the Company enters Lorien, we get the Gimli comic business where he is busy telling a hobbit how alert he is and he almost impales himself on an arrow! Silliness and nothing else. It is Sam who breathes so loudly that they could shoot him in the dark, not Gimli, but this is changed in order to affect the juvenile "humor" of this scene. And for what reason? The emotional tenor of the film continues to be grief for Gandalf's fall and the interplay among the Fellowship and the Elves of Lorien, so what is the reason for the "cutsie" moment? Who knows! But to me it exhibits Jackson's love-hate relationship with his audience.

[Valdarmyr]

I just saw TTT for at least the fifth time. After five viewings, it's still engaging, breathtaking and fun, and will continue to be. What a movie--can't wait to get the EE DVD! Good escapism.

[Mrs. Maggott]

You can certainly "escape" with Jackson's TTT - especially from Tolkien's TTT! :rolleyes:

[Flame of Anor]

LOL. Well, we can all hope and pray that he slightly redeems himself in the EE of TTT. I mean it is the least we could hope for.

-Flame

[Mrs. Maggott]

Originally posted by Flame of Anor
LOL. Well, we can all hope and pray that he slightly redeems himself in the EE of TTT. I mean it is the least we could hope for.

-Flame
Frankly, I would say that it is the most we can hope for.:rolleyes:

[Flame of Anor]

Originally posted by Mrs. Maggott
Frankly, I would say that it is the most we can hope for.:rolleyes: LOL I suppose you are right.

-Flame

[Finglas]

I saw the theatrical edition and the extended edition. There were some things that i didn't like (like how healm's deep was half the movie, but it was only one chapter in the book), but all in all it was pretty good. I admit, there were some things that i would fix if i were working on it, but otherwise it was pretty good. They did an amazing job with gollum/smeagol, and i think that the acting was phonomenal. And dispite what others may think, if you watch the appendix to the extended edition, they give reasons for why they did some things to the movie that weren't in the book, and vise versa. So it's not like they didn't have reasons to do some of the things that they did.

[joxy]

Originally posted by Finglas
{in} the extended edition, they give reasons for why they did some things to the movie....
Very nice of them - the problem, for them, is that the reasons are so silly that they make the changes themselves seem even worse.

[Mrs. Maggott]

Originally posted by joxy
Very nice of them - the problem, for them, is that the reasons are so silly that they make the changes themselves seem even worse.
Indeed, frequently their "reasons" contradict themselves. Faramir had to be made into a bully boy because it was necessary to show the power and influence of the Ring. Yet, Faramir was a bully before he was even aware that Frodo possessed the Ring. On the other hand, in the EE, we learn that Denethor so despises his younger son that Faramir wishes to bring the thing to Minas Tirith in order to "earn" his father's good opinion. However, after all of this, having learned that Frodo did possess the thing, Jackson has Faramir "talked out" of taking Frodo to Gondor by a sentence or two from "golden-tongued"(?!) Sam! So, what on earth is the sense either of the story that Jackson has filmed or the reasons he has put forth for the story "being that way"? I'm sorry to say that a great deal not only of what is done, but the reasons we are given as to why it's done is pure unadulterated nonsense!

[joxy]

Originally posted by Mrs. Maggott
....a great deal not only of what is done, but the reasons we are given as to why it's done is pure unadulterated nonsense!
There are parts of the TTT DVD EE extras which have the strong impression of the speakers being naughty children, trying to defend their naughtiness, by reciting wild excuses which they have concocted and then convinced themselves to be true. Watching those parts in this light makes them slightly more bearable! I have not yet switched on the various voice-over commentaries to the actual film, but confidently expect to have to apply the same method to listening to them.

The sort of details you present knock some of the final bricks out of the defensive wall built by those who insist that the films must be judged purely on their own merits, and from whom we seem to hear less and less these days!