 Ring Ping!! |
Posted on 12/02/2002 5:03:32 AM PST by maquiladora
Ring Ping!! |
What more could we want! This is fantastic! All worries / fears are gone, bring on the movie!
Well it's about time! :)
No mention of Pippin and the Palantir?
And Gollum! Gollum sounds terrific!
I want this movie --- NOW!
I skimmed a bit to avoid all the spoilers.
One quibble:
When Frodo, Sam, and Gollum reach the Black Gates Of Mordor they watch men who supposedly serve Sauron enter into the gates. This is obviously different from the book, and I cannot see why or how they fit in as of yet.
I confess I don't have my TTT copy with me at work, nor have I seen the movie yet. However: If I am not mistaken, Frodo and Sam do see some units of Easterlings arriving at the Morannon when they reach the Gate.
Since they're dumping the entire "Scouring of the Shire" sequence and likely most everything else between the wedding and the Havens, time probably won't be that big of an issue - if they have the usual 3 hours to work with.
Palantirs, the death of Saruman, and the ride to Gondor
Merry, Squire of Gondor, Dernhelm, and the Ride of the Rohirrim
Paths of the Dead and the Corsairs of Umbar
Introduction to Minas Tirith and Denethor, Pippin of the Guard
Wounding of Faramir, the siege, the breaking of the gates, Denethor's suicide
Death of the Witch King and the battle of the Pelennor
March on the black gates
Shelob and the escape from Cirith Ungol
Frodo and Sam disguised as orcs
The destruction of the Ring
The crowning and wedding of Aragorn
Wrap up and the Grey Havens
Wow. THAT'S a movie!
In the book, ROTK is actually fairly short once you take out the appendices. If you chop most of everything after the wedding...it's manageable. Even if you add in the confrontation with Saruman, the palantir, and Shelob.
It is unclear what they will do in regards to Saruman's fate. They may leave it unaddressed.
I suspect one reason that Shelob was moved back to ROTK is that there's a real imbalance in storyline in the third book between Frodo/Sam and the rest of the Fellowship. Especially if "Flotsam and Jetsam," "The Voice of Saruman," and "The Palantir" (three full chapters) are all being moved in some form to the third movie.
I don't object so much to such adjustments given that Tolkien himself was displeased with the idea of publishing his work in three volumes. In the end, both the movies and the books must be judged in totality.
FROM TheOneRing.net™
TTT Review - What Of The Cast Performances?
Demosthenes @ 7:18 pm ESTTigerlilly Gamgee sent in this Two Towers review that is largely absent of spoilers. Those who want a feel of the performances in the film may enjoy this one, though if you're trying to avoid spoilers regarding who may or may not be at Helm's Deep, perhaps you should steer clear.
The Two Towers - What Of The Cast Performances?
I had the priveledge of attending an advanced screening of TTT this morning here in Chicago (along with Roger Ebert... and many other contest winners). My opinion is still forming for this movie; it is just so strange because you are accustomed to FOTR and then you see the characters in a new story (which you probably already know the ending to). Overall, I did like it. I was not disappointed. I need to see it again!
It varies away from the books a lot more than FOTR did. Some parts didn't even exist in the books, and in other cases you are seeing the same story from different perspectives. Sam and Gimli stole the show, in my opinion. Everyone voted that Pippin would be the comic relief in this movie, but I think that Gimli has stolen his trophy on that account. Many of Sam's greatest moments from the books are left in the movie (Sam fans will be cheering at these parts!), and some really nice new scenes are given to him. Legolas is also more likeable in this movie. He becomes a little more "humanistic" in quality, as opposed to the slightly "magical" nature he had about him in the first film (his kind-of "aloofness"). Elijah Wood does a great job with Frodo as he becomes possessed by the ring. There are some heart-breaking moments for him and Sam (one really huge one at the end; which is from a shot in the trailer, but you wouldn't know that that shot of Frodo is actually in a scene with Sam and not Gollum).
The new characters are all lovely. Eowyn has a very nice introduction and she doesn't whip out the sword quite yet (at least, not in a big way). Theoden is well played and Wormtongue is great. Eomer is also a lot better than I expected (no offense to Karl Urban, it's just that he seemed a little dryer in the books; but new life is good). There is also some nice stuff with the Rohan refugees, some of it is very emotional and may move some to tears (look for the Jackson kids in the caves - boy they get around don't they!).
Gollum and Treebeard, in my opinion, have not fallen in the "Jar-Jar trap", but those who have not read the books may not like them. I can see how putting an Ent on screen is a difficult task (with their not wanting to be hasty and all - I don't think that people will quite understand them if they haven't read the books). Merry has a lovely speech at the Entmoot (addition); Dominic is really stepping up to the plate. Gollum is done very well, though slightly different from my impressions of him in the book (though, I have never really liked him - so don't listen to me). I never felt pity for him while reading the book, but that aspect is brought into the movie very nicely. His relationship with Frodo and Sam is great! It really made me see why Frodo trusts him.
You get to see Merry and Pippin start to grow up in this film. I mentioned the speech Merry has... great! Pippin also has a nice moment with Treebeard when they have left the Moot. He's not so much of a "fool" anymore.
The scene between Arwen and Elrond is very well done. Everyone is worrying about her being in the movie, but I enjoyed that scene (though her picture on the poster need not be so big). The flash-forward was very moving and it let's the audience see more of what Arwen is sacrificing to be with Aragorn (that was probably unclear to non-readers in the first movie). Fear not, she does not come to Helm's Deep (though I can't speak for Haldir's troops on that matter)! I, personally, liked the elves at Helm's Deep. It gave the movie a slight Silmarillion-like moment. I think it added to the relationships of the characters, and it showed more where the fate of Middle Earth is heading. Helm's Deep is spectacular!!!!!!!! 'Nuff said there...
The movie has a great climax accompanied by a speech with Sam. I was accompanied by Rosemunde Brownlocks (from my Line Party) and she made an excellent point that... at one point or another in the movie each character has a moment where they realize that this is their fight. All of Middle Earth is in peril, not just an individual race or kingdom. This speech is the climax of those moments. Very well done... go Sean Astin!!!!!
Well, this is already long, so I will end here. I tried not to spoil too much, so hopefully I didn't ruin anything for anyone. Now, I am eager to see what Ebert is going to say (though something tells me he's probably going to be skeptical about it). Fans will not be disappointed, though I am beginning to think that maybe I shouldn't have re-read the book so close to the movie's release date (because of the differences - it made them much more noticeable). They are each in their own, different, yet the same. Be ready for moments that will blow you away!
~Tigerlily Gamgee~
Thanks for posting that. Must have missed it when I was over at TORN today.
I am a bit nervious about these reports of greater deviations from the text. But I'll keep an open mind.
In the meantime I ran across this from FilmJerk.com. Apologies for the rough language. There are spoilers here as well, so skip over it if that's not your cup of tea.
It will be interesting to see if his prediction that "women won't like it" is borne out. Mrs. Iguana will be Test Subject A.
--
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
By Marco
Review Date: December 2, 2002
"The Two Towers" is the film of the year. It's an epic battle and some that loved "The Fellowship of the Ring" might be shocked because of the sheer power, violence and volume of impressions "The Two Towers" features. That doesn't mean it is bad. In the contrary: It is cinema to my liking. The sort that makes the screen explode.
I've read the books about five years ago so excuse the mistakes I'm probably going to make. Also excuse that I am reviewing the film, not the book. I loved the book, but Jackson's job was that of an adaption. And he did a brilliant job. The rest of the text contains spoilers. Don't read on if you want to see the film unspoiled.
"The Two Towers" opens with the camera hovering over snowy mountains. We hear voices and screams. Then, the camera enters the mountain and we see the battle between Gandalf and the Balrog again. This time, from a slightly different perspective - and slightly longer. That's good: The film opens with my favourite scene from "Fellowship." It starts with an impressive bang. That's because Peter Jackson did all the character introduction and the geography of Middle Earth in "Fellowship." He can now dive right into it. At the beginning, that causes some problems, because the intercutting of the scenes make the film appear episodic and uneven. However, as soon as all the plot threads are interwoven, The Two Towers becomes a bulldozer you cannot stop until the very end. In it's pure kinetic style, I was reminded of James Cameron's Aliens which also had such a relentless energy.
Each of the three story parts (Aragon/Legolas/Gimli - Frodo/Sam - Merry/Pippin) has a distinctive style. The Merry/Pippin-plot for example starts out rather grisly and later becomes the calm part that acts as a counterpart to the battle at Helm's Deep. This different style and different speed of the three threads make the film more vivid than the rather linear Fellowship. One thing is alike to all three plots: The darkness. Frodo's and Sam's walk through the marshes is extremely gritty. The landscape is chilly and the bodies floating under water are truly creepy. It's an eerie landscape and one can see that Peter Jackson is a genius when it comes to portraying evil. The hobbits then reach the black gate which is operated by two cave trolls. The impressive thing about the scene is the weight of the portal. The use of models and CGI is perfect and gives this set the depth and weight it needs to be convincing.
Meanwhile, Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas search for the two hobbits. The story of the three makes up the biggest part of the film. After they re-unite with Gandalf, they set out to free Théoden from the spell of Saruman and guide the people of the city to the stronghold of Helm's Deep. In those scenes, I was very impressed by Jackson's courage to use some ancient tongues. If I'd like Shakespeare, I'd say The Two Towers is Jackson's Henry V because of the long, melancholic monologues and of course the war-theme. I don't know if the kids will like those heavy words. Anyway, on their way to "Helm's Deep", Orcs on wargs attack and that's a fierce scene. Very well edited. From there on it's straight to the last third, to the big battle. It is intercut with other threads, but overall, it accounts for about 45 minutes of epic sword- and bowfight.
Jackson introduces us to the geography of the fortress before Saruman's huge army approaches with thundering noise. The vista is amazing and the battle will keep you on the edge of your seat. There's the scene with the exploding wall you might know from the trailer. The spectacular thing is the huge stones that rain down after the explosion. Again, they *feel* heavy and when they fall down on some Uruk-hai, it really hurts. This is definitely the biggest set piece in the film - but it's not my favourite scene. That comes later. Oh, and before the battle actually starts, Jackson shows children being prepared for the battle. It's a simple yet effective way to show the dispair of the people. An army that has to send its kids to the front line is probably the most impressive symbol of a hopeless situation. But you don't have to become all depressed. Disrupting the doom are some comic relief moments from Gimli. The funniest scene has him just standing behind the wall. You only see his helmet (they made him a bit smaller than he should be but never mind) which causes some much needed laughter. I wouldn't have liked The Two Towers being ironic, but a little humor is most welcome.
That leads me to the last thread: Pippin and Merry. The beginning of their story is very rough. There is actually an intestine visible when the Uruk-hai kill each other in a frenzy. "The Two Towers" is tougher and rougher than "Fellowship." That PG-13-rating is really hard to swallow. There's a lot of R-material in this film. I personally think violence fits the story and atmosphere, but this is not for kiddies. Jackson shouldn't care though. One can clearly see how much fun he had with those scenes of carnage.
Later, the two hobbits flee into the forrest and meet Treebeard. I really like this tree-guy. His nose, his eyes, his "skin", his voice. All perfect. If you see a wide shot with him and other Ents, they appear to be the most CG-ish of all characters. I guess leafs are hard to animate and the color green is tough for the effects-people. However, that's not bad because the forrest looks terrific and the Ents are wacky guys. When they set out for Isengard, my favourite scene begins. This is the "nature strikes back" scene and seeing Saruman watching his army being blown away by some trees made me smile. The almost biblical flood afterwards has a clensing effect after all the dirt and foulness we've witnessed. Wonderful scene.
Now to Gollum. He's the best CG-creature I've ever seen. There are moments, when you clearly see that he's digital (for example when he catches a fish), but the major feeling is the one of being impressed. Before our eyes, a couple of pixels become an important character. I'm already heartbroken if I have to read comparisons with Jar-Jar or Dobby. Gollum might also be a little nag, but he's way more complex. When did you ever see an artificial creature having a schizophrenic conversation with itself? Over a couple of minutes, Gollum actually argues with himself. Either you accept this, or not. If you don't, you're perhaps not really into fantasy movies to start with.
Gollum is the CG-highlight. Others include my favourite Balrog in his early scene, the cave trolls, the explosion at Helm's Deep, the attack on Isengard, Treebeard - oh and the oliphants. They are majestic. At that point in the movie, they are almost too much because they don't much serve the plot. But the sight is impressive - and I always prefer "too much" to "not enough". As in Fellowship, the backgrounds are stunning. New Zealand once again becomes Middle Earth. The difference to something like "Attack of the Clones" is the fact, that Jackson filmed real landscapes and added the buildings. That gives the image the depth it needs. Even if you don't like the war mongering in The Two Towers, you'd at least have to acknowledge that this is a very good walking guide through Middle Earth ...
Now, briefly, the actors: Sean Astin has more to do and shines. Elijah Wood appears a lot less than in part one but he's good. The other two hobbits have less gags than in "Fellowship" - and it works. This time around, the jokes go to John Rhys-Davies who's funny as Gimli and impressive as the voice of Treebeard. Orlando Bloom was better in "Fellowship." He has one or two wooden lines and is less fancy with his tool - the bow that is. But he's still good. Viggo Mortensen was probably the best man in the film. If Fellowship was Frodo's quest, The Two Towers is Aragorns. And Viggo does a good job portraying that. On the other hand, Ian McKellen was reduced. He's stiffer than in part one and apart from 2 or 3 funny lines, he only has some heavy dialogue. Cate Blanchet has only a cameo and Liv Tyler was less distracting than I thought. Her scenes are still rather useless.
Bernard Hill was grand. Sometimes I had the feeling he's playing captain of the Titanic again and steering his ship Rohan into doom. Miranda Otto was also good. There were lots of discussion about the "love triangle". It's not happening actually because Eowyn sees that Aragorn loves Arwen. The few glances of Miranda Otto speak volumes and were better than any love relation a lesser director would have attempted to put more estrogen in the picture. I guess the changes of the female characters will be the most talked about among Tolkien purists. For me, they felt right. Also something to discuss: The movie ends before the book does. It ends when Gollum leads the hobbits to a grisly fate ... to "her" (he pronounces it deliciously).
To sum things up, "The Two Towers" is the movie event 2002. A colleague of mine said, women won't like it. Well, that might be sexist. I'd rather say geeks (and there are some women among those) will particularly enjoy it. It's an epic war movie full of amazing visuals and astonishing power. It is not a light movie. It's the evil stepchild of "The Fellowship of the Ring." One cannot exist without the other. "Fellowship" did not only introduce the characters, it also remains a counterpoint to "The two Towers." When I left the cinema I felt beaten and exhausted. And for that, Peter Jackson, I thank you.
Marco's Rating: A
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.