The Two Towers; One Freepers Review

12/19/02 | Anitius Severinus Boethius

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

How does one begin to discuss a film that is at it's essence not a film in the way most people understand. There can be no mistaking, those who do not have an understanding of who these characters are, either from viewing the first movie or by reading the books, cannot begin to catch up with this movie. In that understanding, this movie cannot and does not stand on it's own. Unlike other "middle installments" (The Empire Strikes Back, The Temple of Doom, The Godfather Part II) this film is not a complete story, and for some non-book fans that will be a serious problem.

The second problem with the film is the unrelenting pace by which things happen. I say that it is a problem, but not in a bad way. It's like having a girlfriend or wife that is so attractive that other men are constantly staring. Or having your stock portfolio increase so much that the SEC investigates. You know, it's a problem, but not one you want to be rid of. The film is fast. Let me make that clear, it is F A S T.

Imagine the Die Hard movies all in 90 minutes. Bruce takes care of Alan Rickman and frees the skyscraper in 30 minutes before taking on rogue Special Forces at JFK and blowing up their plane at the 60 minute mark and then jumping in a cab with Sam Jackson to foil another group of terrorists in the city in another half hour. But don't cut any scenes.

The third problem, and again this is from someone who is very familiar with the books, is the uneveness of the story. This actually is a real problem, and why the film seems a bit choppy at time. Unfortunately, this is the good Professors doing and he left himself an out that Jackson couldn't take. The Frodo storyline is a much more contemplative storyline than the other two and feels much more mellow and sinister. Tolkien worked around this by keeping it seperate in his storytelling; Jackson had no such luxury. A fault with the film, but oddly enough the fault lies in not the director nor the material but rather in the medium itself.

Wow, sounds like I had a lot of problems with the film, doesn't it. Well, no. In fact quite the opposite. The problem with reviewing this film is there is such a cornucopia of real magnificant things that it is easier to recognize that which didn't work instead of that which did. Imagine talking about Ben-Hur without mentioning the chariot race. What a magnificant piece of film making! The Two Towers has so many "chariot race" type scenes that it would be impossible to describe them all and diminish them if you just took a sampling.

Absolutely the best film of the year, and that includes fan favorites such as Spiderman and critics favorites such as The Hours or Far From Heaven. Sadly, the problems with the film will stick out in the minds of many due to the consistantly excellent qualities that permeate this work of art. For that reason, I think that the academy might overlook many of the great accomplishments of this film. That is very dissapointing, because Andy Serkis, Howard Shore (whose score works much better in this film for me than in the first film), and especially Peter Jackson deserve to be holding little gold statues in March.

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

I don't know... Tolkien hated to be edited. It just wasn't done!

Tolkien hated to be edited ... by other people! He had constant revisions on his own works.

[HairOfTheDog]

Right. That is why I can hope he would like the films... But I wonder.

Christopher Tolkien is still living, is he not? - Has he ever spoken on the movies? I am going to poke around and see if I can find anything. They have certainly given the book sales a whole new life for a whole new generation. I hope there is still money to be made by the Tolkien family in this, given the book deals that might have been made years ago.

[HairOfTheDog]

Here is one article... expressing a bit of nervousness about it before the first one came out.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

December 07, 2001 at 23:12:29

In a historic first public comment on the upcoming Peter Jackson trilogy of films based on his father's work, Christopher Tolkien says the movies will not do justice to his father's work.
LONDON (Reuters) - The son of J.R.R. Tolkien says the forthcoming Hollywood adaptation of his father's classic "The Lord of the Rings" will not do justice to the magical Middle Earth tale.

In a statement to newspapers published on Saturday, Christopher Tolkien, who is literary protector of his father's works, said he did not disapprove of the film but was dubious about the adaptation.

"My own position is that 'The Lord Of The Rings' is peculiarly unsuitable to transformation into visual dramatic form," he said.

Article: http://www.xenite.org/faqs/lotr_movie/news_0000/468.html

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

Yes, all of Tolkien's children are still living, I believe. At least John, Priscilla and Christopher are. Christopher has said he has no interest in the movies, but as reclusive as he is, I doubt he would comment on them even if someone got to him with a DVD of it. The books are no longer part of the family's estate, I believe, but the Histories of Middle-Earth are, and I'm sure they are seeing quite an upturn in sales.

[steve-b]

I think even if he felt it was there, he would think it was in the hands of Gondor... and wouldn't dream of someone coming into Mordor with it. That they would destroy it is not something he has imagined....

Inability to conceive the idea that his enemies might seek to simply cast him down with none to take his place was the big blind spot of the Lidless Eye.

[af_vet_rr]

Christopher has said he has no interest in the movies, but as reclusive as he is, I doubt he would comment on them even if someone got to him with a DVD of it.

That may have to do with him having grown up around it and probably hearing about it from his father (I'm not familiar with ages of his children and how close he was to them). He probably has this image in his mind of the books and stories from his father that he probably would not want tarnished by the movies (although I will admit, as a big Tolkien fan, I was dazzled by the movies and how close they were to the books with the length they ended up being).

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

I tend to agree with those who say we will not see the tense scene at Minas Morgul where the Witch King turns and looks in Frodo's direction. This scene replaced that one in the book. Plus, Sauron doesn't think anyone would even want to bring the ring to Mordor, so when he finds out it is in Osgiliath, he probably just assumes that the Gondorians have it.

If I may, what was the whole point of the chase to Bree in the first film? Were the Nazgul in the habit of chasing everybody who ran away from them? They would have known then that Frodo had the ring, and they certainly would have known at the Watchtower.

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

Silly LOTR question...if the ring could be hidden for 2500 years at the bottom of a river, why not head out to sea and chuck into the deep ocean? Imagine that, the Fellowship heads west until they hit the surf, sail far out, drop the ring in the water, end of movie, end of saga, roll credits...

That would seem to be an acceptable solution if the situation truly existed, instead of a seemingly suicidal mission with exceedingly high probability of being caught and having the ring taken anyway. Thoughts?

[Festa]

This exact point is dealt with in the book

1) The ring laid in the river for so long because Sauron was not there...he was hiding...the ring hid itself and eventually made its way back into the picture through the hands of Gollum

2) Now that Sauron is back, throwing the Ring into the ocean would be stupid as the ring would find its way back into existence. It would merely be postponing the inevitable, destroying the ring or be destroyed by the ring.

[ecurbh]

Yes, this thought occurs to them, and it is discussed at the Council of Elrond:

"Then," said Glorfindel, "let us cast it into the deeps...in the Sea it would be safe."

"Not safe for ever," said Gandalf. "There are many things in the deep waters; and seas and lands may change. And it is not our part here to take thought only for a season, or for a few lives of Men, or for a passing age of the world. We should seek a final end of this menace, even if we do not hope to make one."

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

He was exceptionally close to his children and his youngest, Christopher, was particularly enamoured of the stories set in Middle-earth. While Christopher was in his early 20's he served in South Africa with the RAF during WWII. His father sent him chapters of LOTR as he finished them as a sort of serial story for Christopher to read while away from the family.

I honestly believe that Christopher just can't imagine that the story can be captured to any extent in a visual interpretation. I would like to see if anyone can get the Shire scenes to him at least just so he can see what Jackson is capable of.

[HairOfTheDog]

I am going to guess that the LoTR is even more sacred to Christopher than it was for his father. One would hope that he could appreciate the film as a tribute to his Dad by a man who also loved the work. I hope he would have that response if he did see it (And I bet he did... how could he not?)

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

I have a feeling that Christopher may have been a secret part of that "horrible cultus" that the good Professor shuddered at thinking of. :)

Of course, since in many ways the story was written for him, I can easily understand the jealousy at sharing a gift from your Father with the whole world.

[Valin]

I am a little disappointed, not by what he left out but by what he put in.

I'm thinking in particularly the whole scene where Aragon goes over the cliff, and the following dream sequence(for lack of a better word) with the elves showing up at Helms Deep. Also if memory serves Fairamir released Frodo Sam and Gollum w/o and doesn't take them to Osgiliath.

With these two exceptions I thought it was just wonderful.
And now a question?


Is it Dec. 2003 yet?

[BigFLPanhandleDude]

Saw The Two Towers today. I thoroughly enjoyed it as much as FOTR, but have a question, and as such please excuse me if I get anything mixed up. But who were the exotic looking "men" with half of their faces covered?? In Mordor when Frodo, Sam, and Gollum are outside the gates, there is a group of them marching in, and when Sam takes a tumble two of them become curious. Later there is a large group making its way to Mordor, some riding on the Oliphants, and they are ambushed by the Rangers led by Faramir. They don't look like Uruk-hai, but somewhat eastern looking. Later, either in the cave or at Osgiliath(I think)?, Faramir refers to "Easterlings" or "Eastlings" making their way to Sauron at Mordor. My question is, who are these guys??

Sorry if this is a stupid question, obviously I haven't read the books. However, I plan to start reading them, because I am fast becoming a fan of Tolkien.

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

Okay, thanks for the info. It's a fair question to ask of the movie, since it isn't explained there.

[BigFLPanhandleDude]

I found this on the web from The Encyclopedia of ARDA: An Interactive Guide To The Works Of J.R.R Tolkien.



EASTERLINGS- A general name for the races of Men from the unknown East of Middle-earth, who were a constant foe of the Free Peoples, from the treachery of Ulfang in the Nirnaeth Arnoediad of the First Age to their frequent attacks against Gondor in the Third Age.

In the movie they do have a middle-eastern flare to them.

[Elenya]

That was very much true to the book, that Frodo pitied and identified with Gollum's plight.

Absolutely. It is in fact an essential element to the complex relationship between the 3 characters Sam-Frodo-Gollum. Frodo is the one in the middle, the only one who understand what the 2 others are going through. Sam and Gollum don't and can't understand each other and are in constant "sibling" rivalry for Frodo's attention and affection. One more reason for them to hate each other as is clearly shown in the book AND in the movie.

[Elenya]

the only one who understand=the only one who understands

[BornOnTheFourth]

Thanks! I'm going to see TT tonight and can't wait!!!!