The Two Towers...
Nemesis_Zero
Old European Join Date: 2002-01-25 Member: 75Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
Old European Join Date: 2002-01-25 Member: 75Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
<div class="IPBDescription">Spoilers ahead...</div> I've seen the Two Towers in a midnight showing (which means that, thanks to the different timezones, I've seen it hours before most of you ;p), and would like to share my opinion:
<span style='color:red'><b>Warning! Spoilers ahead!</b></span>
Let me first say that 2T is definetely a very good movie. It is, however, by far not as great as the hype may have lead you to believe. In my opinion, it's weaker than the Fellowship. It's not as rousing, scaring, or moving as the first part.
<b>The Story:</b>
There is no doubt that the second book was a lot more difficult to adapt than the first one: While the Fellowship features one strong line of events around Frodo and his fellowship with sparse happenings away from them, the Two Towers splits the cast up, thus forcing the movie to tell three stories at the same time.
This big problem in mind, I have to say that they did a pretty good job with at least one of the three subplots: Aragorn, Glimli and Legolas, who've got the most screentime, get somewhat more fleshed out - although I have to say that the dwarves size is used as comic relief too often - and their quest stays coherent and understandeable for the whole time.
The subplot that experienced the most cutting was Pippin and Merry with the Ents (more about them in the Visuals). I can understand why they were 'left out' - this station doesn't add too much to boths characters, but I somewhat looked forward to Fangorn, so I was a little displeased.
The story of Frodo, Sam and Gollum is surely the most difficult part - how do you portray a man who's getting consumed by a magical artifact, his brave servant, and a shizophrenic fivehundred year old in a understandeable way? Sometimes, this works amazingly well - the mental fights between Gollum and Smeagol are surely some of the best scenes of the movie - sometimes, it doesn't work at all. I did, for example, not get a feeling of the extreme pressure on Frodo, which made the final scene with the Ringwraith somewhat incomprehensible. The Fellowship managed to portray Frodos 'addiction' much better.
Another very important point are the differences between book and movie.
I can understand why some things had to be cut out, I can understand why some things were added, I can understand why some things had to be changed.
I do, however, not understand why the lovestory between Aragorn and Arwen had to be enlarged like that - I don't mind romance, but extending this element that far over what can be found in the books appeared a little ridiculous to me.
I <i>hated</i> the scene with Gandalf 'healing' Theodén. One of my favorite parts of the books, changed completely - I just couldn't stand this 'electroshock therapy'.
I don't know why there had to be elves in the battle of Helms Deep. Not that I'd mind them, it just looked a little like 'filler' to me, plus, the whole thing would've looked much more desperate without them.
The last, and maybe most severe, thing - why did they have to make Frodo visit Gondor, instead of getting him near Shelob in this movie? Whatever happened to good ol' sad endings?
<b>The Visuals</b>:
Important in every fantasy or sci-fi movie, the visuals in 2T range from incredible to lousy.
Want to see what I mean? Compare the big views on the battle of Helms Deep, which really looked as if ten thousand angry Uruk-Hai stormed a castle, to the beginning scene with the orcs and Merry and Pippin, which looked more like a bunch of dark guys with bad teeth and two small guys running around a rock.
Or, take the scene where Théoden, Aragorn, and the rest ride through the entrance hall - I felt like in a recolored Charlie Chaplin movie.
One of the most interesting visual aspects is surely the CG figure Gollum. While it's always obvious it came out a computer, I could still 'understand' its each move and gesture. Impressive work.
The Ents, which I had imagined a little like the Ancients from WC3, looked OK. A little too skinny and 'stop-motion' for me, but not too bad.
<b>The Actors</b>:
Outstanding, each and everyone of them. Aragorn, Legolas, Théoden, Pippin, Gandalf, and Wormtongue are easily my favorites with each of them delivering each line with proffesionality and emotion, whereas Christopher Lee always seemed to be a somewhat wooden Saruman to me. Hugo Weavings performance as Elrond is very difficult for me - no matter how good the actor may be, I always feel as if he'd be about to draw a Desert Eagle and shoot at people with black sunglasses.
Being musically uninterested as long as no guitars are involved, I won't comment on the soundtrack.
<b>All in all,</b> as I said before, a very good movie, which does however not reach the quality of the first part.
<span style='color:red'><b>Warning! Spoilers ahead!</b></span>
Let me first say that 2T is definetely a very good movie. It is, however, by far not as great as the hype may have lead you to believe. In my opinion, it's weaker than the Fellowship. It's not as rousing, scaring, or moving as the first part.
<b>The Story:</b>
There is no doubt that the second book was a lot more difficult to adapt than the first one: While the Fellowship features one strong line of events around Frodo and his fellowship with sparse happenings away from them, the Two Towers splits the cast up, thus forcing the movie to tell three stories at the same time.
This big problem in mind, I have to say that they did a pretty good job with at least one of the three subplots: Aragorn, Glimli and Legolas, who've got the most screentime, get somewhat more fleshed out - although I have to say that the dwarves size is used as comic relief too often - and their quest stays coherent and understandeable for the whole time.
The subplot that experienced the most cutting was Pippin and Merry with the Ents (more about them in the Visuals). I can understand why they were 'left out' - this station doesn't add too much to boths characters, but I somewhat looked forward to Fangorn, so I was a little displeased.
The story of Frodo, Sam and Gollum is surely the most difficult part - how do you portray a man who's getting consumed by a magical artifact, his brave servant, and a shizophrenic fivehundred year old in a understandeable way? Sometimes, this works amazingly well - the mental fights between Gollum and Smeagol are surely some of the best scenes of the movie - sometimes, it doesn't work at all. I did, for example, not get a feeling of the extreme pressure on Frodo, which made the final scene with the Ringwraith somewhat incomprehensible. The Fellowship managed to portray Frodos 'addiction' much better.
Another very important point are the differences between book and movie.
I can understand why some things had to be cut out, I can understand why some things were added, I can understand why some things had to be changed.
I do, however, not understand why the lovestory between Aragorn and Arwen had to be enlarged like that - I don't mind romance, but extending this element that far over what can be found in the books appeared a little ridiculous to me.
I <i>hated</i> the scene with Gandalf 'healing' Theodén. One of my favorite parts of the books, changed completely - I just couldn't stand this 'electroshock therapy'.
I don't know why there had to be elves in the battle of Helms Deep. Not that I'd mind them, it just looked a little like 'filler' to me, plus, the whole thing would've looked much more desperate without them.
The last, and maybe most severe, thing - why did they have to make Frodo visit Gondor, instead of getting him near Shelob in this movie? Whatever happened to good ol' sad endings?
<b>The Visuals</b>:
Important in every fantasy or sci-fi movie, the visuals in 2T range from incredible to lousy.
Want to see what I mean? Compare the big views on the battle of Helms Deep, which really looked as if ten thousand angry Uruk-Hai stormed a castle, to the beginning scene with the orcs and Merry and Pippin, which looked more like a bunch of dark guys with bad teeth and two small guys running around a rock.
Or, take the scene where Théoden, Aragorn, and the rest ride through the entrance hall - I felt like in a recolored Charlie Chaplin movie.
One of the most interesting visual aspects is surely the CG figure Gollum. While it's always obvious it came out a computer, I could still 'understand' its each move and gesture. Impressive work.
The Ents, which I had imagined a little like the Ancients from WC3, looked OK. A little too skinny and 'stop-motion' for me, but not too bad.
<b>The Actors</b>:
Outstanding, each and everyone of them. Aragorn, Legolas, Théoden, Pippin, Gandalf, and Wormtongue are easily my favorites with each of them delivering each line with proffesionality and emotion, whereas Christopher Lee always seemed to be a somewhat wooden Saruman to me. Hugo Weavings performance as Elrond is very difficult for me - no matter how good the actor may be, I always feel as if he'd be about to draw a Desert Eagle and shoot at people with black sunglasses.
Being musically uninterested as long as no guitars are involved, I won't comment on the soundtrack.
<b>All in all,</b> as I said before, a very good movie, which does however not reach the quality of the first part.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
My opinion of the movie is basicly this: If you liked the first part, you'll like this one also. I can't decide which one is better yet, I think you should see both as a union.
<b>The Visuals:</b>
GREAT. Can't say more. Gollum is unbelievable, not only in look but also in acting. The Landscapes are great, the Ents also.
<b>The Soundtrack:</b>
I'm not really experienced in this art, but I myself liked the Soundtrack ALOT.
<b>The Story:</b>
Well, the book has one of the best storys ever (in my opinion) so Jackson couldn't do much wrong.
Only two times I noticed _strong_ story-changes (when Aragorn nearly died after a warg-attack and when Faramir let Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath) that disturbed me, but most time the Movie was very close to the book. And yes, the scene with Theodens Healing just didn't fit. Not only was it completely different from the book, but it also remind me somewho of "The Exorcist"...
<b>The Acting:</b>
Agree with Nemesis, all are great, but they shouldn't have comicized (?) Gimli so much. Again, Gollum is unbelieveable believeable!
Just watch it, as long as you don't exspect a 1:1 adaption of the book, you shouldn't be disappointed.
It is just this : A GREAT MOVIE. Perhaps not THE GREATEST MOVIE, but still top notch.
I actually liked how they made Gimli funny, it was exctally how I would have pictured him. I was very glad they did more with his and Legolas' characters this time. But I do wish that they had played up them not getting along in the first one a bit more, so that when they are watching each other's backs and being such good friends that the casual viewer would understand how big of a deal that is for an elf and dwarf to be friends. =)
Firstly, keep in mind that I *have not* read any of the books. Nor do I intend to. Yeah I know, I'm not blah blah blah, but meh, I don't really get a kick out of reading in my spare time anyway, I'm just not one to enjoy that.
I definately did not think as highly of this movie as I did the first one. While the giant battle scenes were great, the rest of the movie was kinda... bleh. I just couldn't get into it I guess. I guess a lot of it just seemed too.. I dunno, I can't put my finger on it.
Like the part where the human sword guy, the elf archer, and the dwarf (see how I'm not a 'true' fan and don't even know their names?) meet Gandalf in the forest, and Gandalf seems to not remember who he was.. That had me thinking "oh great, this is just gonna be The Search for Spock all over again.. yup, even w/ the white robes".
That and the whole severence of the human forces w/ jumping back and forth between the sick king and his outcated.. erm.. nephew was it? Yeah, that part didn't make a whole lot of sense initially. It should have been explained a bit better. Also a part that had me a bit confused was the seeming love triangle of sorts between the Sword Guy, Blonde Chick (who can fight but didn't get to), and Hot Elf Chick. All I know is man, I'd like to be him. heh.
I also didn't like Golem/Smiegal one bit. I just can't stand CG characters. Would much rather have had a muppet or a guy in a lot of makeup (I love how the orcs look). Also didn't like the 15 minute or so 'recap' that they had at the very beginning of the movie, trying to make it so that if you missed the first one completely that it would make at least a little sense...
Maybe its cause I'm a game dork and not a book dork, but for me the most satisfying parts of the movie were seeing where Blizzard was inspired (okay, stole) the idea for the creatures in their games. I mean, I knew beforehand that Tolken was responsible for Humans, Orcs, Elves, and the like, but I had no idea that it extended all the way down to Peons, Wryms, Wolf Riders, and even the Treants. The Ents was one of my favorite parts of the movie too, I just loved the final scene where they were pw33ning the orc base. I kept expecting to hear "Our town is under attack!" and then seeing a Priestess of the Moon come out and cast starfall on the tower. ^_^
Speaking of the tower, so is the bad white wizard guy (again, I don't know their names) supposed to be defeated now? or did the Ents just leave him (and his tower) alone and only wipe out all the orcs?
But I think I can understand you, DooManiac. Some parts seems a bit weird without knowledge of the books. The part about Gandalfs "rebirth" I too only understand after reading the book a second time...
I think the triangle between Aragorn (the sword-guy), Eowyn (the blonde chick) and Arwen (Elf chick) was meant to be very mystic/unsure (?).
What's wrong with Gollum? One part I liked about him was the fact that during the movie I NEVER thought : WoW! Great CG!
But in the end it's all a matter of taste. I'm sure you don't need to be a book-dork to like this movie, but a knowledge of the books will help you.
<!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
sometimes my stupidity surprises even myself....
I had hoped to hear Sam sing his song about the Oliphant.. so sad he didnt <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
And did Aragorn acctaully fall out of a cliff and dissappear for a while? I dont remember that from reading the book.. I liked the Hobbit more than LOTR, i've read The Hobbit twice, and it gets just better and better <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> If you intend to read LOTR you should read The Hobbit first..
I have LOTR once in Norwegian and now reading in English.. and i must say, the english version seems much better than the Norwegian, so to everyone that have read the book in non-english: Read it in english <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Edit: another thing, did u guys get dizzy right in the start when they are filming the mountains in high speed? and at the end where they film up over the mountains of mordor, i almost puked <!--emo&:0--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='wow.gif'><!--endemo--> heh
I knew they were going to make Aragorn and Arwen's romance huge, that made me angry, but I can live with it.
Gandalf "Healing" Theoden. Sounds overplayed and unnecessary, but ok, I can live with it... he did *kind of* heal him in the books, what with talking him out of listening to Grima and all that... but yeah, what you're describing sounds infinitely lame.
Elves at Helm's Deep... *sigh* why do they do these things? Unnecessary, screws with a beautiful scene (which also happens to be my favorite chapter from the entire trilogy), and makes me wonder what people were thinking.
However, this fourth change that Nemesis Zero mentioned... gawd. I don't know if I can live with that.
Frodo goes to... Gondor? WTF?!?!
Seriously, I see NO way of finishing the second book/starting the third properly if Frodo ends up at freakin' Gondor somehow. I will personally mail Peter Jackson anthrax if the vision I have in my mind turns out to be true.
<!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
sometimes my stupidity surprises even myself....<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh come one! It's based of a friggen book, and DOOM is just about the only person who has never read it. Saying this thread spoiled the movie is like saying you heard someone say Darth Vader was Luke's father yesterday and it spoiled Star Wars.
jeez, next you'll be tellin me Luke was kissing his sister the whole time...
also, I have another question for you bookworms: How the hell did Frodo know Golem's real name?
Frodo heard the story of Smeagol/Gollum from Gandalf at the very beginning of The Fellowship. It wasn't in the movie, but that's how he knew.
(also, I haven't read the books recently enough, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, anyone)
This one may be off-- Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but he doesn't go <i>to</i> Gondor . . . they're on their way, and then he ends up being released while they're in <i>another</i> human city that's under seige.
I think. I haven't read the books in ages, so they're extremely fuzzy, and get a bit confused while watching some of the added bits in the movies.
As far as Gimli being cast as the comic relief, I think (from what I remember) that it <i>is</i> in line with his character from the books (bad with horses, very competetive with Legolas), and plus, I think they handled it well-- sure, they make the short jokes every now and then, but he still kicks a lot of (behind).
I thought the movie was great-- in fact, after just seeing it, I'd have no problem watching the it and the first in one sitting right now.
st*u, n00b!
Er . . . Uh . . . yeah . . .
I mean, I stand corrected <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
I knew there wasn't a prayer that I was right there, but I gave it my best!
It WAS in the movie. Gandalf tells Frodo in Moria. At least in the Extended Cut DVD version I just saw.
Concerning all the changes, I'm afraid they are quite necessary. Animated pictures are very different from a book as a storytelling medium, and Jackson has done a marvelous adaptation. Of course it can never reach the depth of a book.
And anyway, I think good old Master Tolkien would be worried more about the correct pronunciation of the languages than changes of the plot <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->. Some actors always sound like breaking their tongues when saying "Morrrdorrr".
And when he gets on the horse with 1 hand on horse's neck ( when those bull things are attacking ).
heh heh
I saw the movie for the second time today. The audience gasped at that part. It was cool.
Personally, I haven't read the books since a bit before FotR came out in theatres, but when Faramir announced that he'd be taking Frodo to Gondor I was like "wtf?"
I don't think it turned-out horribly though. It allowed for a quite good dramatic scene that wrapped-up all the subplots at once (something that just IS NOT easy on film).
I can't help but thinking of Planet of the Apes when the Uruk-Hai are marching though. =\
<b>Visuals</b>
Outstanding, as always. But they shouldve made more camera movement when the battle rages on at Helm' Deep. At the beginning, i dont know for you guys, but the mountain looks like computer made to me...
<b>Story</b>
Too much things added, too much un-necessary parts, etc. wtf is with aragorn falling ? wtf is with Frodo going to gondor ? AND WTF IS WITH REMOVING THE SPIDER PART <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--><!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--> Were they tired of spideyman+harrypotter spider sequence or whta ? It wouldve been the Spider-Year ! whatver. removing the spider adds intrigue to the story,still, so maybe its ok.
Overall, everything is good exept one thing= time. you have to wait <b>2 hours</b>to get to the good parts (ents+helms finnaly). The Rohan development part couldve been cut out at many places (remove that unnecessry doggish+orcs battle gainst horses, doesnt get the story anywhere), and the part where Frodo gets to gondor.. Ok the nazgul at the end is good but hell, its not even in the book! Even the Helms deep battle couldve been shortened (say when the elf guy dies and when aragorn gets with gimly to the bridge). After all that, gettin the movie thirty minutes down BEFORE the end parts wouldve been great (cuz you DONT want to wait 2 hours to get good stuff).
Hope thats good !
I understand that some scenes need/had to be changed for the film but there was too many unnecessary parts.
Im not sure of the proper reason of the delay of Shelob, it isnt to keep the stories all at the same time otherwise Gandalf & Pippin would have set of to Minas Tirith. Most likely time constraints, which doesnt help ROTK much....
It seemed to have alot more humour in it, a good thing? Did Gimli say anything non-funny?
Whats he gonna do about (because of his detour to Osgiliath) one of the Nazgul knowing about the location of the ring? The Nazgul *WILL* tell Sauron, what happened to the secrecy?
Got more, but you ppl dont wanna hear that
Aggh I might have spelt some names wrong, sorry if I have.
Hey, I DID like the movie though and it was a fun watch.
i also felt that they shouldnt of wasted so much time at the beginning of the film showing footage from the last film. (although i like the way it showed a different camera angle of when gandalf falls <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->)
the scenes where merry and pippin were on the ent was a bit...i dont know...i think it was sorta obvious there was a blue screen behind them...
the rest of the film was awesome! i loved the bit where gandalf leads the riders of rohan at the enemy at sunrise, and the sun comes up just in time and blinds the Uruk-hai!
that bit where legolas was skateboarding down the stairs on his shield was funny <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<span style='color:blue'>Let's don't spoil that en detail, OK? <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--></span>
17
How about you?
2
Legolas: 19 now!
The dwarf couldnt even see. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Exactly. This was a big problem with me. I mean, we have gigantic tree people leveling cities and wraiths flying on dragons over bogs with dead people, so why does it look so not right?
I don't think from Mordor, NZ... regardless of origin though, the orcs clearly lost the trail of the party after they got into Lorien. That's an excellent, excellent point that was brought up about the Nazgul, though. Now Sauron knows EXACTLY where the hobbits are (or just were, anyway)... man, that screws with the story hardcore.
and @ Ninjaburger: The removal of Shelob was also in there because if they'd ended the movie exactly as the book ends, the hobbits would be way ahead of the humans timewise. We'd be jumping back and forth in time to hear both parts of the story, which makes for kind of a crappy way of telling the story...
and @ twex: Cutting may be necessary, but changing the plot is is NO WAY necessary to make a movie adaptation.
The overplayed romance between Arwen and Aragorn: It's not in the books. It shouldn't be in the movie. It is, and people hate it. I think it's the cheesiest load of crap in the whole thing... when I need a bathroom break, that's the part I take it at.
Frodo going to Osgiliath: it's already been brought up in this very thread that that's going to muck with the plot even further now, because a Nazgul saw the ring and Frodo carrying it... gah. Not necessary, and CERTAINLY not helpful to the story. That change carried more than just a plot abnormailty, though... the character of Faramir was BUTCHERED. They made him a clone of Boromir, which is total BS. Faramir was actually a very noble human, who "had the air of a wizard about him" according to the books, and I was disappointed to see him turned into a cheap ripoff of his brother.
On the character-changing note... the reason everyone likes Legolas so much? His character hasn't been mucked with. Same goes for Gandalf.
The changes made to certain characters' personalities (Aragorn, for example) just make the movie that much less enjoyable... Aragorn, in the books, is just so damned HEROIC... he's got an air of heroism about him, he never thinks twice about what he's doing, and he's always determined... then, in the movies, they've made him have all these reservations about what he's doing, he seems insecure, and it just yanks the heroism that makes his character so enjoyable right out of him... *sigh*.
Elrond... why, oh why did they have to make elrond a 'concerned father figure'?
Oh well, I could whine all day about the alterations they made... I suppose when the movie is over, I'll still have the books, which I'll enjoy much more... as I say so many times when addressing the changes made in the movies, "Why mess with perfection?"
I don't think from Mordor, NZ... regardless of origin though, the orcs clearly lost the trail of the party after they got into Lorien. That's an excellent, excellent point that was brought up about the Nazgul, though. Now Sauron knows EXACTLY where the hobbits are (or just were, anyway)... man, that screws with the story hardcore.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll give you the origin about the Moria orcs (although we could discuss whether Saurons power isn't strong enough to keep at least links to all orc bands), but the more I think about it, the less I believe that the Osgiliath scene - as useless as it may be - actually screws with the story.
What do we know does the dark lord know? First, he knows that the hobbit Frodo Baggins has the ring - Gollum told him. Second, the Wraiths know Frodo and his fellow hobbits from the encounter on the Weathertop. He also knows that a group of fighters around Frodo and Gandalf have set out from Rivendell - the orc ambush by the Uruk-Hai (although one might argue that Saruman could want to keep this secret from Sauron), or Moria (if you want to follow my argumentation about their origin) are the two proves in the movie, we both know there are numerous more in the books.
So, the question isn't <i>whether</i> the ring is being transported, but <i>where</i> it is brought to.
The scene in question plays in Osgiliath, Gondor. Numerous snippets in the books, as well as the scene with Pippin and the Palantir in The Return of the King, suggest that Sauron believes it's brought to Gondor to be used as weapon against him - which can be considered to be the main motivation for the siege on Minas Tirith.
In that respect, the secrecy isn't broken, because all the Wraith may report is that he saw a hobbit (and clearly they can't distinguish between them, as the aforementioned scene with Pippin proves) with the ring in Gondor.
The possibility of a 'detour' to Mordor would appear remote, Frodos future way thus remains undiscovered.