I endured the cut out scenes, the added in scenes but I thought the Arwen scenes weren't necesary... They werent in part 2 of the book right? (I have read part 3 yet <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) Overall it was a good movie, I find Jackson did what could be done to convert 400 pages into 3 hrs of movie.
But the thing I most hated was: That I-haven't-read-the-book-but-I-still-know-everthing retard sitting next to me, telling he's girlfriend all he knew and where he didn't knew he made stuff up. He was all like: "Ow, look, now comes Gollum..." "See that's Gollum..." "Now they're gonna..." "They did that because..." etc, etc... After an hour I got tired of his nagging and firmly told him to shut the f-word up because he was ruining it for me... He was quit for 10 minutes then started fiddeling with his cellular and after about half an hour he was showing off his LoTR-lore to his girlfriend again... Some ppl are A-HOLES <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Ryo-Ohki+Feb 19 2003, 10:13 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Feb 19 2003, 10:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If you want to complain about how the movie didn't follow the book, consider this. If the film DID follow the book it would have a lot of boring stuff. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Good God. I can't believe how many people say things like this. Do you honestly think that people who didn't like TT wanted it to follow the books <b>exactly</b>? Must it be that black and white? No. But the books told a damn good story, and people who have read them expected the movie to tell a damn good story, with the same awesome characters and themes.
Okay now, gather round, because I'll say this once - whenever I say somewhere that I didn't like TT because it strayed too far from the book, I add this piece of information, and people don't seem to pick up on it. I'll put it in its own paragraph and bold it.
<b>I liked FotR. I did not like TT nearly as much.</b>
FotR did not follow the book exactly, but it made a good effort, and that's what counted. TT made no such effort.
I will now bring up specific examples of changes that were made to the book's storyline that in no way helped the movie's story, and in my opinion in fact hurt it.
- Faramir being a buttmonkey initially and dragging the hobbits to Osgiliath. No. No. No. It made Faramir a much less noble-looking character; having him make the wrong choice in the beginning did not make the right choice look any nobler. The scene with the Nazgul was just lame - one arrow knocks it down? All this did was spoil one of my favorite characters, and add an unnecessary fifteen minutes to the film. (So much for "but he had to keep it short, the book is too long.")
- Aragorn falling off the cliff and drift down the river. For one thing, this scene was stupid. Just stupid. If it had been in the book, I would have said to cut it out. It's that stupid. But PJ felt compelled to add it in so he'd have a way to lead into his Arwen dream sequence - God forbid he do it in a flashback or while Aragorn was sleeping normally. He was probably trying to draw some sort of visual connection that nobody in the audience got anyway (a parallel with Gandalf falling into the pit with the Balrog?). It was dumb. Again, another fifteen minutes of extra film that could have been better spent.
- Having the elves come help at Helm's Deep. Some might think this made the fight cooler. I thought it was cheesy and lame. The thing that made Helm's Deep epic in the book (and it was indeed an important event, not a "minor episode" like that hack at Newsweek wrote) was the fact that this ragtag group of humans held out against impossible odds, and they did it without the elves coming to save the day this time (as they did at the end of the Second Age), thus starting to prove that they were fit to inherit the world in the Fourth Age. Haldir's death scene was as cheesy and lame as anything I have ever seen on film. And the final charge of the Rohirrim was just really dumb - less than a hundred guys with horses slaughter 10,000 orcs all by themselves? Um, no. (SPOILER AHEAD) The idea was that they couldn't really have killed all those orcs by themselves, but they were so determined to die trying that their approach, combined with Gandalf's sudden appearance, drove the orcs mad with fear and they fled to be trampled by the Huorns (who in the movie were nowhere near Helm's Deep that I could see). All of that could have been fixed easily and cut time from the movie - cut down on the dialogue where Theoden is being annoying (that's another sore point with me, Theoden's character got nerfed along with Faramir's), cut down on everything involving the Galadrim, add about fifteen seconds that shows the Huorns. Oh well. At least Legolas and Gimli kept count properly.
Okay, that's enough to give you a taste. I also posted <a href='http://forums.keenspot.com/viewtopic.php?t=48433&start=0#840758' target='_blank'>this link</a> earlier, which goes to a much longer rant on the subject I posted shortly after seeing the movie.
I am indeed looking forward to the extended version in the hopes they'll at least repair some of the damage, but most of the major crimes, in my opinion, were committed by adding new crap rather than leaving things out, so I don't think the extended edition will help me there. <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
i must be honest...i read the FOTR in hope that i could read it before i saw the film...(i got halfway through..dam council of elrond bored my brains out...) the second half of the film was completely new to me..and so when i saw gandalf fall...(a truly great character) along with " May it Be" i almost cried...ok..i did cry... <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
i managed to finish the FOTR a few months later <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
the changes of the film from the book were minor annoyances such as "where was tom bombadil?" ...and "why didnt Gandalf create that puff of smoke that makes Bilbos 'disappearance' at the party cooler?" ..and why the hell did Boromir stop Frodo from saving Gandalf? (according to PJ, the bridge was too dangerous to cross after Gandalf cracked and broke it...and it was too much of a risk to help Gandalf)
but i soon got over it, and the second time and onwards i saw FOTR i saw it in a new light..and i Lurrve it.. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> (i love the Extended DVD more though)
hopefully i will feel the same way with TTT...bring on that extended DVD...pleeease...
Do you want to know what the worse thing about the LOTR films is?
They are too friggin SHORT!...3 hours just ISNT enough...**** the idiots who have never read the book...let the FANS enjoy it too!
I suppose it's a good thing I don't really remember much from the books. Two Towers is an incredible movie, and I've seen it so many times I've lost count. Okay, so the scenes with Arwen are a complete bore, and maybe some plot elements could have been handled a little better, but this movie is still one of the best I've ever seen.
Hell, I'd probably say I like it more than FotR if you asked me.
<!--QuoteBegin--Greedo386+Feb 19 2003, 03:29 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Greedo386 @ Feb 19 2003, 03:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I suppose it's a good thing I don't really remember much from the books. Two Towers is an incredible movie, and I've seen it so many times I've lost count. Okay, so the scenes with Arwen are a complete bore, and maybe some plot elements could have been handled a little better, but this movie is still one of the best I've ever seen.
Hell, I'd probably say I like it more than FotR if you asked me. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> AMEN
<!--QuoteBegin--Greedo386+Feb 19 2003, 03:29 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Greedo386 @ Feb 19 2003, 03:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I suppose it's a good thing I don't really remember much from the books. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Yup. If you re-read the book, you'd probably realize that Two Towers could have been about twice as good as it was. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
I hate it not because it was a terrible movie, because it wasn't, if you look at it on its own; it was actually a reasonably good fantasy film. I hate it because it could have easily been my favorite movie of all time, and fell far short of that mark.
The Two Towers stands on it's own. When you consider the fact that Peter Jackson had to design a movie that would not be knee-deep in Tolkien lore and would be enjoyable by all.
Ok, some people say the Arwen scenes are horrible. Have you ever watched Liv Taylor? She's really hot, and so I can endure the fake love story because of that 1 fact.
I thought the battle for Helms Deep was really well done considering the breadth of what they were taking on.
Also, if you listen in the movie, the Roherrim that arrive are said to number about 2000, not 200.
<!--QuoteBegin--SmokeNova+Feb 19 2003, 07:59 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SmokeNova @ Feb 19 2003, 07:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Also, if you listen in the movie, the Roherrim that arrive are said to number about 2000, not 200. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Hm. Perhaps I assumed that since earlier they had said there were 200 (which they did), and showed a number of them that looked to be about 200, there would be 200 later. Did they multiply while they were away? I thought they were all men...
If the Two Towers is meant to stand entirely on its own, it should not be named "The Two Towers," since that's already the title of an excellent book by J. R. R. Tolkien, which has some characters that have the same names as some of the ones in the movies. People might get confused and think the two are related in some way.
Yes I read the book and watched the movie the statement that he massacred the story is an over statement by far try some movies that was messed up worse the TTT
Try IT you know the story about the clown killing people by Steven King that was a massacre of the story only about 1/3 of the story was probably represented it made no sense to the book it was like the whole story was shuffled up. I mean at the end it did not stop simply stop at the fight of the spider. It went on to a mental combat for IT was not a frigen spider was what the whole damn city built on IT when they destroyed IT the whole city started collapsing and floods etc (all most total destruction of the city)
Ok another example Queen of the dammed the “second installment of the interview with the vampire” Try third book, the character Lestat was like Louie (who was left out of the movie) and Marius portrayed to be like Lestat and no Marius was not Lestat's creator. This blood dripping from the mouth was not in the book it was a big fuss for vampire not to even let a hint of blood be spilt or shown at all. The ending was most possibly changed to give it a lower age rating It was ok over all but if you read the whole vampire chronicles like me the movie was a croak of ****.
So to bring this back to TTT it’s not that bad he could of done worse but he could of done better as well But it is better then the cartoon adaptation of lotr
It brings tears to my eyes to see other people with my opinion of TTT, which is very much like Sycophant's and his friend's. I'm an avid Tolkien fanboy and TTT just doesn't cut it...
the film has the same problem with the book...its harder to follow.... in the FOTRm, all the fellowship were together...so it was easier and more enjoyable to follow.. In TTT, everyone is split up, and the story feels like it is dragging on for a long time... in this respect, the film follows the book very well..it can become very tiresome at stages...but that is how Tolkien wrote it...some characters had shorter appearances than others..and that is the same with the film... Peter Jackson has done a pretty decent job with this aspect, although some scenes could of been better spent....lets face it...Peter Jackson only has 3 hours to tell a story that can take months to finish..he is going to **** up in places...and the extra scenes with Arwen, if incredibly tiresome to watch, is only there for character development between Aragorn..The reason they are implemented is that Aragorn is reminded by the evening star (the necklace Arwen gives him) of their shared love for each other, and he is reminded of this every time he sees Eowen...and he is reminded that he and arwen share a love bond that should not be parted from...even if Eowen is being a big flirt... <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> although that sounds very cheesy...its true...and annoying...well there you have it...now i want to know why the hell they sent Aragorn off the edge off that cliff.....
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->now i want to know why the hell they sent Aragorn off the edge off that cliff..... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Simple - <b>dramatic tension</b>. It's on the "must-have" checklist for pretty much any Hollywood movie, so PJ tinkered with the story so it'd be there. Completely unnecessary, of course, and it also leads into another Arwen scene (also unnecessary).
It also lets the audience feel sympathy for Eowyn when Aragorn doesn't show up with the rest of the merry wandering troupe from Edoras. Yep, a love triangle (of sorts) which is also on the "must-have" checklist.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Having the elves come help at Helm's Deep. Some might think this made the fight cooler. I thought it was cheesy and lame. The thing that made Helm's Deep epic in the book (and it was indeed an important event, not a "minor episode" like that hack at Newsweek wrote) was the fact that this ragtag group of humans held out against impossible odds, and they did it without the elves coming to save the day this time<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh god I was waiting for this. Get a **** clue, Tolkein in the books gave the Uruk-hai the fighting power of wet noodles. The guy was not military minded, if you wanted the Helm's Deep battle to have a shread of believeability in the movie you needed some kind of edge for the humans. What's so **** wrong about the elves showing up anyway? "Oh no, they broke with the storyline" Whatever shall we do! It made perfect sence to me that a small contingent of elves showed up to honour old alliences, and I KNOW it wasn't in the book but like I said Tolkien gives the forces of Sauruman no credit whatsoever. Read the battle scene from TTT and you'll see what I mean.
Ents were bad The nazguls "bird" was bad Faramir was bad Boring and stupid scenes, the "sad" scenes were almost humorous Some of the Helms Deep fighting scenes
It wasn't particularly good movie, now im just waiting for the spidey part <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
At Last, someone who agree's this movie was good considering all that Peter Jackson had to do.
and for all you people complaining that he butchered the story, remember that he let the Uber-Uber-Uber fanboys on the set and let them critique the script and help him set it up. If you were in New Zealand you could've just talked to Pete.
And I believe Flayra said it best once: Let us see you create something so I can poo-poo all over it.
If you think you know how to do better, then I'd like to see you make a movie.
Like mentioned earlier, I can't really pinpoint what about TTT left the bad aftertaste in my mouth. In the books at least, the hobbits were shown to be resilient little things, they stood up fo their own, it wasn't this big show of "lets have the human, dwarf, and elf carry the poor defenseless little hobbit creatures all the way through!". So that's one of my complaints...
Also, as someone pointed out earlier, one of the truly great things about the battle of helm's deep in the book was that it was won by humans and ONLY humans, showing that the nobility and strength of the race might not be as fleeting as some would think it to be. Then again, to actually leave this untouched, and then expect the general populace to pick up on this fact, might be difficult to swallow, but it can be done.
Truthfully, Fellowship was better in my opinion because I actually felt myself caring more about the individual characters presented, they were fleshed out. In TTT, you don't really care about Theoden, his dead son, Eowyn, Eomer, none of them. Least of all Faramir. Faramir was practically a bastion of goodness and integrity in the book, one of the best characters in the whole story. In the movie, he's just another weak-willed human. :sigh: A lot of people on this thread are missing the point, its not "oh well they changed it from the book and its still good", its more along the lines of *why* would you change it, when certain aspects of the changes that were made are so detrimental to the whole storyline.
<!--QuoteBegin--xioutlawix+Feb 20 2003, 01:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (xioutlawix @ Feb 20 2003, 01:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> A lot of people on this thread are missing the point, its not "oh well they changed it from the book and its still good", its more along the lines of *why* would you change it, when certain aspects of the changes that were made are so detrimental to the whole storyline. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> YES! You have hit ze nail on ze head. Making necessary changes doesn't bother me. Making <b>unnecessary</b> and detrimental changes does.
i like it...funny..after seeing all the points *most* of you are complaining about, i have come to the conclusion that..i dont care anymore..these points do not matter to me anymore..i now like the film more than i did before..i thank you for this..i hope you will soon feel the same way... after reading my last post, i realised that i knew all along why the arwen scenes were in there...and i now knew why i disliked them..there wasnt enough time for it...with the extra half an hour of footage on the extended dvd..this will be amended..along with other things..
The *BEST* part of the movie was the charge of the Rohan people (led with Gandalf) as the sunrise appears...Brilliantly done...
<!--QuoteBegin--supernorn2000+Feb 20 2003, 01:56 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (supernorn2000 @ Feb 20 2003, 01:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The *BEST* part of the movie was the charge of the Rohan people (led with Gandalf) as the sunrise appears...Brilliantly done... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I thought it looked really good too, but it seemed like it ended too early - didn't it just fade out about five seconds after it started, implying that all the orcs were massacred? I wanted to see the part where the orcs all scream and flee into the mysterious dark wood (which was conspicuously absent).
<!--QuoteBegin--Ryo-Ohki+Feb 20 2003, 10:00 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Feb 20 2003, 10:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What's so **** wrong about the elves showing up anyway? "Oh no, they broke with the storyline" Whatever shall we do! It made perfect sence to me that a small contingent of elves showed up to honour old alliences, and I KNOW it wasn't in the book <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> What's funny is that there's a line in the book (it might have actually shown up in the movie too, but then got inverted in significance like Faramir's "here's a chance to show my quality") where Legolas says "what I wouldn't give for a hundred archers of my people". But the point is that they don't have that, because this is really the humans' fight for the most part; Legolas and Gimli are there to honor old alliances in a certain sense (largely symbolic, since they act as common soldiers rather than leaders, and 83 or so orcs is really just a drop in the bucket), but a full contingent of elves and dwarves <b>isn't</b> going to show up, and Tolkien calls attention to that because it's important.
Regarding the Uruk-hai being not as good fighters - what do you expect, they're less than a month old, right? <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> They might be pretty strong, but that doesn't make them experienced warriors, especially since the sum total of their experience in combat is pillaging helpless villages in Rohan.
<!--QuoteBegin--[p4]Samwise+Feb 20 2003, 07:12 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> ([p4]Samwise @ Feb 20 2003, 07:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--supernorn2000+Feb 20 2003, 01:56 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (supernorn2000 @ Feb 20 2003, 01:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The *BEST* part of the movie was the charge of the Rohan people (led with Gandalf) as the sunrise appears...Brilliantly done... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I thought it looked really good too, but it seemed like it ended too early - didn't it just fade out about five seconds after it started, implying that all the orcs were massacred? I wanted to see the part where the orcs all scream and flee into the mysterious dark wood (which was conspicuously absent). <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the orcs and Uruk-Hai do run in the film, when they see the first two lines of their team-mates massacred by Gandalf and his Rohan buddies, they all peg it...but they dont show that they go into the dark wood <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
(maybe the Extended dvd version will include this?)
Coolest part of the movie: Right at the beginning, as Gandalf is falling towards the Balrog, where the camera comes in on Glamdring and you can <i>hear</i> the blade cutting through the air.
Silliest part of the movie: Peter Jackson, with all due respect, if you're going to make a big deal out of the magical abilities of Galadriel's gifts in the second film (like, say, the rope, and the elvish cloaks), then you <i>might</i> want to introduce them in the <i>screen version</i> of the first. Or, at least a forced description of their powers in the second. Like:
"Hey Frodo, these cloaks are really nice looking." "Well Sam, not only that, but . . . "
I mean, how many people who <i>hadn't</i> read the books were left scratching their heads in the scene where Gollum is crying about the rope, or Frodo and Sam hide from the enemy alongside the hill?
<!--QuoteBegin--BathroomMonkey+Feb 20 2003, 08:18 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BathroomMonkey @ Feb 20 2003, 08:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I mean, how many people who <i>hadn't</i> read the books were left scratching their heads in the scene where Gollum is crying about the rope <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> yeah...the rope part wasnt done well in the film..there wasnt a good enough explanation..maybe Gollum could of said "nasty Elvish Rope! it burnsd sss!"
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->or Frodo and Sam hide from the enemy alongside the hill?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
One good thing about the movies (particularly in the first one) is that even though certain things aren't fleshed out quite as much, there's still the occassional nod to Tolkien lore that readers of the books will crack a smile, or even a grin about.
For example, at the end of fellowship, when Frodo puts on the ring to get away from Boromir and ends up on that large stone pedastal, and then suddenly sees his entire view fly to the east torwards mordor, I forget the name exactly, but didn't that used to be the site of an old kingdom, where the seat he sat upon was used to see all of middle earth?
Sheesh, I have to read the books again, its been way too long.
and for all the nay-sayers still, remember that Peter Jackson had the massive job of taking a book with a hardcore dedicated following and managing to successfully convert it into a full-blown movie that doesn't appeal to 1% of the U.S. population. He made it appeal to a lot of people. Granted he did mess up some things but you didn't have to read the books to flush out the story, unlike some movies.
Comments
I endured the cut out scenes, the added in scenes but I thought the Arwen scenes weren't necesary... They werent in part 2 of the book right? (I have read part 3 yet <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> )
Overall it was a good movie, I find Jackson did what could be done to convert 400 pages into 3 hrs of movie.
But the thing I most hated was: That I-haven't-read-the-book-but-I-still-know-everthing retard sitting next to me, telling he's girlfriend all he knew and where he didn't knew he made stuff up.
He was all like: "Ow, look, now comes Gollum..." "See that's Gollum..." "Now they're gonna..." "They did that because..." etc, etc...
After an hour I got tired of his nagging and firmly told him to shut the f-word up because he was ruining it for me...
He was quit for 10 minutes then started fiddeling with his cellular and after about half an hour he was showing off his LoTR-lore to his girlfriend again...
Some ppl are A-HOLES <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif'><!--endemo-->
Good God. I can't believe how many people say things like this. Do you honestly think that people who didn't like TT wanted it to follow the books <b>exactly</b>? Must it be that black and white? No. But the books told a damn good story, and people who have read them expected the movie to tell a damn good story, with the same awesome characters and themes.
Okay now, gather round, because I'll say this once - whenever I say somewhere that I didn't like TT because it strayed too far from the book, I add this piece of information, and people don't seem to pick up on it. I'll put it in its own paragraph and bold it.
<b>I liked FotR. I did not like TT nearly as much.</b>
FotR did not follow the book exactly, but it made a good effort, and that's what counted. TT made no such effort.
I will now bring up specific examples of changes that were made to the book's storyline that in no way helped the movie's story, and in my opinion in fact hurt it.
- Faramir being a buttmonkey initially and dragging the hobbits to Osgiliath. No. No. No. It made Faramir a much less noble-looking character; having him make the wrong choice in the beginning did not make the right choice look any nobler. The scene with the Nazgul was just lame - one arrow knocks it down? All this did was spoil one of my favorite characters, and add an unnecessary fifteen minutes to the film. (So much for "but he had to keep it short, the book is too long.")
- Aragorn falling off the cliff and drift down the river. For one thing, this scene was stupid. Just stupid. If it had been in the book, I would have said to cut it out. It's that stupid. But PJ felt compelled to add it in so he'd have a way to lead into his Arwen dream sequence - God forbid he do it in a flashback or while Aragorn was sleeping normally. He was probably trying to draw some sort of visual connection that nobody in the audience got anyway (a parallel with Gandalf falling into the pit with the Balrog?). It was dumb. Again, another fifteen minutes of extra film that could have been better spent.
- Having the elves come help at Helm's Deep. Some might think this made the fight cooler. I thought it was cheesy and lame. The thing that made Helm's Deep epic in the book (and it was indeed an important event, not a "minor episode" like that hack at Newsweek wrote) was the fact that this ragtag group of humans held out against impossible odds, and they did it without the elves coming to save the day this time (as they did at the end of the Second Age), thus starting to prove that they were fit to inherit the world in the Fourth Age. Haldir's death scene was as cheesy and lame as anything I have ever seen on film. And the final charge of the Rohirrim was just really dumb - less than a hundred guys with horses slaughter 10,000 orcs all by themselves? Um, no. (SPOILER AHEAD) The idea was that they couldn't really have killed all those orcs by themselves, but they were so determined to die trying that their approach, combined with Gandalf's sudden appearance, drove the orcs mad with fear and they fled to be trampled by the Huorns (who in the movie were nowhere near Helm's Deep that I could see). All of that could have been fixed easily and cut time from the movie - cut down on the dialogue where Theoden is being annoying (that's another sore point with me, Theoden's character got nerfed along with Faramir's), cut down on everything involving the Galadrim, add about fifteen seconds that shows the Huorns. Oh well. At least Legolas and Gimli kept count properly.
Okay, that's enough to give you a taste. I also posted <a href='http://forums.keenspot.com/viewtopic.php?t=48433&start=0#840758' target='_blank'>this link</a> earlier, which goes to a much longer rant on the subject I posted shortly after seeing the movie.
I am indeed looking forward to the extended version in the hopes they'll at least repair some of the damage, but most of the major crimes, in my opinion, were committed by adding new crap rather than leaving things out, so I don't think the extended edition will help me there. <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
i almost cried...ok..i did cry... <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
i managed to finish the FOTR a few months later <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
the changes of the film from the book were minor annoyances such as "where was tom bombadil?" ...and "why didnt Gandalf create that puff of smoke that makes Bilbos 'disappearance' at the party cooler?" ..and why the hell did Boromir stop Frodo from saving Gandalf? (according to PJ, the bridge was too dangerous to cross after Gandalf cracked and broke it...and it was too much of a risk to help Gandalf)
but i soon got over it, and the second time and onwards i saw FOTR i saw it in a new light..and i Lurrve it.. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> (i love the Extended DVD more though)
hopefully i will feel the same way with TTT...bring on that extended DVD...pleeease...
Do you want to know what the worse thing about the LOTR films is?
They are too friggin SHORT!...3 hours just ISNT enough...**** the idiots who have never read the book...let the FANS enjoy it too!
Hell, I'd probably say I like it more than FotR if you asked me.
Hell, I'd probably say I like it more than FotR if you asked me. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
AMEN
Yup. If you re-read the book, you'd probably realize that Two Towers could have been about twice as good as it was. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
I hate it not because it was a terrible movie, because it wasn't, if you look at it on its own; it was actually a reasonably good fantasy film. I hate it because it could have easily been my favorite movie of all time, and fell far short of that mark.
Ok, some people say the Arwen scenes are horrible. Have you ever watched Liv Taylor? She's really hot, and so I can endure the fake love story because of that 1 fact.
I thought the battle for Helms Deep was really well done considering the breadth of what they were taking on.
Also, if you listen in the movie, the Roherrim that arrive are said to number about 2000, not 200.
Hm. Perhaps I assumed that since earlier they had said there were 200 (which they did), and showed a number of them that looked to be about 200, there would be 200 later. Did they multiply while they were away? I thought they were all men...
If the Two Towers is meant to stand entirely on its own, it should not be named "The Two Towers," since that's already the title of an excellent book by J. R. R. Tolkien, which has some characters that have the same names as some of the ones in the movies. People might get confused and think the two are related in some way.
[/complete obtuseness]
Try IT you know the story about the clown killing people by Steven King that was a massacre of the story only about 1/3 of the story was probably represented it made no sense to the book it was like the whole story was shuffled up. I mean at the end it did not stop simply stop at the fight of the spider. It went on to a mental combat for IT was not a frigen spider was what the whole damn city built on IT when they destroyed IT the whole city started collapsing and floods etc (all most total destruction of the city)
Ok another example Queen of the dammed the “second installment of the interview with the vampire”
Try third book, the character Lestat was like Louie (who was left out of the movie) and Marius portrayed to be like Lestat and no Marius was not Lestat's creator. This blood dripping from the mouth was not in the book it was a big fuss for vampire not to even let a hint of blood be spilt or shown at all. The ending was most possibly changed to give it a lower age rating
It was ok over all but if you read the whole vampire chronicles like me the movie was a croak of ****.
So to bring this back to TTT it’s not that bad he could of done worse but he could of done better as well
But it is better then the cartoon adaptation of lotr
in the FOTRm, all the fellowship were together...so it was easier and more enjoyable to follow..
In TTT, everyone is split up, and the story feels like it is dragging on for a long time...
in this respect, the film follows the book very well..it can become very tiresome at stages...but that is how Tolkien wrote it...some characters had shorter appearances than others..and that is the same with the film...
Peter Jackson has done a pretty decent job with this aspect, although some scenes could of been better spent....lets face it...Peter Jackson only has 3 hours to tell a story that can take months to finish..he is going to **** up in places...and the extra scenes with Arwen, if incredibly tiresome to watch, is only there for character development between Aragorn..The reason they are implemented is that Aragorn is reminded by the evening star (the necklace Arwen gives him) of their shared love for each other, and he is reminded of this every time he sees Eowen...and he is reminded that he and arwen share a love bond that should not be parted from...even if Eowen is being a big flirt... <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> although that sounds very cheesy...its true...and annoying...well there you have it...now i want to know why the hell they sent Aragorn off the edge off that cliff.....
Simple - <b>dramatic tension</b>. It's on the "must-have" checklist for pretty much any Hollywood movie, so PJ tinkered with the story so it'd be there. Completely unnecessary, of course, and it also leads into another Arwen scene (also unnecessary).
It also lets the audience feel sympathy for Eowyn when Aragorn doesn't show up with the rest of the merry wandering troupe from Edoras. Yep, a love triangle (of sorts) which is also on the "must-have" checklist.
Oh god I was waiting for this. Get a **** clue, Tolkein in the books gave the Uruk-hai the fighting power of wet noodles. The guy was not military minded, if you wanted the Helm's Deep battle to have a shread of believeability in the movie you needed some kind of edge for the humans. What's so **** wrong about the elves showing up anyway? "Oh no, they broke with the storyline" Whatever shall we do! It made perfect sence to me that a small contingent of elves showed up to honour old alliences, and I KNOW it wasn't in the book but like I said Tolkien gives the forces of Sauruman no credit whatsoever. Read the battle scene from TTT and you'll see what I mean.
The nazguls "bird" was bad
Faramir was bad
Boring and stupid scenes, the "sad" scenes were almost humorous
Some of the Helms Deep fighting scenes
It wasn't particularly good movie, now im just waiting for the spidey part <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
and for all you people complaining that he butchered the story, remember that he let the Uber-Uber-Uber fanboys on the set and let them critique the script and help him set it up. If you were in New Zealand you could've just talked to Pete.
And I believe Flayra said it best once: Let us see you create something so I can poo-poo all over it.
If you think you know how to do better, then I'd like to see you make a movie.
In the books at least, the hobbits were shown to be resilient little things, they stood up fo their own, it wasn't this big show of "lets have the human, dwarf, and elf carry the poor defenseless little hobbit creatures all the way through!". So that's one of my complaints...
Also, as someone pointed out earlier, one of the truly great things about the battle of helm's deep in the book was that it was won by humans and ONLY humans, showing that the nobility and strength of the race might not be as fleeting as some would think it to be. Then again, to actually leave this untouched, and then expect the general populace to pick up on this fact, might be difficult to swallow, but it can be done.
Truthfully, Fellowship was better in my opinion because I actually felt myself caring more about the individual characters presented, they were fleshed out. In TTT, you don't really care about Theoden, his dead son, Eowyn, Eomer, none of them. Least of all Faramir. Faramir was practically a bastion of goodness and integrity in the book, one of the best characters in the whole story. In the movie, he's just another weak-willed human. :sigh: A lot of people on this thread are missing the point, its not "oh well they changed it from the book and its still good", its more along the lines of *why* would you change it, when certain aspects of the changes that were made are so detrimental to the whole storyline.
YES! You have hit ze nail on ze head. Making necessary changes doesn't bother me. Making <b>unnecessary</b> and detrimental changes does.
after reading my last post, i realised that i knew all along why the arwen scenes were in there...and i now knew why i disliked them..there wasnt enough time for it...with the extra half an hour of footage on the extended dvd..this will be amended..along with other things..
The *BEST* part of the movie was the charge of the Rohan people (led with Gandalf) as the sunrise appears...Brilliantly done...
I thought it looked really good too, but it seemed like it ended too early - didn't it just fade out about five seconds after it started, implying that all the orcs were massacred? I wanted to see the part where the orcs all scream and flee into the mysterious dark wood (which was conspicuously absent).
What's funny is that there's a line in the book (it might have actually shown up in the movie too, but then got inverted in significance like Faramir's "here's a chance to show my quality") where Legolas says "what I wouldn't give for a hundred archers of my people". But the point is that they don't have that, because this is really the humans' fight for the most part; Legolas and Gimli are there to honor old alliances in a certain sense (largely symbolic, since they act as common soldiers rather than leaders, and 83 or so orcs is really just a drop in the bucket), but a full contingent of elves and dwarves <b>isn't</b> going to show up, and Tolkien calls attention to that because it's important.
Regarding the Uruk-hai being not as good fighters - what do you expect, they're less than a month old, right? <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> They might be pretty strong, but that doesn't make them experienced warriors, especially since the sum total of their experience in combat is pillaging helpless villages in Rohan.
I thought it looked really good too, but it seemed like it ended too early - didn't it just fade out about five seconds after it started, implying that all the orcs were massacred? I wanted to see the part where the orcs all scream and flee into the mysterious dark wood (which was conspicuously absent). <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
the orcs and Uruk-Hai do run in the film, when they see the first two lines of their team-mates massacred by Gandalf and his Rohan buddies, they all peg it...but they dont show that they go into the dark wood <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
(maybe the Extended dvd version will include this?)
Silliest part of the movie: Peter Jackson, with all due respect, if you're going to make a big deal out of the magical abilities of Galadriel's gifts in the second film (like, say, the rope, and the elvish cloaks), then you <i>might</i> want to introduce them in the <i>screen version</i> of the first. Or, at least a forced description of their powers in the second. Like:
"Hey Frodo, these cloaks are really nice looking."
"Well Sam, not only that, but . . . "
I mean, how many people who <i>hadn't</i> read the books were left scratching their heads in the scene where Gollum is crying about the rope, or Frodo and Sam hide from the enemy alongside the hill?
yeah...the rope part wasnt done well in the film..there wasnt a good enough explanation..maybe Gollum could of said "nasty Elvish Rope! it burnsd
sss!"
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->or Frodo and Sam hide from the enemy alongside the hill?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
lol..that part reminded me of "The Wizard Of OZ"
One good thing about the movies (particularly in the first one) is that even though certain things aren't fleshed out quite as much, there's still the occassional nod to Tolkien lore that readers of the books will crack a smile, or even a grin about.
For example, at the end of fellowship, when Frodo puts on the ring to get away from Boromir and ends up on that large stone pedastal, and then suddenly sees his entire view fly to the east torwards mordor, I forget the name exactly, but didn't that used to be the site of an old kingdom, where the seat he sat upon was used to see all of middle earth?
Sheesh, I have to read the books again, its been way too long.
and for all the nay-sayers still, remember that Peter Jackson had the massive job of taking a book with a hardcore dedicated following and managing to successfully convert it into a full-blown movie that doesn't appeal to 1% of the U.S. population. He made it appeal to a lot of people. Granted he did mess up some things but you didn't have to read the books to flush out the story, unlike some movies.