Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

TTT Revisited

FortKnox (169099) writes | about 11 years ago

Movies 10

OK, I finally went out to see The Two Towers again. The LoTR movies are a 2-see movies. The first time to see how they did everything and to enjoy the story. The second time to analyze and see the familiarities it has with the book. Because I wasn't done with the second book the first time I saw the movie, we had to wait a while until I went to see it again (and extra time to get someone to watch joey, too). Anywho, here's my analysis. It contains plot summaries, not necessarily spoOK, I finally went out to see The Two Towers again. The LoTR movies are a 2-see movies. The first time to see how they did everything and to enjoy the story. The second time to analyze and see the familiarities it has with the book. Because I wasn't done with the second book the first time I saw the movie, we had to wait a while until I went to see it again (and extra time to get someone to watch joey, too). Anywho, here's my analysis. It contains plot summaries, not necessarily spoilers, but if you haven't seen the movie yet you may not want to read (honestly, if you haven't, you probably already heard all the spoilers anyway):

First, and formost, the guy that did Smeagel (aka Gollum) deserves an award. There is no doubt about how perfectly he portraited the part.

The actress that played Eowyn is a hottie (had to throw that in). I'd even say she'd be a better "geek" fantasy than natalie portman.

And finally, the only thing that rubbed me the wrong way (except ending where it did [1]) was Faramir. The whole elf sequence was fine, even though it wasn't in the story. The "falling into the river after the warg battle" was fine by me. The only thing that really got to me was the portrail of Faramir. In the book, Faramir was very smart and clever. He was the one supposed to go to the Fellowship instead of his brother Boromir, but Boromir was too headstrong and stubborn and insisted on going. Faramir knew about the ring, but also knew the graveness that it possessed. Once he knew Frodo had it, he wanted nothing to do with it (WTF? Forcing them to go back to Gondor? Its exactly the OPPOSITE of what happened in the book). Anyway, I just thought that part was poorly done.

Don't get me wrong. The writing of the script follows the book better than any other rescripting of a book. He even uses direct lines throughout the movie. I just thought that the portail of Faramir was a bit off, but it didn't make the movie any less magical.

[1]: Where they should have ended the movie. If you haven't read The Two Towers book, don't read this. It'll be plot twists from the "Return of the King" movie!! However, I generalized it to not give anything major away, just a little tease of what's to come.


They should have ended the movie when the one hobbit starts walking away after the incident with Shelob. That would be enough emotion to get the audience to start reading the books to see what happens next >:-)


Faramir and ending point (2, Interesting)

Foochar (129133) | about 11 years ago | (#5583358)

As far as the portrayal of Faramir goes, I have to agree with you that he came off much harsher than how I read him to be in my many readings of the books. With this portrayal in mind I'll have to see how he comes across this summer when I reread the books again (I probably read them 4 or 5 times before the movies started coming out, and then I decided that in order to keep from confusing the details of what happens when I needed to reread them every year before the movies came out). I'm also interested in seeing if Faramir comes across differently in the extended release of the movie. Its amazing what an extra 30 minutes of footage can add, especially to a true fan of the movies.

As far as the ending, they almost had to move the conclusion up some. They moved it by a chapter or so at the end of Fellowship, and now the end of Two Towers was probably about 3 chapters before the end of the book. The thing is, Return of the King is the shortest of the books in terms of actual material, the only reason it is of comparable thickness to the other two books in the three volume sets is the voluminous appendicies at the end. Couple this with the fact that Jackson has decided to cut the scouring of the shire, as well as some of the stuff and in order to create a time balanced set of three movies he has to slide the end points to earlier points than what is in the books.

Re:Faramir and ending point (1)

agnosonga (601770) | about 11 years ago | (#5588581)

The fact that Jackson has decided to cut out the scouring of the shire makes me really sad. I really liked that part. But unlike Tom Bombadil (my other favorite part that they left out), I think the scouring of the shire is way more important.

My wish? (1)

JMZero (449047) | about 11 years ago | (#5583361)

They should have got Arnold to play Theoden. Before you laugh, picture the scenes in your mind. Arnold can do old withered guy. And damn can he do vigorous aged guy. Can he do vaguely foreign looking medievalish king of horse kingdom? I think he is a vaguely foreign looking medievalish king of a horse kingdom. It would have been awesome.

The guy they got was a dork.

Re:My wish? (1)

Otter (3800) | about 11 years ago | (#5584988)

By Arnold, you mean Schwarzenegger? Does he do withered? My first thought was that you meant Arnold from Happy Days (Pat Morita) who is certainly old and "foreign" (in the white LOTR world).

Hopefully Arnold Horshack wasn't what you had in mind!

Indeed. (1)

JMZero (449047) | about 11 years ago | (#5585099)

I was thinking Schwarzenegger, but Horshack would be cool too. But only if Mr. Kotter was Elrond.

Ent trickery (1)

MacBrave (247640) | about 11 years ago | (#5583425)

Another 'plot twist' in TTT that bothered me was the so called trickery used by Merry and Pippin to get the Ents to attack Isengard. In the book didn't the Ents come to a decision to go to war after the Entmoot? Has Jackson said anything about this change and why it was done?

Re:Ent trickery (1)

FortKnox (169099) | about 11 years ago | (#5583439)

Actually, the way the ents came to battle (IIRC) was the same in the movie. He saw all the trees destroyed by Saruman. However, it wasn't pippins idea to go there.

Re:Ent trickery (1)

Flamesplash (469287) | about 11 years ago | (#5585401)

I really really hated this too. In the book the Ents came from Entmoot with the decision that they needed to be involved, in the book they had to be tricked. This completely undermines the Ents in my mind.

I found it distasteful that the fellowship characters knew all and everyone else had to be swayed by them, when in the books they are all falable and not perfect.

I'm chiming in a little late, but... (1)

Randolpho (628485) | about 11 years ago | (#5650753)

As for Faramir, I have to agree, but I have to say I see where Jackson was going with the way he was portrayed.

One thing I loved about Faramir (he and Eowyn are my favorite characters in the book), is that he was *above* all that. He was noble, moreso in many ways than Aragorn was portrayed. He had strength of character that was rare even in a fantasy series all *about* strength of character. And I *liked* that.

However, I think I can at least explain what Jackson was shooting for. In the first two movies, he made a major point of how easily mortals and especially *men* are corrupted by the ring. Boromir was just the first to fall; even Aragorn had to make a hard choice not to take the ring.

I think Jackson was trying to hammer that point down with Faramir. He's corrupted by the ring, just like all man eventually will be.

But at the same time, Jackson did his best to show that inner strength of character that Faramir is famous for by the way he handled his corruption. Note that he never actually touches the ring in TTT. Note that, dispite being corrupted by the ring, he repents.

By doing it this way, Jackson accomplished three things: he sealed into us the idea that the ring is corruption given form, even as he managed to show that Faramir nobility of character, and, as a bonus, he got to show us the attack on Osgilioth, which is only mentioned in passing in the book.

Anyway, I try not to hold up the book to the movie too much; they're different mediums and some changes have to be made. Jackson is still holding true to overlying themes and even characterizations. I can forgive the Ents, and the "presumed dead", and even the Dwarf jokes; in the end, the movies are still quite entertaining. Hell, I still get shivers thinking about the opening sequence, watching the fall of Gandalf!

I did have a couple of beefs with the movie, but they're more logical flaws.

First: the ents. Treebeard is suddenly surprised by all the dead trees in his forest, that I can handle. But hundreds of ents just stepping from the fringes as if they'd been standing around waiting for Treebeard to finally get off his ass and go look at the dead trees so they could go to war was a little off-key for me.

Second: Osgiliath. When Sam and Frodo are shown in Osgiliath, which is in the heat of a battle for control of the city, they're shown on the *western* side of the city, across from the river Anduin which runs smack-dab down the middle. How did they get across? I mean, what with the seige and all, that's not exactly something that can just be cut away, right? Then, when they leave, they're back across the river again, dispite the fact that the only bridge is now destroyed. I mean... getting to the western shore off-screen I can handle, but getting back on the eastern shore off-screen is a bit hard to swallow.

Of course, only fans of the book would note this; people who haven't read the books wouldn't see anything wrong.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account