Comments on The Two Towers movie (with spoilers)- page 1

Peter, New City, U.S.

The movie, the two towers had almost nothing to do with the book. First,in the book, Eowyn doesn't even give Aragorn a second glance, the Ents do not hesitate to attack Isengard, gandalf brings some ents and huorns to helms deep along with the rohirrim, this is not shown in the movie, Faramir lets Frodo and Sam go right after they go to the secret hideout. In the movie, Faramir takes them to Osgiliath. Also, elves do not come to helms deep. The movie had some cool scenes but there were too many inaccuracies.

Jarle Nilsen, Askøy, Norway

Well, after seeing it 5 times I'm finally ready to comment on the film. I liked the movie quite a lot, giving it a rating 8 out of possible 10.

There are scenes that i really dislike (Like the "Theoden exorcism" and the portrayal of Faramir/Osgiliath visit) and that i will probably never will get used to.

Then again, there were scenes that i loved, like the portrayal of Gollum, and the elfs involvement in Helm's deep didn't bother me after the second viewing, they gave the battle an extra dimension.

I love the movie as long as it stayed true to the book, but has realized that some adaptions hade to be made. I have come to see the movies as more of an visual companion to the book than anything else. The books will always stay closest to my heart.

Overall, I'm quite happy with the movie and look forward to the last chapter and has already started planning my costume for the next premiere here in Bergen.

Filipe Lopes, Lisboa, Portugal

Peter Jackson and the New Line Cinema changed a lot of important stuff in the movie from the original story, even more than in the first movie !

There wasn't any fight during the trip between Edoras and Helm's Deep, so Aragorn didn't fall into the water, and nobody thought he was dead!

Arwen wasn't leaving already for the Valar Land !

They didn't finish the whole book in the movie, Minas Morgul, the stairs, the tunnel and Shelob didn't appear in the second !

Lee Dotson, Tampa, U.S.

What a depressing mess. The director and screenwriters pay more homage to Spielberg and Lucas than Professor Tolkien. They had to change everything, even Frodo falling in the Marshes and being saved by Gollum?! WHY? Here's a brief snippet overheard from the screen writing conference: "People have read and reread and discussed this story for fifty years ...obviously this is proof that it's flawed. Thank god we're here to change it. I mean, like, uh, can you just imagine Faramir being noble? Jeez! Gimli being not funny? Gimme a break! He needs more C3PO comedy lines, right Phillipa? And why would Tolkien make these dinosaur mounted black riders scary when all it takes to deter them is a single arrow? God I'm brilliant. Get me a double latte and tell the artists to bring in those sketches of the hyena warg thingies...they should make great Happy Meal toys."

Christian, London, UK

I found it hard to enjoy the Two Towers fully. This is a shame as it's a very good film. Jackson has captured the soul of Tolkien's Middle-Earth - not just the Lord of the Rings, the essential feel that makes it enduring, and this is the best that could be hoped for. However, what I felt through most of it was a vague feeling of worry - why are Peter Jackson and Philippa Boyens making things so difficult for themselves in the third movie? Internal logic will be hard to maintain in the Return of the King. And why the procrastination with Treebeard and Faramir (it's not as if they need procrastinate)? Why the Nazgul at Osgiliath? Jackson says that the Two Towers required the most re-writing of the film scripts and with the Two Towers I begin to feel the problems of translating the book to the screen, the desire to shape it into a contained theatrical episode: I did not feel that with the Fellowship.

Alec Michael, Seattle, U.S.

I thought the movie was good.It was good to see Legolas and Gimli and Aragorn and Sam (somewhat) together. I thought Gollum looked interesting but not human enough. I Liked opening where Gandalf fell with the Balrog and Killed the Balrog. I thought it stunk that the movie ended almost at the middle of the book.The Wargs were never in the Two Towers and Shelob was in the book but not the movie. I think The movie was good if you never read the books.

Sophia Tsitsoni, Athens, Greece

The Two Towers is a great disappointment! I could live with the changes and impressionism in the choice of events in the first film (although I still cannot bear the Hollywood love story of Arwen and Aragorn "stealing" screen-time from other events, as well as the corruption of a noble character like Boromir). The second film, though, is simply not Tolkien's The Two Towers. It's a wonderful fantasy film, but neither the characters (who is that pathetic man watching the battle at Helm's Deep without being able to act? Could it be King Theoden? One of the great kings?) or the plot is actually "based on Tolkien's Lord of the Rings". What about that sequence with the wolfriders and Aragorn falling in the river and Arwen and Elrond? I must admit that the battles are always exceptional as regards filming and directing, but I think that the the whole trilogy (as it seems) fails to show the balance of the powers and races on Middle Earth. It is, in effect, rather flat and simplistic compared to the book. Above all, the decrease of the plot and characters to a Hollywood action/love story is disrespectful to Tolkien's work. Thus perish great works in the hands of mediocre directors!

I apologise for possible empathy but my disappointment is very recent.

Alfred Hermann, Cologne, Germany

The movie is very impressive, however it departs from the book in some places, interfering with it's logic, while sometimes failing to create a new coherence of plot for the movie (the battle at Helm's Deep has parts that defy logic, and also the sequence when Frodo meets a Nazgul and threatens Sam with his sword: How can he have a sword when he's held captive?)

The greatest achievement of the film is that it's images definitely CAN compete with what goes on in the head of a reader of Tolkien's books. However, the movie has much too little time for poetry, and the interaction between the characters carries to much of an exaggerated cartoon-type violence.

The pacing and plotting of the second movie is inferior to the first one.

But still... who would ever have imagined that a movie like this would ever come to life?

I think the three movies will be landmarks for movies ever after, if the third one holds the status.

Alberto Leal, Windsor, Canada

The movie is really good. I was happy to see Treabeard alive. I felt like old friends were coming home for Christmas. My favourite part, the new Elves/Men alliance at Helm's Deep. The Two Towers was a really hard book to adapt, but Jackson pulled it off for the most part.

A. Stanley, Lewiston, US

Although the special effects and cinematography were wonderful, and the actors did an excellent job, I was a little disappointed in some of the alterations that were made. Why did they have Aragorn fall off a cliff and what were elven archers doing at Helms Deep? Those were my only major complaints to an otherwise wonderful film adaptation of Tolkien's masterpiece.

Paul Gunderson, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA

Very disappointed. Aside from the large deviations in plot, the changes in character are disheartening.

Very briefly, my chief concerns:

In the novel, humanity is redeemed in Frodo's eyes by the words and deeds of Faramir. In the movie, Faramir is just another thug. Theoden is craven in the movie. As is Treebeard. Gimli is played purely for comic relief. Having Aragorn rebuff Arwen is a truly strange directorial choice. Having her go to the Havens (or at least seem to do so) even more strange.

No one seems particularly heroic, save only Gandalf (given very little screen time) and Aragorn (given far too much) and, perhaps Legolas - though only in a supporting way. Having Lorien's elves show up at Helm's Deep gives short shrift to the danger facing all the peoples of Middle Earth. The poor understanding of military matters could have been overlooked if the characters had been left intact.

Other matters:

Losing the last three chapters in each book of the Two Towers leads me to wonder what will be shortchanged in or cut entirely from the final film. It seems a pity to have wasted Christopher Lee's talents. I was very much looking forward to him using "the voice of Saruman." I can't imagine this scene being put into the final film... Finally, everyone seems to know about the ring. Did Gandalf send out a memo after reading the old scrolls? (This troubled me in the first movie as well.) I had some small problems with the first film, but enjoyed it very much. The second, however, just leaves me shaking my head.