Media Index |
Comments on this page can contain spoilers. Contents
may settle in transit. Actual mileage may very.
Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3
| Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6
| Page 7 | Page 8
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
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.
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.
| Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4
| Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7
| Page 8 |
This page copyright © 2002 The Tolkien Society, registered as a charity in England, number 273809.