Comments on The Two Towers movie (with spoilers)- page 3

Chriel, Wollongong, Australia

A highly respectable dramatisation of the book, yet the unforgivable"clownification" of Gimli diminished his strong character to nothing more than comic relief for small-minded hollywood audience.

Leslie, Irvine, USA

Comment: I believe that it diverged from the text a little too much. For instance, Dealing with Helms Deep- the Elves did not come to aid them, and the the men that were exiled were never actually exiled, along with the ents came to help at the battle and fought the Orcs from the back... just to share that

Paul Bish, Taunton, England

The first thing I would like to say is that the Two Towers is a massive achievement, and a splendid action/fantasy movie. Inspired by the Two Towers, but not nearly as faithful to its spirit as it could have been, without detracting at all from the spectacle. I came away angry about several things, Faramir, one of the most noble characters in the book was reduced to a pale shadow of his brother, the whole point of him lost. The fact that he resisted the lure of the ring is crucial to the story. The exorcism of Theoden was totally unnecessary, and all the joy of Theoden's recovery lost. All the other changes were bearable, and mostly necessary to tell the story within the time constraints and practicality of the cinema genre. The major changes stopped it from being a masterpiece. They also seem puzzlingly unnecessary, the true events would not have added any more running time. I can't see how TROTK can now pull things together, as so much about the motivation of the characters and the direction of the plot has been lost. I hope I'm wrong. I'm going to see TT again, to enjoy it as a great piece of film making. But the Two Towers was not filmed, when it seems it could have been.

Kim Evans, Pembroke Dock, Wales

Thoroughly enjoyed it - so much so that I've seen it twice - and I've NEVER done that before in my life for any film.

However, like the first film, it does need to be seen, as someone else has commented, as Jackson's story, not Tolkien's to some extent. While the changes from the book will no doubt be argued over for a long time (about as long as it'll take me to recover from the shock of Haldir not only turning up at Helm's Deep but also getting killed there!!!), I do think it important to remember that 'making a book into a film' is perhaps not really possible. There is clearly a relationship between the two, but they are different forms of creativity. Richard Adams actually puts it much better than I can, in his introduction to the 'book of the film of the book' of Watership Down. (PLEASE, don't let anyone try this with LOTR!).

Us Tolkien fans do I think have some responsibility towards the Jackson fans to continually remind them that the books ARE THERE. For me, this takes the form of answering questions from my Entings as 'well, in the film Jackson does ..., but what Tolkien actually wrote was ...', generating two sets of further questions - 'What did Tolkien mean by ...' and 'Why did Jackson do ...'. I've also made it clear to them that comparing the 'worth' of the two isn't an option - in my opinion the films are excellent films, and the books of course will always remain some of the best reading going.

edd, london, england

in itself the film is good, as a film, but it is difficult for a person who has read the book to say that it still holds true to the trilogy. Chronologically the film has ripped to shreds the book to try and make it more exciting and tense, and in the process done the absolute antithesis to this. The thing that, personally, gets my back up though has to be how they've rewritten the finally victory of Helms Deep bringing Eomer in alongside Gandalf at the dawning of the day, which obviously is a complete fallacy if anyone cares to so much as glance towards the book. The character of Faramir - again a personal favourite - has again been destroyed by Jackson et al, through their seeming pugnacious desire to tarnish him with Boromir's brush, something that Tolkien plainly didn't wish to do, and having Frodo, Sam and Gollum dragged to Minas Tirith just makes the mind boggle.

Having said all this I thought that the character Gollum was superb. After The Fellowship... I was petrified they would Jar Jar Binks him but miraculously they made one of the strongest characters out of him! It also could be argued that the general story of the book (though the minute have been altered slightly) still shines through. I think it may be unrealistic for everything from the book to be replicated perfectly into the film...but at the same time there are certain things that do really rub me the wrong way.

Emily Cheeseman, Tonbridge, England

I think that TTT is a really, really cool movie, but it wasn't true enough to the book. Too many things happened which had just been added in to make it more interesting for those who had not read the books. Such examples are: Aragorn's falling off of cliff; Elves at Helm's Deep; Faramir taking Frodo to Gondor etc...

Also, Merry and Pippin were too serious! (There won't be a Shire any more, Pippin) I know they have to be shown to be maturing, but they were just too serious. But, it is an incredibly cool movie, and is better than the Fellowship, although the Fellowship is much more true to the book. Gollum was so, so, so cool!!! He was amazing and I think Andy Serkis was really good as him, but he hasn't got enough recognition.

Ruth Lester, Dublin, Ireland

The Two Towers was entertaining. But for those who have read the book and, like myself treat it like the Bible, it is VERY disappointing.

What's all this about Aragorn falling off a cliff, and Elves from Lothlorien coming to the battle of the Hornburg.

Plus, has anyone else noticed that that so and so Jackson has made BOTH Boromir and Faramir look like enemies?

Joanne Wong, Coventry, UK

Although the film (TTT) was well made, I was not entirely happy with some of the additions/changes made to Tolkien's story. eg.

1) elves fighting at Helm's Deep, and worse still Haldir getting killed,

2) Aragorn falling off the cliff,

3) no mention of the Ents' involvement at Helm's Deep - I always thought it was the Ents that saved the day at Helm's Deep.

4) The Faramir of the film is the opposite to the real Faramir,

5) the ring being taken to Osgiliath.

6) no mention of the encounter with Saruman and the Palantir of Orthanc,

7) no Shelob.

Hope 3, 6 and 7 will be made up in the ROTK.

Peder Stenslie, Mandan, U.S.A.

After Fellowship... my expectations were high. I was terribly disappointed with Two Towers. It was a stunning film, but unforgiveable what they did to the story. Only the framework of Tolkien's story remains. The ents shouldn't have to be bullied and tricked by Merry & Pippin... they shouldn't be clueless as to what is happening at Isengard because they're the oldest living creatures in Middle Earth. There should be no elves at Helm's Deep because there time is passing and it is a time for humans to stand and carry the fate of middle earth. Aragorn, at Helm's Deep, should not be fighting with Elves. He should be with Eomer and the men of Rohan, because he needs to be stepping into his role as leader (king) of men. Legolas "skateboarding" on his shield is ridiculous. Such a scene has no place in this movie. The Nazgul inches away from the ring and then scared away by a single arrow is mind-numbingly stupid. Doesn't Sauron now know where the ring is? The whole point of making a gallant stand against the overwhelming forces of Sauron is to keep him unaware of the presence of the ring. However, in my mind, most unforgiveable of all is what Jackson did with Faramir -- one of the most wonderful characters in the story. We refuse to call the Faramir character of the movie by that name. We refer to him instead as Boromir 2. I believe that Jackson himself fell victim to the power of the Ring. He came to fancy himself a better story-teller than Tolkien. And that he is not.