LoTR: The Two Towers - Page 7

Rufus T. Firefly · December 27, 2002, 06:18

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberShy

Quote:

The Elven cloaks work as camoflage?

You should watch the Extended DVD Edition,
it's mentioned in it

I have it, wanna rent it?

"Lord of the Rings narrative includes everything you see here. Foreshadowing and key plot points sold separately."

Footie Mad · December 27, 2002, 07:33

I think you got a pretty dreadful feeling about Gollum when you first saw him attack Frodo and Sam, though he should have been a bit nastier perhaps and another thing, does he not complain alot about the walking in the light of day as the sun burns him in the books?

Arrian · December 27, 2002, 10:28

I saw it a second time, and liked it better. I stand by my comments about Faramir - that still annoyed me - but I'm now ok with the other changes.

Gimli was funny, but I felt they went a joke or two too far.

They did overdo the little kids at Helm's Deep. One or two too many shots of wide-eyed terror.

I'm definitely looking forward to RotK, and getting the full extended DVD set.

-Arrian

Jac de Molay · December 27, 2002, 13:27

Saw it. Loved it. 9/10.

I came with the same feeling as I did in the first movie- a little shell shocked, needing a few days to absorb. This is a very different kind of movie-making.

I liked the acting the best. There seems to be such a committment and weight by all the actors that makes the movie unique. Got the feeling sometimes I was watching a shakespearean saga as opposed to LOTR.
Especially true with the characters Theoden, Aragorn, and Gandalf.

Only take a point away for the Ents, which I thought was drawn out excessively.

Ironikinit · December 28, 2002, 22:37

Seemed to me that Gandalf did fly in the movie, more than once. At the very least, he flew up to Strider, Legolas, and Gimli.

Gimli was constantly used as comic relief, and I just didn't need any short jokes. I always thought of him as a tough character, not a figure of fun. Plus, when they were chasing the orcs who had Merry and Pippin, he kept falling behind. Made sense. Next scene he's caught up again. Falls behind, catches up, no explanation. How'd that happen?

I'm pretty sure Frodo said Galdalf told him about Gollum and hence knew his name was once Smeagol. I liked Gollum quite a bit, but he sure was noisy when he sneaking around. Nice dialogues with himself, though.

Bad tactics/engineering/inconsistences detracted from my enjoyment of the battle scenes... Why was there a hole in the wall? Why did the gate have a permanent bridge attached? Why did the orcs only have crossbows when secondary characters could get killed? Why not arm the women if they had to arm the children? Why not drop more stuff on the attackers? Why did Legolas get on the horse when the wolfriders attacked? He was killing them pretty well where he was... if they were too close, why not go away from them and keep shooting? He likes his bow so much that he used it to threaten Eomer (or whatever that guy's name is). The scene where Legolas surfs down the stairs on a shield shooting arrows all the while made me laugh. If he's superelf, fine, he's superelf cos it's a movie and anything's possible, but nothing prior told me he was superelf.

Too much Liv Tyler. I really thought that was all about trying to stretch women's roles because there aren't many in the source material. Nothing wrong with that other than it wasn't in the book, other stuff that was in the book could've been there was cut so she could be there, the love story bored me, and nobody can ever convince me that elves have big pouty lips. I liked the scene where the logical result of her love for Strider was dramatized. That was sufficient.

Some weaknesses of the books that I hadn't thought about became apparent, such as Gimli's running problem. Another one was the idea of orcs riding wolves into battle. I guess my idea of orcs was that they were a bit smaller than humans and that wargs were a bit larger than wolves. Even so, it doesn't really work, does it, and certainly wouldn't look impressive on screen. So they had giant wolves. Well, I guess they were wolves, they looked like beavers. Nevermind that. How are people on horses supposed to fight people on giant wolves? One's on a herbivore, the other's on a carnivore... hm, wonder who'll win that one? Not the guy who's mount got eaten. It's like having a battle between a tractor and a tank.

Lord Merciless · December 28, 2002, 23:03

Worgs aren't very reliable creatures. They are almost as dangerous to their riders as to their enemies.

Lord_Davinator · December 28, 2002, 23:37

liked the movie.
Have read the book 3-4 times so I say they did a good enough job

Ironikinit · December 29, 2002, 04:23

"Worgs aren't very reliable creatures. They are almost as dangerous to their riders as to their enemies."

That may be, and the film showed that they were dangerous to Gimli, but they seemed indifferent to horses.

I was thinking that this is an old-ish thread, but here in Australia it was released the day after Xmas.

Grrr · January 1, 2003, 00:10

Was a damn good movie, and I should've posted here sooner about it.

I saw it the day after the premier ... I love living in wellington.

And I also went to the lord of the rings exhibition ... and damn was that worthwhile. I recommend anyone to go if it is near them ... some of the gear on show is just amazing.

SlowwHand · January 1, 2003, 02:50

You know the Orcs are Gay, right? Frustrated Gays.
Explains a whole lot.

ranskaldan · January 1, 2003, 03:24

Watched it. 8/10

The movie, on the whole, is too Braveheartized. Enlarged love-element, love-object kept close to warrior, warrior with comical friends, warrior and friends engaged in many gory battles, gory battles that are designed to ensure that the audience would only support one side for sure, (as opposed to, say, the opening battle of Gladiator) not to forget the concept of shortened childhoods, and innocent children.

Yeah. But on the other hand. It's a movie, and hence needs to appeal to the vast movie-going population. And this population requires gory battles, love elements, comical wisecracks, and cute, innocent children.

Ramo · January 1, 2003, 03:34

Excellent movie. 9/10.

It took the best parts of the first movie (amazing battle scenes, feeling of history, etc.) and expanded on it. The dialogue (excluding the ents-related parts) is much better. Wutang.

Felch · January 1, 2003, 03:52

I loved the movie, the parts that were changed didn't bother me, except for one.

In the books, the caves were sort of seperate from the main keep, and Gimli and some other guys got trapped in there, but held out. In the movie they were behind the keep. This wasn't a problem, it in fact simplified things for the movie.

The problem was that there was an escape route from the caves, through a mountain pass. A way out is also a way in. Who the hell would ever build a giant fortress that has an unguarded back door? I guess it's one of those common sense things that you're supposed to ignore, but it struck me as funny.