[OT] Upon watching PJ butcher another's work.

[Tom Cashel]

FotR, that was ok. Not great, but ok.

Man, How I wish Chris Columbus had directed these movies.

I only read far enough to get a sense of where you're coming from, and you provided it with these two quotes. Now I feel justified in ignoring your comments.

 

[jgbrowning]

we'll if everyone's gonna turn this into a bash Celebrim, you might as well turn it into a bash jgbrowning and Celebrim.

im another of the minorities that wasn't very impressed with this film.

joe b.

 

[jgbrowning]

I have read many people's comments onthe love/dream sequences with Aragorn and the river sceen as well. I think these were added for pacing. It forced the movie to slow down a few times so we could catch our breath and enjoy the next major sceen. You may not have liked them or would have chose a different way to break up the action and drama, but they were neccessary for pacing. It is the same when you play D&D. You don't want to go from battle to battle without any RP in between because the battles get muttled together and are less fun.
Face it, I am right

he could have just as easily left out the warg scene and replaced it with more merry and pipen. that way he could have slowed down the pacing and put in much needed character development.

joe b.

 

[Bohemian Earspoon]

"udged on its own merits, this wasn't even the movie that Gladiator or Braveheart was."

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/TheLordoftheRingsTheTwoTowers-1118285/

116 reviews, all from established critics. 113 good, 3 bad, a 97% approval rating. I think Braveheart got 83%, and Gladiator around 78%.

I dunno. I liked it! Sorry you didn't. Hey, did Merry and Pippin actually do much in the second book? I don't think so.

 

[Assenpfeffer]

we'll if everyone's gonna turn this into a bash Celebrim, you might as well turn it into a bash jgbrowning and Celebrim.

im another of the minorities that wasn't very impressed with this film.

Nobody's bashing anybody. I think Celebrim is taking his distaste for the film a little too seriously, but that's his perogative.

I like to hear specifically what made the film a bad film in the eyes of those who didn't like it. The whole group I was there with loved it - the movie got a standing ovation at the end.

I'm not sure it's as strong a movie as FotR, myself. But as others have said, I've only seen TTT once and FotR probably 50 times. So it's not fair for me to make the comparison right now. I do intend to go at least once more. (Hell, I saw Attack of the Clowns twice - now that was a piece of steaming poo.)

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Faramir was nearly ruined by PJ's take on him, that is my main gripe. He passed the test that Borormir failed, and it didn't take a Nazgul to do it. That I thought was bad work by PJ. The Treebeard having to be tricked into going to Isenguard was poor as well, but I guess they needed to get something interesting for Merry & Pippin to do. Still they are pretty shallow characters compared to thier book versions, that's kind of sad. The Arwyen scenes were the only times I checked my watch. She is a bad actress and should stick to cheap trash like Armageddon. The whole Aragorn over the cliff deal was poorly done and totally unnecessary. Theoden should have been a lot older as well. Good movie but could have been better.

 

[Tom Cashel]

we'll if everyone's gonna turn this into a bash Celebrim, you might as well turn it into a bash jgbrowning and Celebrim.

Okay, if that's the way you want it...........



No, seriously...that's fine to be less than impressed. I didn't think it was perfect, or particularly faithful to the book...but I also don't much care. I thought it was an entertaining film; a lot of fun.

I'm not faulting you or Celebrim for expressing an unfavorable opinion of the film. I'm jeering Celebrim for his "Peter Jackson urinates on Tolkien" stance, his outrageous comment that the schlockmeister responsible for the ever-so-schlocky watered-down-fantasy mass-media tripe that is Harry Potter should have directed LotR, and mostly his claim that he doesn't want to even think about TTT anymore, but then goes into multiple-post ranting with very little provocation.

'Sfunny, is all.

 

[Olorin]

I agree with Celebrim that many of the changes/additions were poor. I enjoyed the movie overall but I just can't fathom why the writers and director though some of these things were a good idea.

Faramir is the chief one. His character was done a huge disservice by forcing him to admit the ring is bad by external forces (the Ringwraith and Sam's speech), rather than by his own wisdom. It shows him to be just another weak man like his brother, rather than the wiser and nobler of the two. The addition of the Osgiliath scenes didn't even work well... Faramir only seems to react to outside circumstances, rather than making the right decisons on his own. And his tone and expression when telling his men to take Frodo and Sam to his father "bearing a great gift" made me feel like the Ring had its hooks into him already, after a much shorter time than it took Boromir to be corrupted.

The Aragorn "is he dead?" interlude following the warg battle (which I quite liked) served no purpose that I could tell and took away screen time from other things. If they really wanted to slow the movie down at that point, finish the battle and then cut away to Merry and Pippin talking with Treebeard, staying at his home, drinking the Entdraught. The focus on the Aragorn/Arwen romance was too much in this film, one scene would have been sufficient rather than the 3 flashbacks we got.

I have no problem with adding new scenes to the movies as long as they serve the overall story and stay faithful to the spirit of the books. The changes in Fellowship did quite well in this respect I thought. For TTT, I feel like the director/writers didn't try hard enough to make the existing material work on the screen.

The Theoden exorcism scene I had no problem with, as it simply exaggerated the cause of his decline, making it an overt effort from Saruman rather than just the poison tongue of Grima. Different means, same effect. That was a good example of adapting something from the books in a way that worked better on film while maintaining the spirit of the book.

But the changes to Faramir, the Aragorn interludes, also the presentation of Elrond as a man-hating elf (the impression I got from his scenes with Arwen and the messages from Galadriel) were not done well in my opinion.

And why did Haldir give greetings from Elrond?? He is a Galadrim and it was clearly Galadriel's doing that elves were sent to help the Rohirrim at all. That just seems like a continuity gaffe.

I still enjoyed the movie overall but felt that Celebrim had some valid concerns with they way some of the changes were done.
Just my two cents.

 

[jgbrowning]

No, seriously...that's fine to be less than impressed. I didn't think it was perfect, or particularly faithful to the book...but I also don't much care. I thought it was an entertaining film; a lot of fun.

i think the film should have been more than "entertaining" or "a lot of fun." Tolkien was telling a good story, with lots and lots of excellent internal conflict/development. The whole story's a book about good/evil.

good/evil conflict should be more than just a good movie. I really wish they would have gone into more depth about the concepts of loss. its a story about how allowing evil to continue within oneself eventually leads to a massive "paying of the price." and how that paying is never ejoyable, leaves scars that never heal, and defines what humanity is. an inevitiable descent to death, with the best a human can do is display courage, will, grace perserverance, pity, wisdom, and acceptance.

jackson had a lot to work with, especially in this film. moreso than i think in the other two, because this film is the real "decision" film. its the part where the characters start to really feel the brunt of their decisions... its the part where the characters suddenly realise that in the end they're going to be consumed by their path. perhaps he's just waiting for RoTK to show this.. i'll wait and see.

basically, i expected more from the film than i got. that's my fault, buddha and dukkha and all that...

joe b.

 

[Assenpfeffer]

good/evil conflict should be more than just a good movie. I really wish they would have gone into more depth about the concepts of loss. its a story about how allowing evil to continue within oneself eventually leads to a massive "paying of the price." and how that paying is never ejoyable, leaves scars that never heal, and defines what humanity is. an inevitiable descent to death, with the best a human can do is display courage, will, grace perserverance, pity, wisdom, and acceptance.

jackson had a lot to work with, especially in this film. moreso than i think in the other two, because this film is the real "decision" film. its the part where the characters start to really feel the brunt of their decisions... its the part where the characters suddenly realise that in the end they're going to be consumed by their path. perhaps he's just waiting for RoTK to show this.. i'll wait and see.

The theme of loss is one of the major ones of the book - but it's played up in the films, too. So much so, in fact, that it could be said to be heavy-handed.

Galadriel says flat-out that Frodo's decision to be the Ringbearer will cost him his life. The ramifications of Arwen's choice are clear. The Elves are leaving Middle-Earth, and with them will pass away their wondrous era, and bring forth the dominion of Men.

So no, this is not one of Tolkien's themes that the movies blow off. It's developed a bit differently, but I don't see that as an issue.