Two Towers is amazing

[Olli Kalma]

Have you read ' Bored of the Rings ', wroted by Henry N. Beard and Douglas C. Kenney...?

My GF gived it to me for christmas and I have just read couple of pages from it, but it's really funny!

If you like Tolkien's Hobit, read that book!

[kev]

I've never heard of it Olli, but I will keep an eye out for it.

[Bungleau]

It's a national lampoon-style parody of Lord of the Rings. Instead of Bilbo, the main character is D!ldo. It goes downward from there... rather funny, as long as you can appreciate that kind of humor. I doubt my wife would find it funny, but I enjoyed it.

[Radek]

How come. There is somebody on this planet who does not know ALL the books starting from The Hobbit and ending at the Unfinished Tales? [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

Happy new year to everybody [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Wyvern]

Well -
Even though I knew before going in that of the three movies planned the Two Towers is the one that strays from the books most did not lessen my disappointment with the changes made. Don't get me wrong, it is still a good movie and I'll probably like it better when I get to see it again and watch it for it's own merit, not how well it keeps to the books.
I wish they would cut out all the Arwen stuff completely. My husband says that they must have felt it was necessary to have a "romantic" angle in the movie. This isn't a romance story and I don't feel inserting the rather weak romance line of Strider and Arwen added much to the movie. I found it distracting and disruptive to what was really going on. It doesn't help any that of all the actors casted in particular parts Strider and Arwen are, to me, the most miscast.
The Ents looked great!!!
Golum wasn't quite what I had envisioned but they did an excellent job with him so he gets a thumbs up!
Guess when this comes out on DVD I'll have to check to see if they have director comments that might explain the choices he made. Many of the things that they did change seemed unnecessary to me. It didn't appear that they were trying to save some time (omitting Tom Bombadil from the Fellowship was due to time limits) and they could have put the Arwen time to better use or made the movie shorter which wouldn't have hurt either. At 3 hours, I found it long and I was anxious for it to be over.
I was also grateful that there were not so many shots of
THE RING (close up in Bilbo's hand)
THE RING (close up on floor)
THE RING (close up in the fire)
THE RING (close up in Frodo's hand)
THE RING (close up on chain around Frodo's neck)
THE RING (close up on pedestle) etc. etc.
They might have had time for Tom Bombadil after all!
Considering the difficulty of the task of translating this great story to the screen, they've done a great job but the book is still MUCH better!

Wyv

[morningstar]

Hi Wyv! Good to hear your comments on the "Two Towers". I agree that Tom Bombadil should have been put in too, I was bitterly dissapointed with his exclusion, as he is my favorite! I am going to see it Tuesday 7th January, so will add my comments later. Thanks!

[Nutman]

Gidday, thanks Wyvern for your long reply. I agree that the book is better, but I just loved the movie and I feel PJ did a wicked job of bringing LOTR to the bigscreen, and although there has been some things changed for the big screen, he has been very faithful to the books - I think this reflects in the fact that PJ also loved the books. I thought they did a amazing job with Gollum and the story with Gollum, Sam and Frodo was almost straight from the book. As I remember Eowen and Aragorn did notice each other quite a bit in the books. PJ didn't go far with the romance at all, and it actually hammered home the fact that aragorn is completely faithful to Arwen, which will come into play more in the next movie. 3hrs wasn't enough for me, oh well only another 11 mths to go till the Return of the King.