h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hi, no spoilers here, but follow the link below and discuss it if you HAVE SEEN IT! (IT = The Two Towers)

Otherwise, stay away and avoid spoiling what could be a great event in movie-watching.

-KC

WARNING, IF YOU READ THIS IT WILL SPOIL THE FILM. SEE TWO TOWERS FIRST. AND SEE FELLOWSHIP BEFORE YOU DO, OR YOU WILL BE SO LOST PLOTWISE.

Hi there! Yes, I too was awestruck. Two Towers was magnificent. I went into it with high hopes, which usually means that I am a little disappointed, but not this time. It was even better than Fellowship. Cool beginning, cutting straight to an action sequence. Gorgeous scenery. Lofty ideals. Beautiful luminous elves and studly heros. (I'm thinking Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn here ) Gollum was amazing, wasn't he? He really came alive as an independent character in his own right. He was miles ahead of any other CGI I've seen. I read somewhere that the director had the actor who did the voice of Gollum actually play opposite Frodo and Sam in all their scenes together, then digitally wiped him out and replaced him with Gollum. So that Elijah Wood (Frodo) had someone flesh and blood to interact with. I'm hoping that Towers sweeps the Oscars, but I'm not counting on it. Fantasy films rarely get critical acclaim. (I remember when Star Wars lost. I was crushed) The one scene of TT that I can't get out of my head is the winged nazgul (sp?) swooping down on Frodo. So terrifying, yet heart stoppingly beautiful at the same time. Merry and Pippin proved themselves resourceful in this one didn't they? Everything in the movie was a surprise to me, because I haven't read the books. Although I've heard key elements about the next one, what's it called Return of the King? Jackson is so cruel to make us wait a year for it! Ah here's a cool bit of trivia about Rings that I picked up. In close ups of the elven women they used christmas lights to make their eyes reflect the sparkles.

I am glad that I liked TT so much, because I also saw Gangs of New York this week. Didn't like it much. A big disappointment. Way too violent for one thing. Towers was violent too, but I don't really mind seeing an Orc get killed.

i thought it was great...if i thought it maybe wasn't as good as the fellowship, it's because i was picking holes in it because i've read the books now, recently as well, but as a film it's good, and as a film adapted from a book it's still good
i didn't much like the winged creatures the nzagul were on...or rather i did, but because they were comical. i can't think of a better word to describe them...they weren't funny exactly, just...comical
i already knew tat about the christmas lights cos i have the extended dvd
i loved gollum...and i loved isengard being flooded
as for helm's deep, just
one of the worst bits of the film was how it was so short
^. .^
= ' =
Gurus
CommunityArtists

There is a lot to say about this Great Film Event, but I am short of time. I'll be back tomorrow and throw in a few witty comments.

'Till then; Go watch "The Lord of the Rings II - The Two Towers" again.

Oh, and did you also see Peter Jackson at the Gate?

i decided to concentrate on the film itself rather than cameo appearances
but i'll keep that in mind for next time...
^. .^
= ' =
Gurus
CommunityArtists

GAH! I was pleased with the movie, overall, but i had three main points of contention.

1) They turned Faramir into Bormomir 2. Faramir was not supposed to take the ring. He was wise enough to realise what the ring had done to his brother, and knew that that was the reason for Boromir's death. It drove me nuts to see his character undermined in that was, and they can't fix it. No matter how good he becomes in the next movie, he will always have had that moment of weakness. There was no reason for it, either! Why bother having him take them when he just lets them go after a long and cheesy speech by Sam??

2) Merry and Pippin didn't drink the Ent draught! It's a main plot point that they just kinda skipped over.

3) Why end so early?? The ending of the book was a great cliffhanger (no pun intended) and would have made for a much better movie. Especially for all the folk who saw the movies without reading the books.

I also thought that Sam was not very well represented, and his strengths weren't portrayed very well, but it didn't really matter all that much to me.

i agree with a lot of the discrepancies people had with the film, but it isn't gonna make me dislike it...slightly annoying, but i never expected the film to stick exactly to the books...
hopefully the extended version will clear some things up (what do you mean i have to wait till november???)
^. .^
= ' =
Gurus
CommunityArtists

November is in deed very far away.

As is (whine) December 17th!

In deed, some decisions have been made regarding the layouts of the movie, but I guess it was necessary to cut some here and add a little there. I hadn't stopped long enough to think about Faramir, but you're right, it's a sad development.

However, I do believe that the "cliffhanger" is intended, due to necessary events in the third movie. And if they put in too great a cliff-hanger, people would just be annoyed about it! After all, we do have to wait for another 358 days.

-KC

P.S. Merry (and Pippin) Christmas.

^. .^
= ' =
Gurus
CommunityArtists

Oooooh, I wish I had thought of that - Merry and Pippin Christmas - That's great!!

i'm downloading the soundtrack...
^. .^
= ' =
Gurus
CommunityArtists

*Coughs* Isn't that... not-so-legal?

I just read an hour ago that one in every five Danes do it all the time. Now, I fancy myself an individual, often not doing what the broad masses do, but... ...well... You'll probably guess

Found the original for LotR I in a bin the other day, amazing how cheap it can get when it is "old news". Not that it is to me, so I bought it for (calculating) approximately 7½ euro.

The end-title to TT is awful, much more James Bond than Tolkien. *Sigh* Enya was MADE to sing this soundtrack!!!

yeah, it is slightly weird...
7 1/2 euros...that is quite cheap, isn't it? lucky...
um, downloading, well, i use kazaa, which uses some sort of loophole in the law...i'm not maknig money out of it
^. .^
= ' =
Gurus
CommunityArtists

In Denmark, a 150 KaZaA-users are currently being sued by local copyright-activists, and fines and settlements reach well into the 500-8000 Euro-area for private users.
I'm not trying to moralize here, really, just letting you know it. Many people here also seemed to believe that KaZaA enabled a copyright-law-loophole or something, but they have become wiser.

oh..well...is it something about the danish law?
and were they using the music for themselves, or trying to reproduce it on CDs and things?
cos all i'm doing is playing it on my computer, and making the occasional CD which is my own mixture of songs
(and noone knows about it anyway...)
^. .^
= ' =
Gurus
CommunityArtists

*Pondering when I suddenly started to sound like a know-it-all old bastard...*

Well, most of the people being sued are (were) only using it for home purposes. It costs them a fine of 20 Euros per music-CD and 60 per movie. Added to that are then calculated costs for programmes and so forth. As for the law, well it is copyright violation as defined by most western nations, and as such they are also held responsible for violations of copyright held by people outside Denmark and even outside the EEC.
I'm really not trying to be a moralistical loudmouth here (if it can be called that, but I'm sure you understand) but these are the harsh facts in our little neck of the planet. And it is said, that more trials will come and that the tracking system used will be used by other European nations.
They probably would state that, no matter if it is true or not, just to scare us. But the abovementioned about fines and stuff, are the basic facts. Also, it is a fact, that when you use the KaZaA media-exchange system, your IP-adress is registered, and that is how they tracked these people. And it is said, that these first 150 are just the bulk to start off with.

*Coughs* Well, not that I've never found stuff on the Internet. In fact, I have gotten hold of... well... you understand. And I read just yesterday that one in five Danes download or borrow music - violating copyright - so I guess I'm not as abnormal as I used to think.
I've even heard from a friend of a friend that he knows a bloke who has the Two Towers - screening edition - for downloads. I'm now wondering, how long I can withstand it before I give in and do the unmentionable about that...

So, there you have it.

Best of luck, happy New Year and go watch the (original) Two Towers some day soon. Frodo, Legolas, Araghorn are just so... YUMMMMMMMMM...

-Kimoto

I have to start out by saying that I am by far the harshest critic of TT that I have come across so far, but while I am very strong in my opinions, I do love the fact that other people thought it was wonderful. After all, it is Lord of the Rings, and I am an incurable ring nut. My own frustration with the film probably stems from the fact that I just completed a reread of the second book only three days before seeing it. I've heard it said that Peter Jackson admits more license was taken with this script than with the other two, and I certainly hope that this is true.

The first time I saw the film, I hated it. Absolutely hated it. There were bits I liked, particularly Gollum, but I just felt like it deviated so completely from the books in key areas that it was almost painful. I live and work in Hollywood, and I understand that no movie can follow a book completely, and I'm okay with that. I understand that Eowyn and the people of Edoras had to travel to Helms Deep in the film because they had to give Eowyn and Aragorn more flirt time. That makes sense to me. It's not what happens in the book, but I can live with that. It was major plot and/or character changes that I have a problem with.

The first real beef I have is with Faramir. As mentioned above, Faramir was an honorable, steadfast, good-hearted man. With the exception of Aragorn, who is portrayed as some sort of uber-human, the race of men are painted as corrupt and evil all throughout LotR, so it was always refreshing to read the bits with Faramir. Faramir has always served to restore my faith in mankind, as far as Middle Earth is concerned. Now he's no better than his brother and others (don't want to give away the next film for those who haven't read the books). For me, this was the biggest disappointment of the film.

I was also disappointed in the Ents. An ancient and noble race, they were reduced to being little more than an oddity. I suppose Treebeard's unwillingness to help the hobbits in the film was PJ's way of showing how slow they are at coming to decisions and how unwilling they are to interfere with affairs outside their own boundaries, but it creates a handful of minor wrinkles that don't sit well with me. Personally, too, I am sorry that the army of trees was replaced with an army of elves at Helm's Deep. I can kind of understand that change, as the elves made for more exciting battle scenes, but it would have been fun to see the huorns brought to life. Besides, I have to say that it sucked to watch Haldir die, knowing he wasn't even supposed to be there!

And what was this about Aragorn being left for dead after an Orc attack? I still haven't been able to figure out how that furthered the plot. It just took up time which could have been better spent, in my opinion, following the book a bit more accurately.

Oh, and don't get me started on the scene in which Frodo offers the ring to the Nazgul!

All this being said, there were a good many things about the film which I did like. I thought the opening bit with Gandalf and the Balrog was absolutely breathtaking, for starters. I thought that it was brilliant the way lines and clips from the first film were interspersed with sounds of Gandalf's battle. I get goose bumps just thinking about it!

The battle sequences were amazing, too, as was the Nazgul's winged beast. I would have liked to see more of that magnificent creature, in fact (just a selfish moment, not a complaint). I was also tickled that Sam got to see his Oliphant. And although I agree with some of the arguments against it, I really enjoyed some of the humor that was added to the film. (Although I feel a bit bad about poor Gimli, who is a mighty warrior with a stout heart, but has now been reduced to an axe-weilding punch line.)

Of course the film's highlight, hands down, was Gollum. I have never been a great fan of that character or of computer animated figures in live action films, but Peter Jackson has made a believer out of me on both counts. Gollum was extraordinary. The depth of emotion that the animators managed to convey in his face is remarkable. That, along with the combined elements of the clever writing, and Andy Serkis' brilliant voice work, made Gollum into a multi-layered, poignant, conflicted creature whom it was both delightful and painful to watch struggle with his inner demons. Any time I find myself wanting to cheer for a character who pretty clearly fits into the "bad guy" mold, I must give kudos to the filmmakers.

I have seen the film twice now, and have plans to view it a third time in a couple of days. As much as certain parts of the movie still make me cringe, I believe it is growing on me, and I am coming to like it on its own merits. Who knows, to paraphrase something a friend of mine said, perhaps by the time Return of the King is released next year, Two Towers will feel as much like an old friend as Fellowship does today.

I sure hope so.

Myjo

That was a breathtaking review, Myjo.

I agree on most points, but I am the kind who finds defence in the difficulty of adapting LotR to the silverscreen in the first place.
If one should give good credit to the books all together, it would take not nine hours of film, but at the very least double that. And added to this, many a moviewatcher has NOT read the three books. No, it is by far not an easy task to adapt it to the screen.

BTW: I'm a teacher and teach children in a broad variety of ages. Just the other day, a few days before the premiere of TT, a young boy asked me if I'd read the books, to which I answered that I had read them several times. He was stunned in awe by this and I asked why, and as it turned out, he truly believed that the books came out along with the first LotR-movie and not, as fact is, approximately fifty years ago. (When he learned this, he could better understand that I had "already" managed to read them several times. )

Just for the anecdotes...

At any rate, I still love thoe movies and, like you, I like Gollum a lot better now. Poor, despaired creature... We like him, even if he doesn't like the hobbittses!

-Kimoto

I've seen it! I've seen it! I've seen it! I've seen it! I've seen it! I've s-s-seen it!

... and

Wow!