Just came from Toys R Us, having purchased the gloriously huge talking Ent, Treebeard. And, just to be complete, I also picked up Merry and Pippin who are sized close to proportionately correct. Sure beats the heck out of my previous Ent action figure, which consisted of a carefully carved broccoli stalk.
By the way, I wonder: Would people start crabbing that “Two Towers” is “inaccessible.” After all, it makes zero effort to summarize the previous film. It just assumes you know what’s going on.
PAD
• 
You mean you haven’t heard about the new, continuity-lite “Ultimate LOTR” currently in development? It gets rid of all that convoluted backstory about the Ring of Power…
You know that had occured to me about 15 minutes into the movie as well. A friend of mine had shown me the first LOTR film a few weeks before, and watching the second film it occured to me that there were no memory-refresher scenes of any kind, and nothing at all to let someone new know what was going on. If you haven’t seen the first film or read the first book — forget it.
Not that a film that long would have had any room for anything like that, anyway!
I didn’t really mind, having just seen the first film… but with my memory, I’m sure I’m going to have to watch the DVD of Two Towers this time next year before I go see the third one.
Innacessible for people who didn’t watch the first one?
Yeah, but I kinda read somewhere (I think it was in the newspaper)that it was Jackson who dictated that there would be no recap, summary or whatsoever. The people at New Line were againt it but somehow he convinced them to follow his lead.
Pretty much, it forces you to have watched “Fellowship”, so you can enjoy “Two Towers” properly.
Haven’t gotten the chance to read LoR bools (it’s a shame isn’t it?), but still struggling if I’ll pick it in english or translated to Portuguese.
Anyway, I really enjoyed “Two Towers”. Yes, I agree that it seems more like a popcorn flick than “Fellowship” is, but it was fun and made think about a few things after I left the theather. Don’t know if it actually lives up to Tolkien’s books, but it’s at least a very cool movie….
Now, wait another year for the final chapter fo this 9-hour big epic….
I want the big Sauron figure with the glowing eyes, myself…
From what I heard, Mr. Jackson’s tonge-in-cheek comment was “If you can’t spend the $3.00 to rent the first movie from Blockbuster, I don’t want you to see my film.”
Some people will probbably crab about the “no recap,” but since every outlet has stated that there is no recap, every review says there’s no recap, and that it’s a continuation of the story, as opposed to a “part 2” like most sequels (i.e. the next story), then I don’t feel sorry for anyone who goes to see it who didn’t see Fellowship.
And of course, much better to use the recap time to show what they did show in the first 15 min then a recap sequence which always feels artificial. I can’t think of any time that the recap in anything felt natural and not like the writers going “For those now tuning in…”
Hmmm… but of course a movie doesn’t have a 30+-years-long tail of history and continuity. Much as I dislike the current
I saw LOTR: Two Towers last night and luckily I did know the story because there are parts I still did not get. But those things seemed small. All you really needed to know was that a seemingly powerless creature was carrying a huge burden in order for good to triumph over evil. Everything else is fanboy claptrap. But fun fanboy claptrap, don’t get me wrong.
I think the movie was spectacular ( though a little too long) and leagues better than Attack of the Clones. I was amazed at how much I accepted Golllum as a real character. His facial expressions were fantastic. I honestly forgot he was a computer generated first cousin to Jar Jar Binks.
First of all, there is a brief recap, when we see Frodo’s dream/vision of Gandalf in the beginning of the movie, which recaps the crossing of the bridge in Moria, and Gandalf’s fight with the Balrog, which at least lets us know/think that Gandalf is dead (for those who didn’t see the trailer).
Having worked at a movie theater for a few years, and having come into contact with many “casual moviegoers” while working the box office who haven’t seen any commercials or trailers for a film, who don’t know what they’re going to see until they get to the theater, and don’t make it a point to find out something about it, I would say that those people don’t have the right to complain. I mean, Fellowship was seen by just about everyone. If you’re so apathetic about your moviegoing that you don’t bother trying to make it somewhat interactive experience, then you forfeit the right to bìŧçh about it.
I would also point out that The Empire Strikes Back had absolutely no recaps, and it’s generally considered the best of the Star Wars trilogy. I’ve never heard anyone complain about it.
I was hoping you would start a dialogue on the LOTR, albeit through the toy tie-ins. [SPOILER WARNING] I have to say I was a little disappointed with the Two Towers becase it deviated from the book. I’ll admit the second book was my least favorite, with “Book IV”, kind of boring, but it bothered me that Faramir was less pure and more like his brother, Boromir and actually took them to Minas Tirith (and what a long hike they’ll have getting back to Mordor). I didn’t like the Elves marching to Helm’s Deep (I expected the Munchkins from Oz to follow). And that scene at the end where Frodo shows the Ring to the Nazgul, well, shouldn’t that be game, set and match? The Nazgul saw the Ring. Why didn’t he report that back to Sauron, if not take it outright? Oh, well. I know I sound like a purist. And I did enjoy the film, but I guess I expected more as I enjoyed the first one a lot. And it looks like the third installment should follow pretty true to the book. I’m curious, Mr. David, what you thought of the movie? Hope everyone has a happy and safe New Year.
I saw it last night and was sitting next to a family having this discussion. To quote: “Isn’t this the same movie we have bootlegged at home? No, that was the first one. I fell asleep watching it. What happened?” They then proceeded to have an elaborate, and very vocal, McDonald’s dinner that they snuck in. I swear, it was like skit from “In Living Color.” I got up a half hour into the movie to sit somewhere else making sure to step on each of their feet as I walked out.
It’s absolutely inaccessible if you haven’t seen the first film (although they do recap some stuff in the opening scene, which I thought was well done), but that’s how they make movies these days, on the assumption that you’ll have just watched (or re-watched) the first movie on DVD prior to attending the second. It’s why they throw the buy-one-ticket-get-one-free coupon into the DVD package. I even said here in my review, “if you allow for the fact that it’s a chapter rather than a story” – but in this case it’s absolutely understandable, that’s how the books are structured. And yes, if you pick up the second book in a trilogy you’re very often getting a chapter rather than a complete story, and I mostly do consider that quite unfair to the reader. (As I recall, Tolkein originally wanted the book to come out as one massive volume but was talked out of it by his publisher.) I much prefer stuff like the Oz books, where there’s a wonderful mythology that runs throughout the books but each one is a separate, complete, accessible story.
By the way, according to the Tolkein Society, this coming Friday, January 3, is the Eleventy-One (Eleventy-First?) anniversary of his birth, so I think anyone who hasn’t yet seen the new movie should do so on that day in honor of the man. 🙂
Actually, I am bothered just a bit by the lack of any effort to recap the first film. I think that making the assumption that everyone who sets foot in a theater saw the first film is a bit of a leap. I may be the only man on Earth who watched the Die Hard film in reverse order, but I use myself as an example of how you cannot assume anything about an audience.
At this point, though, most moviegoers are either interested in spending $10 or not. So the lack of a recap is not fatal. Still, a two-minute recap could have been done.
As for the film, which I too saw last night, I liked much about it but found it came up short compared to the first. 2/3rds of it was brilliant, and 1/3rd needed work. Some scenes were rather ponderous, there is a defintely sense that the film was edited to make it fit the time alloted, and the hobbits got badly underused. Still, a fine film.
I must agree with Jim, I was shocked by the deviations in Two Towers. Based on how close Fellowship stayed to the story, I was very surprised at the changes in Towers. On repeated viewings I’m sure I’ll get over the elves at Helm’s Deep and the Warg attack but the change in Faramir will continue to bother me. The major point of the contrast between Boromir and Faramir’s reactions to the Ring is lost in the movie. I don’t even mind the detour to Osgiliath (sp?) other than it stemming from the change in Faramir’s character.
KC – I hope you ground each of their toes into the floor as you stepped on them.
Peace and Prosperity to everyone in the New Year.
Yeah, you might be able to say that it is “inaccessible.” But:
1) The 1st part was one of the top-grossing films of last year, and if you haven’t seen it, it is easily available for rental at your local video store. (As opposed to certain comic book series with initials like CM and SG, where the powers-that-be have decided to not make the back issues available in trades, making it difficult for new readers to catch up.)
2) LoTR is really meant to be a giant 9 hour movie (10.5 via the DVDs), broken up into 3 parts due to the economics of modern movie-making.
3) There will only be 3 parts–it’s not an ongoing.
The best comic book comparison to LoTR would probably be Watchmen: no recaps, 12 part limited series, and meant to be read together as one trade despite the fact that it came out in installments.
Haven’t made enough money this year to see it, but I’m going to use my half-price coupon from the Lowes Theater from seeing the somewhat disapointing new Trek movie to see Daredevil when it comes out.
Actually, a number of the critics who reviewed the film spent a great deal of time discussing whether or not it was “accessible.”
On another topic, I’ve been having trouble accessing (I was going to use a different word, one that doesn’t sound like a bad pun, but “accessing” is more precise) this site on my home computer (a MAC, with Earthlink). I can get here on the computer I’m using now, so I know the page hasn’t crashed. Is the problem with my computer, or with the site? Does anyone know?
–Daniel
Hëll, I found the FIRST movie pretty dámņ inaccessible. As someone who has never read the LOTR books, I found the whole thing largely befuddling — almost like reading Cliffs Notes of a novel one hasn’t read, or a later-season episode of Babylon 5. The movie was beautifully filmed but didn’t do much at all for me.
Of course, not having read the books, I foolishly expected that the first movie would actually have an ending. Fool me once…
Are they putting something ‘experimental’ in the water where some of these people who are complaining about a lack of a recap live?
1. To the people who say that they need to re-watch the first film again on DVD/video the night before they go and see the second one, to remind themselves what happened: you have serious memory problems. Seriously, if you honestly cannot clearly remember a film you saw a maximum of one year ago, check yourself into the care of a neurologist right away.
2. To the people who like to watch trilogies in reverse order: you may even have legitimate reasons for having to do this, but I fail to see why the film-makers should have to pander to you chaps. You’re certainly in the minority here. Why should the majority of people who actually do their homework (and let’s be honest; it’s pretty minimal homework) be made to suffer through tedious recaps just because of a few oddballs who haven’t?
3. Anybody who voluntarily goes to see a sequel when they knowingly haven’t seen the previous film(s) is an idiot. Okay, maybe not an idiot, but they certainly forfeit any right to complain that they don’t understand the film. Especially when there is only ONE previous film…
Sorry if this sounds harsh, but these Two Towers gripes sound a bit too much like people complaining that their food requires too much chewing for my liking… I dread to think that we’re going to end up in a world where all our works of art are going to have to be put in the blender and repackaged as baby-food so the lowest-common-denominator-baby doesn’t have a tantrum.
I absolutley understand why they made the changes to Faramir. They wanted him to have a character arc.
Boromir’s arc was very defined: He’s tempted, he crashes and burns, then redeems himself in some measure.
In the book, Faramir doesn’t really have a character arc. Instead he more or less learns from what happened to Boromir and says, “Whoa, better not go down that road.” And that’s pretty much it.
The time Frodo spends with Faramir, book wise, is almost incidental to the main plot. In the movie, it’s far more central to the storytelling (particularly since the big face off against the giant spider was delayed to the next film.) So in order to make the story work *as a movie*, it was necessary to give Faramir emotional beats beyond what the book provided. As a result, he starts heading down the exact same road as his brother, and it is only due to subsequent events that *he himself experiences* that he realizes the folly of what he’s trying to do and frees Frodo, even at the possible cost of his own life. That’s character development. That’s what you need to make a movie work.
“Harry Potter” aside, a film works best when it’s a story developed on its own terms, not simply a slavish imitation of the book. If the book happens to work beat for beat as a movie, great (“The Graduate,” for instance, is little more than a script of the book)but more often than not, accommodations must be made for the people who spent $7.00 to see the movie.
PAD
Of course, not having read the books, I foolishly expected that the first movie would actually have an ending. Fool me once…
(cue the violin music)
Yeah, because ALL THOSE MENTIONS of this being a “trilogy” were oh so camouflaged, weren’t they? If only all those mentions of the trilogy amongst critics, newsmagazines, moviegoers, fans of the book, trailers, commercials and other sources were just a tad more conspicuous…
Luigi,
I’m not sure why you’re reacting so harshly to what I said. It is possible for a trilogy or a series to consist of relatively self-contained works that have beginnings, middles, and ending.
At the very least, as someone who has not read the books, I don’t think it was unreasonable of me to expect that the movie would not simply stop virtually in-scene, or to be irritated when it did so and I knew Part Two was a year away. I dislike spending eight bucks for filmus interruptus.
Then you’re going to hate the second Matrix film, Chris, because that (filmus interuptus) is the exact phrase the producers used for it’s ending.
Personally, I thought FotR ended at a good conclusion point. The Fellowship had split up, Boromir fallen, and each group was now about to start their own seperate journies. The Quest, for them as a group, was over. Would you prefer they stopped in the middle of the fight with the Orcs? Or where Frodo and Sam eat the Lambis(sp) bread? Or when the Orcs try to eat Merry and Pippin? The film ends just about where the book does, and really is the only place there to pause the story. And to warn you, the second film does a similar bit.
Well, I don’t know why one would go see this movie if they hadn’t seen the first one. But, I got a feel that they did pretty much recap what happened in the first movie along the way, or at least by the end. Sure, in some cases, like Frodo explaining the origin of the Fellowship to Faramir, it isn’t explained until much later, but I think it’s always fun to be thrown right into the middle of the action and not to understand everything until later, but to let the storytelling of the movie grab you and keep you interested nonetheless until all is revealed. I remember, as a kid, I watched the Star Wars movies out of order, but I didn’t mind at all. Even the intros didn’t help me understand the order of events, but through the storytelling, it was obvious what was going on, whether rescuing Han on Tatooine, defending the Hoth base, etc.
In Two Towers, it’s mostly all clear. Frodo narrates how Golem, who should be a new character to everyone in this movie, was the previous possessor of the ring. Aragorn plainly states how his group is searching for Pippen and Merry. It’s plain to see what happened with Gandalf, and which characters know he survived and which think he’s still dead.
And for the record, while I thought Fellowship was supremely mediocre, I was very surprised at how good Towers was
To the people who say that they need to re-watch the first film again on DVD/video the night before they go and see the second one, to remind themselves what happened: you have serious memory problems. Seriously, if you honestly cannot clearly remember a film you saw a maximum of one year ago, check yourself into the care of a neurologist right away.
And the horse you rode in on, Paul.
Seriously, this is really insulting. Yes, some of us don’t remember entertainment we partake in even as soon as the movie’s over or the cover of the book is closed. No, it doesn’t indicate some sort of neurological problem. It’s just the way we are, okay? Some of us have to remember actual IMPORTANT stuff, like dozens of phone numbers for our boss at a moment’s notice. If you actually knew anything about how memory worked instead of engaging in ignorant insults you’d realize there’s only so much one can remember at any one time, and those among us whose job depends on remembering real-life stuff instead of fictional stuff seek to retain our jobs. Remembering fiction just isn’t that important, since the DVD or book is always there to play or pick up again. And. It’s. Fiction.
Hey, Elaine. Sorry if this came across as massively insulting… I meant it to be humorous. I’m not that much of a jerk; honestly! In my defense, I has a humungous migraine at the time I posted that comment, and I was just sick to friggin’ death of hearing people whinge about how they didn’t get enough of a recap for this film. I officially apologise to anybody I may have offended.
(I like the way you assume I don’t have to remember ‘important’ stuff like ‘phone numbers and work related things, too… that was a nice touch! 😉 As for being ignorant of how memory actually works, you couldn’t be further from the mark, I’m afraid. I’ve actually worked with neurologists whose area of expertise is exactly that. I probably know more about it than most people, and have actually suffered from amnesia, which further served to enlighten me about how the mind in general and the memory in particular works.)
All this stuff aside, however, it wasn’t my intention to insult anybody, I was shooting for humour, and I apologise to anybody whose nose I may have put out of joint!
By the way, Happy New Year, PAD fans!
STAR WARS had nothing in way of a recap. There are the scrolling intros, but those fill in the gaps between movies- they don’t recap the previous movies.
Harry Potter didn’t have a cap.
DIE HARD, LETHAL WEAPON, RUSH HOUR, JAMES BOND, TOY STORY, MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, none of those had recaps. and no questioned if it was “accessible” Sequels are made to get money from the fans of the first one. If there isn’t enough money to get from fans of the first one- they aren’t going to make the movie.
One thing, though: Lord of the Rings is not a series. It’s a single work divided in three movies (thankfully. I shudder to think of the nightmare if the whole of the book had been done as one movie).
Anyway, I had no trouble following TTT. I had rewatched the movie on DVD (extended edition), but even so, I would have remembered the more important stuff (although rewatching the first movie made me appreciate the “Toss me” line a lot more :-))
And I loved TTT, and especially Gollum. Yes, they were some changes between the book and the movie, but I didn’t mind a bit. Now, the problem is waiting one year to see the conclusion. But I’ll have the extended DVD to give me a refresher course.
Thanks to your warning, I’ll know going in. 🙂 But THE MATRIX is a known quantity for me — I liked the first movie and the second and third will be released within months of each other — so a cliffhanger ending won’t bother me so much.
I’m not begrudging anyone liking the first LOTR movie; certainly the zillions of dollars it made show that most people didn’t mind the ending, or lack thereof. I’m just saying that, as someone who has not read the books, the first film’s abrupt ending was rather frustrating.
“It is possible for a trilogy or a series to consist of relatively self-contained works that have beginnings, middles, and ending.”
Sure it is. And The Fellowship of the Ring did.
“At the very least, as someone who has not read the books, I don’t think it was unreasonable of me to expect that the movie would not simply stop virtually in-scene…”
It didn’t. It stopped when the story of The Fellowship was over. And I haven’t read the books yet either.
“…to be irritated when it did so and I knew Part Two was a year away.”
Why? Are Lord of the Rings movies the only excuses you have to go out on a Saturday night?
I saw Two Towers with a group and some of them had not seen the first chapter. Except for a few “who is that?” moments, they enjoyed themselves just fine.
Bobby
Bobby Nash
Writer @ Large
I have yet to see the first LoTR, despite being a semi-fan of the saga. Don’t ask me why.