Flipside Movie Emporium

[Balint]

Well, this is my first post here, and I?d like to say hi to everybody out there, great site!

My first topic is about LOTR, especially about The Two Towers.

I?m sure Jackson read the book. Most likely a lot of times. And I?m sure he and his crew of directors put in 100 % of their energy and time, the result being a superb movie just as the first one and I am sure the third movie will be in the same league of superb movies as well.

Honestly I think the movies could not have been better.

BUT

Peter Jackson has had a book he was following during his work in directing the films. And although I think the scenes he left out in the first book were absolutely those I felt should have been left out (Tom Bombadil, the long way to Bree), I do not agree with the changes in the second movie.

So, WHY is the Aragorn scene with the river and the wolves, and why is the character of Faramir so twisted around?

I always felt that these changes will make sense as soon as the trilogy of movies is complete, but I start to feel otherwise...

Your opinion?
_________________
"Now, that is a big trunk. It holds a tuba, a suitcase, a dead dog, and a garment bag almost perfectly." - James Leer, Wonder Boys

[the night watchman]

Welcome to the boards, Balint. I haven't read LOTR so I can't respond directly to your post, but I have seen a lot of movies based on books I've read. I supposed I've come to conclusion that a book is a book and a movie is a movie, and never the twain shall meet. Even the best adaptations in the world are still necessarily different than their source. And sometimes adaptations that diverge from the source end up being better than ones that stick close to it (compare Manhunter with Red Dragon, for example). I think as long as a movie keeps the spirit of the novel, I'm not too worried how the filmmaker goes about his job. And sometimes, like with the case of King's novel The Shining, and Kubrick's movie The Shining, I just put one out of my mind while I'm enjoying the other.
_________________
"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

-David Cronenberg

[Danny Baldwin]

I've read all of them, and I seriously think Jackson's approach is for the better. The way LOTR is written is fascinating, on a literary note, but if the screenplay and Jackson had tried to directly adapt the books, I don't think it would've worked. I think they cut The Two Towers perfectly (I imagine some of it will be in Return of the King). These movies are just to show off amazing special effects, not intelligent like the books, and not even as imaginative as they are. I would change a few things in Fellowship, but I would leave Towers as it is, if I were in charge.
_________________
Danny Baldwin

View My Reviews

[Mark Dujsik]

I'm reading the books as the films come out, and the one thing that struck me about The Two Towers was how relatively without conflict it is. Jackson made a wise decision in creating it throughout the film and expanding upon the theme of a world at war by doing so.

As for the Aragorn fake-death scene, it's there to give him time alone so that his story with Arwen can be developed further. It also gives him a chance to see the army marching to Helm's Deep so he can warn the king.
_________________
"Film lovers are sick people."

--Francois Truffaut

10 Best Films of 2006

Mark Reviews Movies

[Balint]

Yep, all these answers make perfect sense. I hope that all the changes will come to a good turn in the last installment this christmas.

I?ve heard rumours that Saruman is going to die in the 3rd movie (!!!)

THAT would be a major change. My reading of the book took place 10 years ago, but I remember his punishment as spending the rest of his life as a fallen sorcerer.

Anyway.

I?ve downloaded a trailer of "The Hobbit" by Jackson on KaZaa. Is that a fake or is he really doing it?
_________________
"Now, that is a big trunk. It holds a tuba, a suitcase, a dead dog, and a garment bag almost perfectly." - James Leer, Wonder Boys

[the night watchman]

[juhsstin]

well actually...

SPOILER

saruman does die in the end of the book.

when i first saw TTT, i hadn't read the book. while the movie was visually stunning, i found it to be on the whole a little tiresome. one too many solemn moments filled with melancholy or love or the humbling realizations of life/good/evil/philosophy etc. but having now read the book, i loved it on my second viewing (despite divergences from the book)!

faramir in the movie, lends more cinematic tumult to his character and its relationship with the ring and frodo (and boromir indirectly), the resolution should prove more exciting. and the arwen/aragorn story in the book is almost marginal.

jus my .02
_________________
Who let the dogs out?