NOTE PLENTY OF SPOILERS AT THIS POINT, since I think that everyone has had
a chance to see the movie.
SPOILERS
SPOILERS
SPOILERS
I haven't read the books in probably 10 years so I probably have a
different perspective on this than msot. I pretty much know the story,
but I'm certainly not going to notice much in the way of additions and
deletions.
So, some thoughts:
1) Overall, I think that The Two Towers is the best movie. The
Fellowship of the Ring might have been good, but in my mind it was too
slow, too confusing, and most of the great special effects were given away
in the previews. The Return of the King was hyped a little less, and less
was given away, so I place it in the middle. In fairness, I should note
that my single most memorable moment from reading the entire Ring Trilogy
was the meeting of the Ents - so The Two Towers probably had a bit of an
advantage in that department for me. Nevertheless, I just found The Two
Towers more intense, more fluid, more believable, and with overall the best
battle scenes I had ever seen. O.k., I know that Gandalf is not supposed
to be around in The Two Towers (which is one thing that ruined the climax
to The Fellowship of the Ring for me - as I *knew* that Gandalf was
supposed to "perish" in the pit with the balrog.), but by the second movie
I am completely over this, and it is just plain the best movie in my mind
- unusual for the second movement of a trilogy to be sure.
2) In my mind the movie was too long... and too short. 3.5 hours is
definitely a long time to sit in a crowded theatre, especially with 20
minutes of advertisements tacked on. At the same time, you could just
tell that this movie was squeezed into the timeframe, as the storytelling
was often choppy. As just one example, where did the Eagles suddenly come
from? I think they might have been in the first movie... but that was two
years ago... an eternity. Overall, I would much rather have preferred
that they go the "Gettysburg" route, make it a full four hours+, and put in
an intermission. Or why not even make it two separate movies.... we are
about making money after all, right? - and there is plenty of material in
The Lord of the Rings to make the books into four movies. The ending of
the movie is simply interminable. Maybe I have become a jaded American
moviegoer, and maybe I shouldn't have caught a 10:30 showing, but after the
raging climax.
3) The Army of the Dead is a major disappointment. Now, to be clear, I
did not recall this scene at *all* from my reading of the novels a decade
ago.... so I almost half-wondered if they were added in, but that seemed
unlikely to me. Nevertheless, the story line just simply did not seem
believeable. The worst part is after The Army of the Dead arrives at the
harbor and engages in a pitched battle with the arriving Army of Bad Men
(?) and then arrives at the main battlefield and simply sweeps across the
battlefield in a green wave, securing the victory. Huh? immediately
afterwards, as Aragon releases the Army of the Dead, the battliefield has
already been cleared of all bodies, and indeed the men of Gondor and Minis
Tirith who held the battlefield long enough for the Army of the Dead to
arrive are NOWHERE to be seen. What's up with that???? Overall, it was
just a major, major disappointment for me to see this battle end with
ghosts sweeping across the battlefield, and the bravery and courage of the
men who held the battlefield instantly and utterly forgotten.
4) Overall the battles were somewhat disappointing. Agree totally with
whomever mentioned that the Army of Aragon at the Battle of the Black Gate
looked like a pitiful force that simply had no chance. Much of the
battle at Minis Tirith had a bit of a "been there - seen that in the last
movie" feel to it. I also couldn't help but feel that I was going to be
seeing jet-skis and Ewoks bringing down The Walkers. Unfair, I guess....
but once again, it definitely felt like I had already seen this battle
scene once before - albeit in a different trilogy. Also, there were
numerous time inconsistancies in the leadup to this battle, in all the
journeys back and forth - someone aught to have fact-checked the script, as
the _multiple_ inconsistincies just became jarring. Furthermore,
perhaps the most memorable battle moment I had from reading the books was
the arrival of Gandalf the White. There's definitely no way it could
have the same effect in the movie with Gandalf never "dying" in the first
place, but overall I just felt that the movie failed to deliver that
moment. I don't know if the "Woman of Gondor" (whose name I can never
remember) killing the Lord of the Nazgul moment was in the book, but that
was the highlight of the battle scenes for me - even she did nearly step on
the line.
5) I've heard that Sam Gamgee is getting some Best Supporting Actor buzz -
which I think would be great Of course, I still hope that Gollum could
get a nomination, but that's probably too much to hope for. As has been
noted, Gollum is again outstanding. The Orcs were also great as usual.
I seem to recall an Army of Dwarves getting involved at some point in the
books - maybe not - so was a bit disappointed to not see that. Anyhow,
overall a very good movie, but a notch below The Two Towers in my assessment.
JDG
_______________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world,
it is God's gift to humanity." - George W. Bush 1/29/03
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
