Lord of the Rings (2 towers) [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

MaFuYee

12-19-2002, 09:37 PM

hi,

just came back from watching the 2 towers.
what an amazing piece of cinema!

of course the battle scenes were unrealistic; but that has to be expected.

e.g. - you don't "block" with swords. - the edges would chip, and the sword would soon break. - at least that would be the case with the swords used by aragorn, legolas, etc. - it's called 'stage fighting'

also, i found it to be a tad annoying when the baddies would delay delivering the killing stroke, just so they can snarl, and make a face, giving someone else the moment they needed to step in and save the proverbial day.

the storming of isengard was absolutely incredible. - score one for the trees!

the thing that drives me crazy is that i have to wait another year to watch the last installment!

ZIM

12-20-2002, 07:59 AM

I read the books maybe 20 years ago & I've been pretty impressed so far with the fealty to them. This second movie [I saw it last night] was a little off [ended too soon- it was supposed to go on a little] & confusing, but I'm thinking on the second or third viewing it will be better.

I've also seen the extended version of FOTR, and agree that it holds much more info. I'm suspecting that there's at least an extra hour of movie in TTT that was cut for length- seeing that will make a better time of it. I can't imagine what its like for those who haven't read the books.

Fighting styles: agree with MaFuYee re: stage fighting.

Gollum/Smeagol used a kind of "monkey" style, IMHO [and was the coolest character].
Gimli's bravery is spot on when he charges into everything.
The Ents have superb "rooting" LOL:D I was a little put off that they didn't show them 'growing into' Orthanc/Isengard, but still very spectacular. [Side note: Orthanc was made of 'unbreakable' stone. Tolkien wrote the Ents 'used the power of trees, that can grow into anything, given enough time.' A little Hsing I, in a way]

Battle scenes: awesome. We were looking at all those orcs, saying "sheeeeeeit...." All those pikes! And the orcs spoke, not just grr grr :)

@PLUGO

12-20-2002, 03:54 PM

I've never read the books...

Yeah yeah on the theater sword techniques.... But you'd figure elven made swords don't chip.

I dug Legolas's ability to switch from Bow to blades at a moment's notice.

I wonder about the darf... whlle it was nice to see him be more than just grumpy was he SUCH a BAD @SS that he could afford to be so clumsey?

It must have been magic blades that allowed Orcs to be sliced so frequiently. It was often little more than one slice per Orc...

totally dug the flaming Ent's retreat into the flooding waters.

& GOLEM creapy piece of rubber he was!!!

Souljah

12-21-2002, 04:57 AM

did u guys see the making of it? twas quite good.....

saw it on wednesday, great film......!

the battle scenes were the best i've seen, by sheer vast-ness.....

ZIM

12-21-2002, 08:14 AM

Just responding to your post-

I wonder about the darf... whlle it was nice to see him be more than just grumpy was he SUCH a BAD @SS that he could afford to be so clumsey?

Dwarfs in the Tolkien world are tough as stone, literally. The movies seem to be overplaying the comedic relief of the 'short guy'. In [that] reality, dwarfs are nearly always frontline troops capable of cleaving orcs in two with a single blow and withstanding punishment that would shame an elf. Their clumsiness would be relative to elfs [who are the most graceful and quick] and men. I prefer to think of them as 'ungainly' rather than clumsy, which is a beef I have with the movie.

It must have been magic blades that allowed Orcs to be sliced so frequiently. It was often little more than one slice per Orc...

Maybe. Aragorns, legolas blades were elven, not necessarily magical. Tolkien's magic was more involved with the quality of a thing's making than with magical energy put into a thing. Thus materials like mithril figure into it and elven or dwarven craftsmanship is important.

GOLEM creapy piece of rubber he was!!!

LOL- golems are jewish creations. Its Gollum. I only correct becuz a fan will crucify you....yes, he's schizoid from being taken over by the ring. He's his own 'fight club'. :)

Will Rhadagast be in the next movie???
Did you notice the men over by the Black Gates- they were Easterlings, dressed in oriental garb. The story takes place in the western half of middle earth, and they come from the other side of Mordor. They are based on Indian/Arab/Chinese cultures, with oliphaunts and cool weapons. Some might feel that this constitutes a kind of racist commentary, but more to the point is that they are in the stories at all...Tolkien said they had their own tales, he just didn't write them.

dezhen2001

12-21-2002, 04:56 PM

just saw the trailer here in the UK and cant wait to see this movie :) will probably wait until after christmas when things have calmed down a bit though...

it looks effin amazing! :cool: im soooo glad they have such technology now, it makes everything seem much more amazing!

dawood

HuangKaiVun

12-22-2002, 12:29 PM

I've read "The Hobbit" as well as the entire "Lord of the Rings".

If anything, the movies are much darker than the book is. There's no Tom Bombadil (who can put on the Ring with no ill effect whatsoever), and there are quite a few brilliant scenes in the movie that aren't in the book (e.g. Boromir reaching for the ring and getting blown back by Gandalf uttering in the language of Mordor).

I liked Galadriel in the movie. She totally fit the book character, especially in context of the extended series. The gifts were a bit different than in the book, but I think it worked better.

My only wish is that Peter Jackson had made "The Hobbit" before making the 3 ring circus. There's so much in "The Hobbit" that needs to be known before LOTR can make sence (e.g. Gandalf getting rid of Smaug so that Sauron wouldn't use the dragon to "terrible effect").

Aragorn wields the blade "Anduril", which was formerly "Narsil" or "The Blade that was once formerly broken". That sword cut the Ring from Sauron's finger and is a true magic sword. Elrond's Rivendell elves reforged it before Aragorn left on the journey of the Ring. Only Aragorn can wield it because it will kill anybody who draws it who isn't of the lineage of Elendil/Numenor/Isildur.

As a side medical note, Gollum is "schizoid" indeed. He sees the world very strange and twisted as a result of wearing the ring for 500+ years.

However, he's ALSO dealing with multiple personality syndrome - NOT the same as schizophrenia.

SevenStar

12-23-2002, 04:44 AM

I'm shocked there hasn't been a thread about it yet - Has nobody else seen it?

dezhen2001

12-23-2002, 04:46 AM

havent seen it yet but hope to later this week.
ur in the wrong sectin theres one down there ;)

dawood

red5angel

12-23-2002, 06:56 AM

Good movie. I was about to punch about 12 fat balding geeks on the way out though. Next time I hear something along the lines of "it wasn't as good as the book" or "IT didn't happen like that in the book" I am going to pull out a six pack of whup a$$....

Chang Style Novice

12-23-2002, 08:15 AM

The only four divergences from the book (maybe three) that really bothered me were

1 Gandalf not running back to Isengard to kick Saruman & Grima's asses (especially since the Scouring of the Shire is going to be cut out, so I hear.)

2 Aragorn's weird little death subplot (although it did bring Arwen and Elrond back into the picture so I understand why they did that.)

3 Faramir's character getting rewritten (now it looks like the line of the Stewards of Gondor are just a bunch of @ssholes)

and this may or may not count as 4, given 3 above; Frodo Sam and Gollum being taken to Dethenor.

Basically, I would've preferred to see a lot more between Frodo, Sam and Gollum so the focus stayed on the ring more and less on the battle scenes. Except for Helm's Deep and Isengard, this ought to have been the character-heavy movie, where we really get to worrying about the fates of the people and the world, and not so much the action-packed adventure. Also, if it was up to me, I wouldn't have shown the battle with the Balrog - just let Gandalf stay all mysterious about it.

Don't get me wrong, though - the movie was quite kick ass! I just thought the first one was about flawless, and this one had some minor flaws. And hey - they improved on the flawless FotR in the extended DVD version, so I expect they'll do the same for TTT.

Red5Angel may now punch me. :D

yenhoi

12-23-2002, 08:46 AM

I noticed a host of other "not like the books" stuff, call them mistakes or what have you, good movie.

Chang Style Novice

12-23-2002, 08:50 AM

Oh, sure, there was lots of stuff that didn't mimic the book exactly, and I reread 'em for the first time in about 20 years last month, so they're pretty fresh in my mind. What would be the point of making the movie if it was just like the book? Those were the only differences I saw that I figured weakened the movie rather than strengthening it.

red5angel

12-23-2002, 09:24 AM

CSN, I belive your first point will appear in the thid movie. I believ Gandalf will go back to Isengaard then. They cut off the last part of the movie to stick it in the third, including Shelobs lair obviously. That happens at roughly the same time the rest of the fellowship gathers at Isengaard.
I thought in the book Faramir still had a hard time letting go of the ring. I seem to remember he fought for a while internally trying to determine what he would do? As for Dethenor, I couldn't remember but I didn't think it hapened in the book! It was a cool scene though!
Consdier yourself punched!!!:D

by the way you guys aren't obviously any of the fat alpha geeks trying to impress the retinue of lesser geeks on LOTR lore... ;)

SevenStar

12-23-2002, 09:46 AM

Do any of you guys read piers anthony?

KC Elbows

12-23-2002, 10:49 AM

I read a bunch of Piers Anthony years ago. Apprentice Adept, some other stuff.

As for the Two Towers, seeing it on Christmas with ze family. I love seeing movies on Christmas.

red5angel

12-23-2002, 10:54 AM

7star, I've read quite a bit of anthony. I started to get sick of all the sex though. It seems like the guy has a serious repression problem!!!
Sadly after a while I decided to pick up a book of his to see if I could get back into it, it was called "Firefly" if you have ever read it then you know why after that I stopped reading his stuff!!
He is a good writer but it seems like everything revolved around sex at some point and it almost started to get in the way of the plots.

FatherDog

12-23-2002, 11:21 AM

Piers Anthony has excellent ideas for stories.

Unfortunately, he's one of the worst writers I've ever read. He's like a real-life Kilgore Trout.

The Incarnations of Immortality series was his best, I think.

red: I didn't find the amount of sex disturbing, so much as the fact that the age of his heroines tended to decrease with each successive book. Issues there, certainly... although not as frightening as speculating on the issues behind Jack Chalker's fiction.

Chang Style Novice

12-23-2002, 11:22 AM

My beef with how Faramir was handled is that it undermines one of the most serious themes of the trilogy to me: the underestimated ones get the most done. Some examplesfrom the books:

Nobody knows from hobbits, but they turn out to be the toughest in terms of resisting the power of the Ring - the only ones with a chance to resist long enough to destroy it.

Faramir is the best in gondor, but Boromir is the most beloved.

The despised rangers are the decendents of Elendil.

Gimli kills more at Helm's Deep than Legolas

Saruman is the supposed supreme wizard, but Gandalf takes him out.

Also, a related theme is the corruption of authority and the nobility of service:

Frodo is finally corrupted by the Ring, but Sam's earthiness (and gollums decent into self destruction) pull him out.

Boromir's desire for glory causes him to grasp for the ring, Faramir's desire to protect Gondor allows him to resist it.

Dethenor's wish to be King and not merely Steward drives him insane and kills him, nearly killing his son, too.
--------
This is the stuff that raises LotR way above the run-of-the-mill heroic fantasy stuff for me, and so when it's weakened by Faramir's inability to resist the Ring in the movies, it weakens the trilogy as a whole for me.

And I think that's enough to tip me into ubergeek territory. Kill me now.

SevenStar

12-23-2002, 11:41 AM

I don't find the amount of sex disturbing, but I have read Firefly, so I know where you are coming from. My favorites by him are the Incarnations of Immortality and the Xanth series - I've got all of the Xanth books - been reading them for 12 years now, and most of the I of I series. He does have some great ideas, like his use of puns in the Xanth series, or like his novel "Killobyte".

I think the age of his heroines is based on a few things:

1. Xanth Is an ongoing work, like Dragon Ball, for example. Dragon ball begins with Goku at age 6, and ends with him dead and focusing on his twenty-something year old son. Xanth begins with Bink, Iris and the others from the early books and ends with descendants of all of them. If you notice, most of the books will revolve around someone who is a descendant of a main character from a previous novel.

2. his fans. The character 'Jenny' was created after a fan of his who was sick and in the hospital. She loved his novels and asked to be in one of them. Jenny was 12 at the time.

In Xanth, sex is really a non-issue, because it's not allowed because of the Adult Conspiracy (you'd have to be a Xanth fan to know about it) - remember, there are a list of adult things that kids can't be exposed to, like what sex is, and boys aren't allowed to see panties.

If you notice, the young ones and old ones are also usually grouped together in the novels, for example, Jenny didn't run with Nada or Grey - who were in their early 20's by the time jenny came into the series- she ran with a cenatur that was about her age, so there's no perversion thing going on there either.

red5angel

12-23-2002, 11:53 AM

LOL! @ FD, yeah that is sort of what I was getting at. The guy has some real issues.

CSN, I think it did show the struggle, and the Rings will to get back to it's master well. That is well illustrated in the book but seems to be somehting even more stressed in the movies. Good points though, and I basically agree.

7star, haven't read the Xanth series so maybe I am being unfair, mostly the adept series, some one hitters and I can't even think of the series with Death and Time and all that.

KC Elbows

12-23-2002, 11:54 AM

It's been a long time since I read Piers Anthony, about the same amount of time as when I read Moor****. I really don't remember much about Anthony, except he seemed really big on characters living in two diametrically opposed worlds. Everything I read by him had that. Granted, I didn't read much of his stuff.

I like LeGuin.

FatherDog

12-23-2002, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by SevenStar
I think the age of his heroines is based on a few things:

1. Xanth Is an ongoing work, like Dragon Ball, for example.

I was thinking more of his non-Xanth stuff since, as you say, sex in Xanth is a non-issue.

In Virtual Mode, for example, the heroine is 14, and quite merrily attempting to have sex with a man in his late 20's, as I recall. And in "And Eternity", the end of the Incarnations series, part of the plot is the female character being happy that she's spent time in Purgatory, where time passes slower, so that she's /legally/ an adult and can make out with the 40-year-old Judge she's fallen for, even though she's still physically, mentally, and chronologically 15-16.

It doesn't bother me all that much; they're just books, and society's attitudes towards teenage sexuality are a little screwed up to begin with. But it seems to be a recurring theme in his non-Xanth novels (and even the Xanth ones, to a degree) and it kinda makes you wonder about his mental state.

KC Elbows: Moorcock's one of my favorite writers; him and Fritz Leiber. Both of them extremely prolific with a very wide range of subject matter.

SevenStar

12-23-2002, 12:53 PM

yeah, you're right about and eternity. I've never read the Mode series, as nobody I know that's read it had anything real good to say about it.

OdderMensch

12-23-2002, 01:23 PM

I decided not to read the books until the movies came out, so i've seen & read fellowship and just saw two towers and am reading it now.

when My bookreading roommate talked about Faramir after I had seen it, i didn't think the char was two far off.

I have more on this, but have to leave mid post, I will say that faramir "had only to reach out his hand and claim the ring for Gondor" yet Frodo kept it at all times, and was relased under forfit of life for Faramir.

Sam has already saved the ring from Frodo at least twice in the films.

gotta go now, more later

SaMantis

12-23-2002, 01:42 PM

I was a little surprised at Faramir deciding to take them to Gondor, but by the end I was OK with it. Except all I could think at the end of the movie was, 'Now they have so much ****her to walk ..."

I'm glad they left Shelob's lair for the next film. Otherwise it would be three hours of Sam & Frodo walking through Mordor ... Sam & Frodo STILL walking through Mordor ... et al, ad infinitum.

Chang Style Novice

12-23-2002, 03:56 PM

The Two Towers is just the thing after a plate of mushrooms and some pipe-weed. (http://www.theonion.com/onion3847/infograph_3847.html)

[Censored]

12-24-2002, 11:31 AM

Don't want to spoil it for anyone... but I'd be curious about people's views on the battles...

Even though it's a war movie, I would have liked to see a few more fights edited like "Return of the Dragon", and a few less edited like "Romeo Must Die". ;)

Machimurasan

12-24-2002, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by SevenStar
Do any of you guys read piers anthony?

Yo bruh it's OP. Yeah, I especially liked his "Incarnations of Power" series from the 80s. "Bearing an Hourglass" was real hype!

What has he written lately that you can recommend? Merry Christmas, Happy Kwanza, etc.....

SanSoo Student

12-24-2002, 11:53 PM

I dont understand how they got horses from inside the castle...

SevenStar

12-25-2002, 12:37 AM

Yeah, that was a good one. 'On a Pale Horse' was tight too. I know he's written a few new Xanth novels recently, 'Up in a Heaval' I think is the most recent - I haven't ready that one yet though. If you haven't seen 'Killobyte', check it out

ZIM

12-25-2002, 06:53 AM

Didn't piers anthony write "the changeling?" That was pretty cool, as I remember it. I wasn't much impressed with anything else he's writen.

My fave is Gene Wolf. :) His Book of the New Sun would be a really cool movie!

Chang Style Novice

12-25-2002, 07:20 AM

That's true, Zim, but it'd pretty much have to be as long as LotR to do it justice.

Gene Wolfe rocks like your grampappy's chair.

quiet man

12-26-2002, 04:46 AM

Originally posted by HuangKaiVun
I liked Galadriel in the movie. She totally fit the book character, especially in context of the extended series. The gifts were a bit different than in the book, but I think it worked better.

You may be talking about the DVD version, which I haven't seen. I'm talking about the cinema version. And that version was no good. In the book, Galadriel is by far the best female character, and in the movie she's some kind of weirdo, especially when Frodo offers her the Ring (I mean, that booming voice and all... puh-leeeease!?). Read her "Song of Eldamar" to see what I mean when I say "the best female character"... You don't see ANYTHING like that in the movie.

It could have been so much better...
Maybe I'm just too demanding? :confused: :D

KC Elbows

12-26-2002, 10:14 AM

Me and the family went and saw TTT on Christmas(I love seeing movies on holidays). Loved it. I can see what people are talking about with Farimir, but then again, he wasn't in a huge amount of the film, so characterization might be further developed later. However, he never tried to actually take the ring by force per se, at least off of Frodo's person.

BTW, I want a Smeagal. I could just watch him for hours. Best acting in the movie. Absolutely amazing. The next movie should be mind boggling.

Ents. Love 'em. While watching the movie, especially this part(because of the tree thing), got thinking about how this particular movie, in my opinion, captured sense of wonder in as grand a scale as Wizard of Oz. I don't make that comparison lightly, as I worship that movie.

Legolas and Gimli- Did a good job of capturing their friendship, though I agree with whoever posted that Gimli could have been made less clumsy, though at least they didn't keep doing it ad infinitum.

Aragorn- Good job, once again.

The Elves leaving- I would imagine it was really tough finding a way to quickly explain the elves leaving for Valinor. I think that the whole flashback of Aragorn's was a good way. That wasn't in the book, was it? Meaning, the relationship flashback. I'm about to reread it(I'm rereading after watching the movies).

Gandalf vs. The Balrog- Thank you Peter Jackson. Some might disagree, but to make a movie of these books and neglect one of the most visually exciting parts would be obtuse. It is retold in the book because we will imagine it, but for a movie, it should be shown.

Gandalf the White- Very bright. Loved the scene where he put Grima Wormtongue in his place.

Sam- I like the actor they got to play Sam. It's also nice to see an epic where the heros are not male models, and actually appear rather round.

Frodo-Jackson made me think poor Frodo, which is exactly what I should be thinking.

Elves in HelmsDeep- Not really necessary, but such a minor complaint. The only real problem I have with it is that events like Helmsdeep are supposed to be the human's making their stand, and showing their place in a Middle Earth where only the remnants of the magical past still linger, but again, it is a minor complaint, since the humans will see more.

Elf Chick with delicious overbite- Yum.

Nazgul on fell beasts- Very nice.

Mordor- Very nice.

Smeagal- Where can I get one?

SevenStar

12-26-2002, 12:31 PM

The Ent battle was great, wasn't it? Did you catch how the one that was on fire jumped into the floodwater to put the fire out?

Gimli was pretty clumsy, but he made it work for him - he took out more than Legolas, right? Counting how many they took out was really cool to me, for some reason - in the face of destruction, they are still making light of things and fighting hard. That's also one of the characteristics I always liked about spiderman

yeah, I'm glad they put in the gandalf vs balrog scene too.

Sam was played by sean astin - he's been thin in everything I've ever seen him in. I wonder how much weight he had to put on to play sam?

HuangKaiVun

12-26-2002, 03:30 PM

Galadriel is SUPPOSED to be a weirdo.

She bears one of the 3 Elven rings, is the grandmother of Arwen Undomiel, has special powers even for an Elf, and is the big boss of Caras Galadhon (sorry Celeborn). All that in a male-dominated Middle Earth.

The schtick with Galadriel is that she's supposed to be a powerful female character who would readily use the Ring to inflict violence and revenge if she had the chance. That was what she proclaimed in the book when one of the hobbits suggested that she'd be a great owner of The Ring.

A powerful dark booming voice is the correct color for a lady whose tendency for power domination and power are barely held in check by the power of the Elves.

neptunesfall

12-27-2002, 03:56 AM

man. i saw the TTT last nite and it was awesome.
in response to some of the posts here...
foromir wasn't as much an ******* as everyone thought. i believe he was portrayed that way to show how easily the men were influenced by the ring and to reinforce how the hobbits weren't.
and gollum is one of the most tragic characters i've seen in film in i don't know how long. he tried so hard to be good for frodo, fighting with the urges of the ring, until he was mistreated by foromir in the search for the ring.
as a side note - i saw an interview with the actor who played gollum and he talked about how his approach to gollum's personality and battling his urges and his inner struggle was loosely based on heroin addicts.
his lying, theiving, murdering for the ring, the corruption of his self, the division within himself, his struggle for redemption...prominent characteristics in addiction.
the warg vs. rohan riders fight was great.
the battle of helms deep is a battle scene; the humor from gimli was a bit out of place to me though. but then again, when you're sure that there's nothing left but to die on your feet...
the battle of the ent was awesome. and yes, i saw the burning ent dunk himself to put the flames out.
and the nazgul fliers were really cool.

don't follow the lights...

ps - is it just me or were scenes from the trailers not in the movie?

neptunesfall

12-27-2002, 03:58 AM

oh yeah...

i've read piers anthony since i was about 12, starting with the xanth series. xanth and the incarnations series were my favorite from him.
my fantasy diet consists mostly of robert jordan these days. the wheel of time series is fantastic.

SevenStar

12-27-2002, 03:43 PM

That info about the guy who did gollum was interesting. He did a great job.

What's the Wheel of Time series about?

neptunesfall

12-27-2002, 06:14 PM

oh jeez...i don't even know how to explain the wheel of time series...
a lot of it is based on celtic mythology and eastern philosphies.

http://www.tor.com/sites/wheel_of_time/

will have the best explainations of it

David Jamieson

12-28-2002, 09:35 PM

I would suggest to any of you who haven't read the books to pick them up as a hobby for a little while.

The "between the lines message" is along the lines of the fusion of paganism and chritian standards before the Middle ages. A lot of Norse sagas interlaced in tolkiens works with the C.S Lewis influence ready to go at the mention of an Ent :D

really good read.

I just saw the two towers and felt that it could have been a little more than it was. There could have been more time in character development instead of sweeping vistas and rotating cranes. I would have liked to have seen more about the relationships between the kings of the various realms and more Gandalf!

anyway, blah blah blah, I hope the return of the king is as good as these first two have been.

cheers

Shaolin Master

12-28-2002, 11:02 PM

Hey it was worth watching.

I just got my cheap but not easy to find (~US70cents) copy DVD of the two towers and it was cool.

:D

dezhen2001

12-29-2002, 05:24 AM

i finally saw what you were all talking about :D

wow.

the scenery, landscapes and everything was just so visual! absolutely breath-taking!

i thought that although some things were slightly different form the book and not so deep, it did keep the spirit of the series, and created a great sense of escape and involvment for the 3 hours.

the battles were absolutely amazing! The animation team must have worked overtime and the effects were awesome. i thought it really showed the 'chaos' i would imagine in such a battle.

gollum/smeagle was amazing and really one of my favourite characters.

all in all i thought it was the best movie ive seen for along time - better than james bond and even minority report :)

dawood

quiet man

12-29-2002, 06:04 AM

HKVun, if you keep up this disrespectful tone of yours, I'm afraid I'm gonna have to challenge you. NOBODY talks that way about Galadriel in my presence ;) :D ...

Galadriel was like that in Silmarillion: young (for an Elf, of course), rash, hot-headed... but she's changed now. She's learned about the pain and mourning and the toll time takes on all of us (wow! that was beautiful :D). She knows that the Elves of Lorien are bound to lose, no matter which side wins the war. And she would never take the Ring - she says it so herself: "I passed the test. I will diminish and go into the West and remain Galadriel". She knows herself. She's been tempted and she's resisted it. And you make it sound like she's some kind of constant threat and like she would destroy the world if not kept in control by other Elves?! Sounds to me like you need to reread that particular chapter in FOTR...

"I sang of leaves, of leaves of gold, and leaves of gold there grew:
Of wind I sang, a wind there came and in the branches blew.
Beyond the Sun, beyond the Moon, the foam was on the Sea,
And by the strand of Ilmarin there grew a golden Tree.
Beneath the stars of Ever-eve in Eldamar it shone,
In Eldamar beside the walls of Elven Tirion.
There long the golden leaves have grown upon the branching years,
While here beyond the Sundering Seas now fall the Elven Tears.
O Lorien! The Winter comes, the bare and leafless Day;
The leaves are falling in the stream, the River flows away.
O Lorien! Too long I have dwelt upon this Hither Shore
And in a fading crown have twined the golden elanor.
But if of ships I now should sing,what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?"

Gosh, I've just spent 15 minutes eagerly defending her and she's not even a real person! I need to get a life, pronto :D :D ...

dezhen2001 - it's Smeagol, not Smeagle ;)

dezhen2001

12-30-2002, 06:56 AM

sorry that was the English spelling, kinda like Beagle :D

dawood

KC Elbows

12-30-2002, 03:45 PM

To make her speach regarding taking the ring lack emotion or real temptation would have been a diservice to Tolkien. She did not pass the test until the moment she says as much. Everything before that is her being tempted, and the feelings that temptation brought. I can see not agreeing with the visual effects, but the fact is, Galadriel was tempted, and her diminishment was as much due to the properties of the ring as her own people's fate. This needed to be acted out dramatically.

Remember, the only character in the series who is not tempted by the ring is Tom Bombadil, because it's just a trinket to him. For everyone else, it is a burden and a temptation, Galadriel most certainly included.

The reason I like Galadriel in the books is that, despite the lack of female characters in the story, she was a female character who had light and dark attributes, and great brooding power. I think too many people had a picture in their head of this sunshiny elf queen, when that speech, taken largely from the book, is dark as hell, and does not end on a bright note by any stretch of the imagination.

Now who's the geek?:D

quiet man

12-31-2002, 10:43 AM

Not bad, not bad :D ... but I'm still the uncrowned king of geeks, baby :D ;)
Why not crowned? Coz I'm just too geeky :D:cool:

I agree with you, KCE, on the need to emphasize Galadriel's temptation. But that was already done in her speech (once again, see the book), and adding those silly effects was a big turn-off for me. And I don't like Tom Bombadil when it comes to the One Ring - he's just too aloof: "Oh, the Ring cannot touch me, blah blah blah..."
In that moment, Galadriel was supposed to be (I can't remember her exact words) intimidating and beautiful, like a storm, or something like that, and in the movie she was neither. Cate Blanchett is truly an excellent choice; but one important scene is found only in DVD (gifts and Gimli's "falling in love" with her), and the other (temptation of Galadriel) is just no good. Now, if they'd only made ME the director :D ;) ...

@PLUGO

01-02-2003, 10:21 AM

Are Bound...

The One Thred . . . to rule them... and in the geekiness Bind Them!!!

HuangKaiVun

01-25-2003, 08:37 PM

I finally saw "The Two Towers".

Actually, I enjoyed the movie more than the book. The same can be said of my take of "Fellowship of the Ring".

I liked the way Elrond and Galadriel sent Haldir and the Elves of Lorien to assist King Theoden. The House of Eorl folks (Theoden, Eomer, and Eowyn) looked exactly as I had pictured them from the book.

Also, the battle of the Ents against Isengard was more realistic than in the book. Saruman would've been one REALLY dumb wizard to have left no defenses at Isengard (which is the way the book portrayed it). The movie also elevates the roles of Meriadoc and Peregrin to pivotal roles, as far as the Entmoot is concerned.

The thing that impressed me the most was how multifaceted in personality the Gollum/Smeagol character was.