LOTR: The Two Towers

Let's try to mash all the LOTR submissions into one. Reviews: comingsoon.net, Empire Online (UK), CNN, Slate, Salon. The LA Times has a story about animating Gollum which we can't link to because it requires registration. Lord Satri writes "Ents, elves and mages being on every orc's lips, new versions of Tales Of Middle-Earth are available. It is an open source, one player and online multiplayer game. It is ported to many OS's. Yeah, no terrific graphics, but the game is really worthwhile. It is based on the famous roguelike Angband (variants here). Faithful to Tolkien's writings."

Some links

[PhysicsGenius]

Reviews: 1 [tennessean.com],2 [www.rte.ie],3 [tri-cityherald.com],4 [icnetwork.co.uk] That last one lets you submit your own review. Pretty cool.

Re:Faithful to Tolkien's writings?

[grahams]

Hey assramp, the "faithful to Tolkien's writings" comment was referring to the ToME game, not the movie.

Here's the Gollum story

[malibucreek]

http://www.calendarlive.com/movies/cl-fi-gollum17d ec17.story [calendarlive.com]

All LA Times entertainment stories are available without registration at http://www.calendarlive.com [calendarlive.com].

Re:Registration links?

[aardvarkjoe]

Well, it's even funnier when the previous story had a registration required link in it. Makes you wonder it michael pays any attention to Slashdot at all.

For those who are curious, I believe that this [latimes.com] is the story in question. (And no, no registration required.)

Troubles of Middle Earth - bandwidth almost gone..

[Tidan]

Here's a copy of the game in case anyone is interested. It's about to be slashdotted:

Angband is a roguelike dungeon exploration game based on JRR Tolkien's works.

There are a lot of Angband variants because Angband's sources were cleaned up by a remarkable person, Ben Harrison, which meant that as more people could understand the code, more people made variants. ToME, my own variant, expands upon the Middle-Earth influence and is based on Zangband 2.2.0. ToME now follows the Tolkien world more closely than any other variant!

ToME was formely known was PernAngband, but it's name was changed because of copyright issues. Almost all Pern influences have been removed in the current CVS version.

The current version is T.o.M.E 2.1.0 aka "No Surrender, No Retreat" .

"Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for Dwarf-Lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne,
In the land of Mordor where the shadows lie.

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them,
In the land of Mordor, where the shadows lie."

"The Lord of the Rings", J.R.R. Tolkien.

Re:Some bad things about lord of the rings 2

[dosun88888]

Well, had you read the book, you'd notice that every race is described in detail. There are no caucasians in LOTR. There are MEN, which are described as being pretty much white. There are MEN who were evil (siding with Isengard) who were described as black.

Then there were hobbits, dwarves, elves, ents, istari, and so on. All were described as being pretty much white.

Note that what you call "minorities" are ONLY minorities in certain parts of the United States. This movie wasn't even filmed here. It wasn't even directed by an American.

How would you have liked that?

I don't think that spotted owls were shown in a favorable fucking light either; this movie sucked.

God DAMN I hate leftist cretins.

~D

Re:ents...

[deverox]

The Ents look a great deal like the Whomping Willow in Harry Potter. I thought they looked cheezy but that was my opinion. Definatly had that "CG Overlay" look about them.

Re:Whats Up with that Precious?

[zer0vector]

I believe you mean Shelob, and its going to be in the third movie. Jackson didn't want to break up the Battle of Helm's Deep at the end by switching between to seperate climaxes.

Re:Registration links?

[jamie]

Slashdot has kind of grandfathered in the New York Times. We always linked to them in the past even though they required registration, and we're not going to stop now. But other sites that require it, we don't (usually) link to.

The link you gave does require registration -- you probably don't notice because you've already got the cookie.

Re:Okay, I did well on my verbal SATs, but...

[tmhsiao]

It's the equivalent of a authoritative fugue... :)

In poetry, the caesura is a break in rhythmic flow in the middle of a verse. What the author means is that TTT is a well-crafted midpoint or something to that effect.

Re:Troubles of Middle Earth - bandwidth almost gon

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's the Windows version [mtu.edu]. It took me forever to get. I'd mirror the tarball as well, but you know how it goes with finals and all. Maybe later.

Enjoy.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

My 'No Spoiler' Review

[Jack William Bell]

Also on my /. Journal... [slashdot.org]

Well, I got my LoTR fix finally. And I gotta tell ya, it was pretty damn good. The action sequences were especially nice. The battle sequences will set new standards. Gollum was, well, just plain amazing. The Ents looked just like I had always imagined them.

Downsides... This film missed several opportunities to work on the Strider-to-King Aragorn transformation. There was limited character development with Gollum and (surprisingly) Gimli coming across as the most three-dimensional.

The Faramir thing? Well, I already knew about it so I wasn't surprised, but it is pretty damn egregious. I think they could have kept it like the book without losing a beat. Sometimes changes add to a movie because they are needed to keep the flow. Other times they strike a false note, and I think that is the case here.

And, although I really liked the Ents I felt they got pretty short shrift scriptwise. Maybe there are some cut Ent scenes that will show up in the TTEE (Two Towers Extended Edition) DVD when it comes out.

I am going to have to see it a couple more times before I can make the call as to which is the better movie, but right now Fellowship gets the nod as a more rounded picture. Still, any complaint I make is because TT isn't perfect, not because it isn't the best movie to come out this year. Go see it. See it soon so you can share the experience with other LoTR fans instead of the mundane masses.

And remember to go to the bathroom right before the previews start. It is three hours long and you won't want to miss a second...

Re:Faithful to Tolkien's writings?

[kalyptein]

>> Ninja Ents: Was is just me or did the Ents ONLY redirect the river Isen in the book? The whole "Ents stomp!" fight was just unnecessary and left the already underexplained race feeling like some cheesy Disney reject. The book builds them up in to stately, dignified, sad characters who act in their own way. The movie abandons all of that. Granted, you have to make cuts for time, but cut the holywood added big Ent fight and leave the depth of character stuff.

Haven't gotten to see the movie yet, but I wanted to respond to this. In the book the ents did indeed run amok. They tore down the ring of isengard with their bare hands, cracked stone with their roaring, and threw whole sections of wall at orthanc (which did squat). Once they realized they couldn't actually damage orthanc and saruman kept occasionally using field artillery on them, they retreated and *then* redirected the river in as an alternate method of attack.

Ent are sad and stately only until they finally get pissed off. Having said all that, I haven't seen that scene yet, so I can't say whether I think it was well handled. Just that there was actually a fight.

Re:Help

[Silverhammer]

Blockquoth the poster:

Instead, Gandalf sent two of his weakest soldiers on foot. I can only assume he was suicidal or an agent of darkness... does Tolkien cover this in a sequel?

Even though this was modded "Funny," I'm going to respond because the question is asked all the time.

Sauron always expected a frontal assault, just as he always expected some Elf or Man to try to use the Ring against him. He expected it because it's what he himself would do, and as Gandalf's notes at some point, Sauron cannot conceive of any other possibility.

Remember what the Ring represents: raw, absolute power. Sauron craves that power so much, he cannot imagine that someone else would not.

That's why the Fellowship was formed, to attempt to sneak into Mordor whereas an army would be stopped at the gate. That's also why the Ring went to Frodo, because of everyone at the Council of Elrond, he was most able to resist it (for a while).

As for why they didn't use the Eagles earlier -- you saw Gwaihir in the first movie. He was pretty damn conspicuous. And the Fellbeasts aren't the only aerial defense available to Sauron. He also had crows and ballistas and stone-throwing trolls, not to mention his own magic. The Eagles would have been swatted down like flies, so long as they tried to go straight in.

Nope, it wasn't until after Aragorn used the Orthanc Palantir to get Sauron's attention -and- the Gondorian army attacked the Morannon -and- the Ring was already thrown into the Cracks of Doom that Sauron was finally distracted enough to let one (or two? I forget) Eagle zip through to rescue Sam and Frodo.

Yes, I'm a Tolkein geek.

Re:Faithful to Tolkien's writings?

[Noehre]

The point was made SEVERAL times in the book that the Ents were slow to anger but once they all decided on something and got pissed off enough, there was nothing that could stop them. In fact, the 'slow to anger' idea was one of the primary focuses of the Ent gathering chapter. It had some of the most descriptive language in the book. Great chapter!

They were indeed a fucking nasty fighting force in the books and did kick some major ass.

I think you need to go back and reread that part.

Re:Faramir got jobbed (SPOILER)

[Fyndlorn]

Too true! These where my thaughts exactly. I really love the Faramir character in the books, and that jerk on the screen was very dissapointing. A few other thigns too keep in mind:

-They introduced a big plot hole by doign it the way they did. There is NO WAY that sam could have revealed that Frodo had the ring and gotten out of illithien alive. Even if Faramir could resist the urge to take it (such as he did, barely) there no way all those other Gondorians could have let go as easily.

-They really didn't have to bring Sam and Frodo to osgilath, they could have just showed what happened there with Faramir if they felt they had too, it makes no sense too me.

-How can they now show the special relationship between Gandlaf/Denethor/Faramir now. That was a very interesting part of Return of the King that will almost certainly be lost now.

Not saying I didn't love this movie, but that choice didnt make any sense too me.

If you're such a geek

[smileyy]

Then why did you butcher the names?

Gollum -> Golem
Gimli -> Ghimli
Saruman -> Sauroman
Eowyn -> Aowen

Chump. I even cut you slack on owyn. (why is /. chewing up the É?)

Tolkien's opinion...

[MenTaLguY]

Unfortunately, Tolkien detested cinema and television as a matter of principle.

Also, from what I've read of his response to e.g. stage plays adapted from his work, he was pretty upset over anything that deviated from a literal translation.

(That last bit is hardly unique to Tolkien; a lot of writers have trouble "letting go" enough for a proper adaptation to other media. Rowling's hovering over the writers'/directors' shoulders had a lot to do with the first Harry Potter movie's problems)

As for Tolkien's son Christopher, he's pretty upset about the movies, all considered. His other son, John, seems to be okay with them as far as I know.

It's actually caused a fairly major split in the family between Christopher's side that hates the movies and the rest (especially the newer generations) who are either ambivalent or think the films are pretty cool.

Spolier?

[gvonk]

You want a spoiler?

You will die alone.

-Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog [milkandcookies.com]

Re:Make sure not to wait till next week.

[Dodger_]

Yeah, it's just GREAT to hear cell phones go off, people coughing, watch alarms ringing, babies crying and the ultra common dorkus-maximus yammering on to his buddies about the next big scene("Watch this!"). No thanks, I like to go when it's nice and quiet or watch at home on my Olympus EyeTrek.

Dissenting Reviews?

[screwballicus]

Here's what I thought was an interesting dissenting review [globeandmail.com] of the movie. It's a little ridiculous that three out of four stars constitutes a dissenting review, but I'm sure some watchers will consider it that. And Roger Ebert [suntimes.com], who was critical of the first movie, approves of the second, but also has some interesting criticisms to make.

Re:Didn't make it out

[trixillion]

Box Office Mojo [boxofficemojo.com] is a great resource for all things box office related. You can find total box office take; number of screens; cummulative take; etc. Go have a romp.

My take on the move (Spoiler warning)

[revery]

First some background: When I first saw The Fellowship of the Ring, I had not read the books in over five years, and thus, I missed several of the less obvious modifications made to the story line. Of course, I noticed the absence of Tom Bombadil, the failure to acquire the Westernesse swords from the mounds of the barrow wight, the deletion of Galadriel's gift giving (generously reinstated in the Extended Edition), the substitution of Arwen for Glorfindel, and so forth. But there were an equal or greater number of things that I did not notice at the time: such as Barliman Butterbur's failure to give Gandalf's letter to Frodo, I did notice that Barliman barely remembered Gandalf, but I had forgotten that Gandalf never promised to meet Frodo at the Prancing Pony, and that he had not been present at the departure of Frodo from the Shire. I could not remember exactly when Anduril was reforged, I had forgotten that Gandalf, not Gimli suggested the path through Moria, nor did I remember the warg fight that took place between the Fellowship's defeat at Carhadras and their descent into Moria. The list goes on and on. Nevertheless, FOTR was magical, and not once did an omission or addition jar me from my reverie.

Would that it were so with the Two Towers. Perhaps it is primarily my fault. In the past year I have reread the entire series more than once, I have practically memorized certain sections, I have immersed myself in war and sorrow and the rising shadow of Mordor. I enjoyed the movie, and I will see it again. But I wanted more. It is the subtle moments that make the story shine for me. The moments of greatness revealed, of veiled danger, the cruel mercies of the Orcs, the politics of Sauron and Saruman, and the cleverness of Merry and Pippin. It is such moments as when Aragorn announces himself to Eomer, show Anduril and reveals his hidden kingliness that takes my breath away. I know that Jackson is painting a more troubled Aragorn, a king who fears his destiny and hesitates to claim a forgotten crown, but I long for the Aragorn of the novels, the king who bides his time and knows that his day is coming. I missed the strength of Faramir. Of his ability to perceive the ring and it's power, to understand his brother's weakness and avoid that same fate, and his quick conclusion that the ring must be sent beyond temptation. I did not understand the necessity of changing Theoden from a king crippled by a manipulative advisor, to a victim of Saruman's wizardry.

Credit must be given though to every scene in which Gollum graced the screen. There has never been a CGI character so flawlessly placed on screen with so complete a repertoire of inhuman emotion. Also excellent were the Ents, the battles, the acting, the sets, the mood, the wargs.... For all my criticism, the simple truth is this: it is not that the movie is not excellent, it is that the book is even more so. A movie can only do so much to reveal the inner thoughts of a man without resorting to narration or soliloquy, and LOTR is full of such moments. Is the Two Towers a wonderful movie? Indeed. Did it meet my every expectation? No, but in retrospect, I'm not sure that it would have been possible.

Re:Help

[jazman_777]

It was a terrible strategy, and I have no idea why it worked.

Because that's often how God does things--Tolkein was a devout Catholic, and his views of how God works (providence) permeate the LOTR.

Re:Almost

[Gyver]

No, he was right.

Angmar was the fortress of the Witch King.

Angband was the fortress of Morgoth.

Thangorodrim were the name of the three peaks raised at the gates of Angband at the begining of the first age.

Re:Some interesting quotes about the flick...

[Slime-dogg]

If the reviewer had read the book, they would have known ahead of time that the real women's roles don't bloom until the last volume. Eowyn, one of the toughest chicks in existance, was given a secondary role/duty in the second book. There's really nothing that Peter could have done about that.

I can count the number of female characters on one hand. Granted, I saw quite a few women in the movie. Some of the evil soldiers were female, you could kinda tell by their eyes. Galadriel also had a rather long narrative, and Arwen also appeared. These things never did happen in the book (Aragorn was always smitten by Arwen, Eowyn was the one who was smitten by Aragorn... Not the way it's presented in the movie.)

This is just typical NYTimes Liberal PC Hot-headed bullshit.

Re:So...

[MtViewGuy]

Having read LoTR several times, I think Jackson did a pretty commendable job considering the original source material.

His strong emphasis on action really stands out in the breathtaking Helm's Deep sequence. That is some of the most amazing CGI I have ever seen. :-)

Yes, Jackson deviated much from the books, but who can blame him? The conversation between Faramir and Frodo/Sam in the novel would have bored people to tears, to say the least.

I for one cannot wait for The Return of the King. Imagine battle scenes ten times bigger in the Battle of Pelennor Fields! I think Mirando Otto will really be great as Eowyn in the next movie.

Re:Negative review, but not (intentional) flamebai

[dmforcier]

"(leading me to believe that we won't get to see the hobbits return to the Shire after the fall of Sauron.)"

In fact PJ states in one of the sections of the extended FoTR DVD (I think it was in the voice-over when he was explaining why they showed XYZ in Galadriel's mirror) that the "Scouring of the Shire" is not part of the movie trilogy. That would explain why Sam got the rope instead of the box of dirt and the mallorn seed.

Lose the "Scouring of the Shire" and you can lose the scene where Gandalf evicts Saruman and Grima, and maybe the entire visit to (wrecked) Orthanc. What actually happens there besides the eviction? The comrades are reunited (other ways to accomplish that). And the Palantir zaps Merry (or was it Pippin?). The appearance of the Palantir has no other plot purpose. World around that and there's no point to the side trip.

IOW, I don't expect to see the visit to Orthanc in RotK, and I expect it will end with the marriage of Aragorn and Arwen, with perhaps a postlogue about Gandalf and the Ringbearers eventually passing over the sea with the Elves.