Well, here I write a second review about Lord of the Rings, the movie.
But this time about the second part: The Two Towers.

In my last review I said I was looking forward to see the second part. Well I really did, and it was surely worth visiting it.
First of all, I won't give a summary here, as you see in most reviews. There is too much to summarize, and I think that almost everyone has seen the movie, or read the book.

I can do two things now: Write about the movie as if it is not a film version of the book, or I can write down all the major differences with the book.
If I do the first, I'm quickly finished, because if you see it without reading the book, it is a great movie, but there were many differences with the book, too many to discuss here. So I'll only name a few.

I was most irritated about how Faramir was presented. He encountered Frodo and Sam and found out about the Ring. Then he takes them to Osgiliath, because he wants to use the Ring in the war, just like his brother Boromir. He eventually lets them go when the Nazgûl have attacked them in Osgiliath.
In the book however, Faramir is much more different from Boromir. He understands about the Ring at once, and lets them go without taking them to Osgiliath first.
He resists the temptation. It really wasn't necessary to present Faramir like that, there was enough action in the movie already, and to 'waste' a good character like that is a shame.

Another point: Arwen. She wasn't even mentioned in the second book (I recently read it again) but here she was seen several times, to make the love story more exciting. Luckily it was only in the memory of Aragorn, or still in Rivendell with Elrond. She didn't come to Rohan, as I first feared.
Aragorn met Eowyn, who really likes him. But Aragorn already has the love of Arwen, an elf, who has eternal life. Elrond wants her to go to the west with the other elves, instead of having the love of Aragorn for just a little while and see him grow older and die. They made this story a bit more elaborate, but it made it more clear for the ones who didn't read the book. And of course, every American movie needs to have a love story.

Then about Helm's Deep. There came elves to help, while there never came any elves to Rohan in the book. They didn't have only 300 men to defend Helm's Deep and Éomer and Aragorn stood together on the Deeping Wall. It wasn't Éomer coming to rescue them. It was Erkenbrand, who Gandalf brought with him, and with them, a shadow forest, which swallowed the orcs that fled in it.
The battle at Helm's Deep itself was greatly filmed. But all the battles in the movie were well done. Great special effects and excitement.

There are more details to discuss, like Gandalf's horse: Shadowfax, he is black in the book, and white in the movie. He didn't look as special as I hoped, gleaming with silver when Gandalf rode him. But all those details aren't really important.

In the book the first part is only about the battles in the west, and the second part about the Frodo and Sam in the east. In the movie they shuffled that. I expected it, and it's good, it makes the movie more exciting.

The movie started really cool; with Gandalf falling in Moria, meanwhile fighting the Balrog. The camera-view was excellently done; it went down after them.
Not the whole second book was included in this film; they saved a piece for part 3. The Two Towers is bigger then the third book, so that makes sense.

About the characters: Gollum was really great, but I think no one could really disagree with that. He was played very well, although he might have been a little too funny. But when he had a conversation with himself, it looked like you saw to Gollums, while they only used different camera-views. You really saw his face change when he was more like Sméagol, or went back to Gollem. I think he was one of the best-played characters.
Gimli was very good, a brave, sometimes funny, dwarf.
Théodens 'revival' was filmed very nice. Saruman had taken him over, although it was a little to extreme compared with the book. But it looked all the better when Gandalf fought with Saruman, and banished him from Théoden, getting Théoden back to his former, stronger, state. The change of his appearance was very good.

Then about the Ents. Their appearance was very good, and the low voices suited them well. In the book, the Ents decided at the Entmoot (the council of the Ents) to attack Isengard. In the movie however they decided not to attack, they did that when they saw what happened at their borders. I think it's not logic that Treebeard didn't know about the things Saruman did, but it didn't change the fact that they conquered Isengard in the end. They were really impressive doing that.

I can say a lot more about the differences between the book and the movie, and about the positive points in the movie, but I think you really should watch it yourself, and if you haven't read the book yet: really you must read it, it's worth it.

So I think that the movie had too many differences with the book. Jackson really crossed the line, especially with Faramir. If you want to turn a book into a film, you shouldn't change characters that much. But if you see this movie apart from the book, you can have much more fun and then the movie is really good. I try to look at it that way, but it's quite tough. Anyway, the battles and most of the characters are great. The special effects and the excitement are both very good. I didn't regret seeing it (actually I already saw it twice in the cinema).

Back to Philosophers Guild

Home | Contact | Legal and privacy policy | Top of page

This website © Copyright 1999-2011, Arjan Wardekker.
All rights reserved.
All trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners.