|
|
Lord of the Rings - The Two Towers : Where's the Other Tower, Frodo?
Spoiler Alert
Go na' further lest ye read things about the movie you dinna wan' ta knew.
First let me say that I enjoyed Fellowship of the Ring. I thought it one of the best movies I'd ever seen. Those who found fault with the movie because it didn't strictly follow the storyline didn't understand what it would take to make a movie that actually follows the storyline.
That said, I also enjoyed The Two Towers, even though it took greater liberties with the story than Fellowship did. Some of these liberties were extraordinary, not the least of these being that they forgot to even mention the second tower.
There's only one tower in this movie - Isengard. The other tower - Minas Morgul, doesn't even appear. Frodo and Sam never make it to Morgul Vale because they are forced to take a ridiculous detour to Osgiliath, for no apparent reason, at least not one that I can see at this point. Maybe it will make sense once we see Return of the King. But future events in unreleased movies are no excuse for diverting so wildly from the plot of the original book.
The beauty of Fellowship was that, even though there were diversions from the plot, these were needed in order to smooth over those areas that had to be cut from the movie, especially the Tom Bombadil chapters. Add to that the forgivable desire to increase the role of Arwen, and you have Fellowship, pretty much as it was in the book.
But in Two Towers, there are several completely new plot elements, changed plot elements that seem to serve no purpose, and one utterly rewritten character.
Let's start at the beginning. The beginning was great, with Gandalf's fall in the darkness and his battle with the balrog. I'd have liked to have seen more of this, but I was happy with the beginning. I was also happy with Frodo and Sam and Gollum in the Emyn Muil, and the chase across the fields of Rohan. But that's also where you get your first problem. All of a sudden, the Uruk-hai from Isengard have a bunch of evil-looking orcs in their ranks, orcs who rebel once they reach the edge of Fangorn Forest. Where did these buggers come from? In the book, we know that some goblins accompanied the Uruk-hai, but the rebellious orcs, led by Grishnahk, are from Mordor and want to take the hobbits for themselves. But in the Fellowship movie, no orcs set out from Isengard, only Uruk-hai, and there is no mention of orcs from Mordor. Now, as they are crossing Rohan, there are orcs.
Yes, that's being picky, but I thought from the beginning that it was a mistake to make Saruman simply a minion of Sauron. That isn't true. Saruman wanted the ring for himself and was trying to rival Sauron while also serving him. So, in the crossing of Rohan, they kept part of a plot element that they had earlier eliminated from the movie's storyline. Not good.
Want me to get even pickier? When Aragorn meets Eomer and the riders of Rohan, he says they are hunting Uruk-hai. How does he know this? Uruk-hai are new creations of Saruman. In the book, he says they are hunting orcs. Why the change in the movie? I don't know.
This brings us to Treebeard. The scene on the rocky outcropping was eliminated. Understandable. But a key element of that scene from the book was dropped, making Merry and Pippin's initial encounter with Treebeard much more dangerous. In the book, he greets them in a friendly manner, not wanting to be hasty. In the movie, he hurts them. I couldn't figure out why. The interpretation of Treebeard was interesting. I thought him a bit too leggy, but that was ok. Was that John Rhys-Davies doing the voice? It sure sounds like him, and it was distracting hearing Gimli's voice coming out of Treebeard's mouth. They couldn't have found someone else?
This part of the movie seemed rather disjointed. There was too much cutting back and forth between scenes. None of the scenes stayed on screen long enough, until after Gandalf sets out from Edoras. Oh yes, Gandalf. His return seemed hurried to me, and once again they introduced an element that they had discarded in the first movie - namely Shadowfax - the cause for the falling-out between Gandalf and Theoden. Now, all of a sudden Shadowfax appears and Gandalf says they are old friends.
And then there is Eomer. In the book, Eomer doesn't fall out of Theoden's favor until after he attacks Saruman's orcs. In the movie, he is already an outlaw by the time he meets Aragorn. And as for their meeting, I thought it a bit too easy the way Eomer just handed over two horses. I suspect Peter Jackson changed Eomer's place in the story because he needed Eomer to save the day at Helm's Deep, but there really wasn't a reason to do this. Gandalf is the one who saves the day and he doesn't need Eomer there at all. More on this below.
Gandalf arrives at Edoras, and Eowyn is perfectly done, bringing back some of the magic of Fellowship. But then there is this whole battle of wills between Saruman and Gandalf via Theoden. They are saying Theoden is possessed by Saruman? If so, then what need for Grima? It wasn't magic that brought Theoden low, it was hopelessness and old age. And it wasn't magic that brought him back, it was the hope brought by Gandalf - Theoden was still old, but he was no longer bent by care and worry - the poison of Grima. I thought it a mistake to portray this as a long distance magical battle between wizards. Speaking of Grima, they removed the "Down, snake!" scene. Arg! Why? Why?
Oh, and once again, it seems all a wizard's staff is good for is whacking someone from a distance.
Now, after the restoration of Theoden, what happens? He chooses not to fight! Here is where the movie starts to veer into whole new storylines. Instead, he leads his people to the supposed safety of Helm's Deep. I can see the reasoning behind combining Helm's Deep with Dunharrow in this respect, but at the same time, I don't understand why Theoden, newly restored to vigor and hope, should choose to run and hide. What purpose did this character change serve?
I think it served the purpose of the movie's theme - hopelessness. Sometime early in the development, I suspect Peter Jackson decided that hopelessness would be the theme of this movie and everything was convoluted to reflect this decision. Theoden's pacifism is but the first glimpse of what becomes something of a dead horse which is beaten throughout the remainder of the movie.
The second is the separation of Aragorn and Arwen, glimpsed during the period of Aragorn's delirium after falling off a cliff. Did Peter Jackson really throw Aragorn off a cliff just so he could have Aragorn remember their parting at Imladris? And is Arwen really fleeing to the blessed realm? I don't think so. I expected to see her show up leading the Gray Company of rangers from the north, and I think she still may do so, or she may show up with ships for Aragorn to sail up the river and rescue Gondor, but we'll have to wait until the third movie to find out. But once again, we have a long story diversion containing wholly new material for no other purpose than to pound the theme of hopelessness.
Now, back to Merry and Pippin. And again with the hopelessness. Treebeard informs the hobbits that the wars of men are no concern of the ents', and Pippin has to trick Treebeard into joining the fight. Trick Treebeard?!!!! Then, once the sacking of Isengard starts, where are the huorns? Where are the huorns marching off to Helm's Deep? I began to have a sinking feeling, even thought the sacking itself was great fun. I wish he had shown the ents tearing up the stone, as it was described in the book. That's the kind of magic that exists in Tolkien's work, not the magic of invisible staff punches sending wizards skidding across slick marble floors.
The battle at Helm's Deep was fantastic, beyond fantastic. I can forgive them for the appearance of Haldir and the archers from Lorien, even though that isn't in keeping with Tolkien's theme. I can forgive them for the steepness of the slope down which Gandalf and the riders charge. But what I can't forgive them is the lack of huorns. Even with the arrival of the riders and Gandalf, there is no way they could have defeated that army, either in the book or the movie. What saved them was the huorns. What saved them was that element outside the reckoning and the wisdom of Saruman - the ents.
So I can't understand is why the huorns didn't arrive at Helm's Deep. What a scene that would have made - that whole army disappearing into the forest of huorns, never to be seen again! Why didn't Peter Jackson use that scene? It boggles the mind.
And it boggles the mind why he completely rewrote the character of Faramir. Boromir's brother was his polar opposite, more like Gandalf than anyone else. So why rewrite him into Boromir's mirror? Why force Sam and Frodo into that long journey to Osgiliath, which, by the way, puts them crossing the great river twice during the movie, even though they never show it. At the second crossing, they would have been crossing to a shore held by the enemy, by the way.
Up to that point, the scenes with Sam and Frodo were nearly perfect. Gollum is perfect in every respect. I am still amazed by the work they did with Gollum.
But then Sam and Frodo meet Faramir. At first, he is done perfectly as well, and to that point in the movie, I had forgiven all the things I have listed so far in this review. But when Faramir says that the ring will be taken to Gondor, I was stunned. Flabbergasted. Shocked. And thus begins my most serious misgivings about The Two Towers.
Frodo is taken on a long detour to Osgiliath, just in time for the king of the Nazgul's attack. And here, Frodo loses it. He reveals himself to the wraith, shows the ring, and but for the interference of Sam, almost claims the ring for his own. And Frodo almost kills Sam for doing this.
If this were a work of original fiction, I'd have no problem with this, but this is Lord of the Rings, and these scenes simply don't happen in Lord of the Rings. There is no apparent reason for these scenes. They didn't shorten the story, they lengthened it. Lengthened it so that the second tower of the two towers never even appears in the movie!
What is more, by having Frodo reveal himself here, outside Mordor, this changes the whole aspect of Sauron's search for the ring. Now he knows where it is and who has it. Yes, you can say that's why he will send the Morgul army against Gondor in Return of the King, but he was going to do that anyway.
Unless, and this gives me a shiver, Peter Jackson plans to combine the battle before the gates of Minas Arnor with the battle before the gates of Mordor. That's what I suspect he is planning to do. It's the only explanation for the changes he made. And frankly, that will make a heck of a scene and will save a lot of time. And it will allow him to fit in the scouring of the shire, which I sincerely hope he does. If this is what happens, it will redeem what I think is a disappointing second movie of the Lord of the Rings.
That's not to say it isn't a great movie in its own right. It far surpasses anything else that has ever been done, except for Fellowship. And therein lies the seeds of my disappointment with Two Towers and my hope for The Return of the King.
Full Disclosure: I worked for about 8 years planning to write the screenplay for Lord of the Rings. The whole Tolkien creation is dear to my heart, at least as dear as it is to Peter Jackson, and I watched these movies as though I had made them myself. I think Peter Jackson has done almost as good a job as I would have done. Almost. Someday I hope I have the opportunity to thank him.
