[en] The Prancing Pony > The Lord of the Rings

The LOTR Trilogy

<< < (4/18) > >>

Adamin:
Weeell, the picture is simplifying a lot of backstory... Morgoth might have been more powerful than Sauron, but he was satisfied with sitting in the north of Beleriand with the Silmarils upon his head. Sauron on the other hand was always waging war somewhere in Middle-earth and ruling or conquering lands. So who was more effective in the "King of all Earth" business?  ;)



--- Zitat von: hoho96 am 29. Jan 2016, 07:51 ---The reason I place Two Towers higher than RotK is because I feel it's that bit closer to the books (ok, forget the Elves)
--- Ende Zitat ---
And forget that Faramirs Character was completely butchered and thrown under the bus for dramatic reasons! :D

But that aside I also like the second movier very much. Every one of the movies has its unique perks. Fellowship is much more magical and fairytale like. Towers has the drama and great battle action. Return is the climax of everything.

Walküre:
Exactly, I agree with the focus of the Two Towers on drama and characters development.

Especially, I always appreciated how the character of Éowyn was designed and fashioned within the plot, and her role in that common 'Anglo-Saxon'-inspired context that is nothing more than the whole conceptual context of Rohan.
For example, I think that this is one of the precious yet 'small' pieces that always remind us the higher quality of the holistic material of this trilogy (something that I couldn't really recall in the Hobbit).
It's an extended scene of the iconic Théodred's funeral, in which she sings a touching lament in Rohirric (basically Old English)  :)

https://youtube.com/watch?v=jjlxzXO1L1M

bookworm1138:

--- Zitat ---The reason I place Two Towers higher than RotK is because I feel it's that bit closer to the books in depicting the struggles of Rohan and the development of the characters. It has almost no cheesiness whatsoever. You don't feel any rush in the events.
--- Ende Zitat ---

The attack on the Westfold at the beginning of the film makes me cringe every time I watch The Two Towers. Call me heartless, but it just feels like Peter Jackson is just bashing the audience over the head with the hammer of melodrama.

The over-emphasis placed on the Battle of Helm's Deep (how many times in the build-up is the battle being referred to as a lost cause? That the heroes have no chance of winning? And did we really have to see little six-year-old boys being armed and armored? Once again, the hammer of melodrama comes crashing down upon our heads.)


--- Zitat ---It has almost no cheesiness whatsoever.
--- Ende Zitat ---

Glad you pointed out Sam's speech, because up until "Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn't", it was more or less based on things that Tolkien had written in the Lord of the Rings books. Then, of course, instead of letting it be, Peter Jackson has to brandish the hammer of melodrama and drop upon our heads the cheesiest line of the entire films (including the one Galadriel said to Frodo in Fellowship):


--- Zitat ---"There's some good in this world, Mr. Frodo, and it's worth fighting for."
--- Ende Zitat ---

CHEESIEST. LINE. EVER!!!

PS - if you think me heartless, maybe i am. but that doesn't mean that, subjectively, my view on The Two Towers is any less valid.

PPS - before you say that i'm "nitpicking", no, nitpicking would be calling the script-writer out every time they put in a line like "orcs are on the move", "those wraiths are still out there" or "if i was an orc, you'd be dead by now."

Walküre:

--- Zitat von: bookworm1138 am  1. Feb 2016, 18:25 ---The over-emphasis placed on the Battle of Helm's Deep (how many times in the build-up is the battle being referred to as a lost cause? That the heroes have no chance of winning? And did we really have to see little six-year-old boys being armed and armored? Once again, the hammer of melodrama comes crashing down upon our heads.)


--- Ende Zitat ---

But, honestly, was this really a negative aspect?
I obviously respect your opinion, but I would personally view things in the opposite way.

The dramatisation and the climax (as in an ascension) in the construction of the film's plot was almost perfect and complete, intended as starting with a general negative situation, explaining contexts and developing characters, and, in the final step, the awaited and longed resolving battle, in which either the Good or the Evil must prevail.
I honestly think that this was exactly the film's strong and solid quality.

As other ones have already pointed out, both FOTR and ROTK kind of lacked this completeness in their own plot, but mainly due to 'physiological' reasons, deep in their very essence.
The first film was in fact the prelude of everything, with a mythical and fairytale-like essence, like Adamin wrote; the only prominent battle between Good and Evil is the one between Gandalf and the Balrog, but it wasn't definitely something expected nor was it constructed throughout the plot.
ROTK was the epilogue of the holistic picture; on the other hand, we could say that the plot was way too much (intentionally, obviously, according to the film's characteristics) constructed and planned, and that the initial phase of 'development' of settings and characters was not really accomplished because not necessary.

Therefore, I believe we could regard the second film as the most balanced regarding these aspects.
As if, as I wrote above, it dealt with a story in the story, a parenthesis of Rohan related to Middle Earth's events, but at the same time complete in its own development and existence  :)

Faramir The Gentle:
Does PJ ever justified why he portrayed gondor troops so weak in the movie

Navigation

[0] Themen-Index

[#] Nächste Seite

[*] Vorherige Sete