The Two Towers (2002) Review

I reviewed The Fellowship of the Ring a little while ago, promising to return with reviews of the rest of the trilogy. So here I finally am with my review of The Two Towers.

I started off my Fellowship post with a few explanations/disclaimers, so I’ll direct you there to read the first few paragraphs, and jump straight into the review here. (This post will again be very spoiler-heavy!)

I mentioned in the last post that I really didn’t like Frodo’s reaction to Gandalf’s death, so I didn’t much like seeing it all over again during the flashback/dream thing of Gandalf’s death at the beginning. Other than that, though, I think this was an intriguing choice of opening – first raising your hopes that Gandalf’s not dead, then dashing them again when you realize it’s just Frodo dreaming…but still sort of getting your mental wheels turning with the realization that we don’t actually know Gandalf died. I like that. I think it was a cool choice.

Since we start the movie off with Frodo and Sam, I may as well mention here how their character dynamic bugs me. As I mentioned before, I think Sam’s character is well-portrayed, and I think his dogged selflessness and loyalty to Frodo comes across quite well. But I don’t really feel enough of a return of affection from Frodo; their bond feels less tight-knit in the movies than I would like. Frodo and Sam really felt like friends in the books, but at least to me, it feels like more of a master/servant relationship in the movies. It’s hard to pinpoint the difference precisely – Frodo is (usually) nice to Sam in the movies – but there’s a certain degree of trust and camaraderie that’s just missing. (I know that it’s a deliberate choice later on to make their dynamic more obviously antagonistic, but I’ll probably talk about that more in the next post.)

In any case. Enter Gollum.

Gollum is quite well-done. You could argue that the duality of his character is overplayed, but I don’t think it’s a problem; I think it’s a legitimate and interesting choice to play that constant struggle between his good and bad sides as just a part of his personality. And that aside, the strange combination of desperate and slimy and cunning and childish and despicable and somehow weirdly endearing that I find Gollum to be is all portrayed extremely well. Props both to Andy Serkis and the animators of Gollum, who all did terrific work.

Then we’re on to the Three Hunters! I love this part of the book to pieces. And those wide sweeping shots of them travelling over that gorgeous landscape with that wonderful majestic score in the background? Pretty great, I’ve got to say.

I realized before publishing my first post that I never said anything about Cristopher Lee’s Saruman. He’s quite good – menacing and enough gravitas and whatnot. It’s difficult to capture Saruman fully, though. That chapter in which we see his “golden voice,” for instance, is so fascinating in the book and really isn’t fully captured in the movies. They also remove Saruman’s double-treachery against Sauron, and I think that’s a significant part of his character. However, to do the complexities of Saruman’s character justice, you would probably need more time than they’re able to devote to him here.

Let’s move on to Rohan.

Eomer didn’t click for me, unfortunately. I don’t feel like we get enough of a grasp of him as a person/what exactly his personality is…and the fact that most of the times we do actually see him he’s mad about something probably doesn’t help. (Though to be fair, Eomer is a character who doesn’t click for me that much in the books either. Maybe this is partly a me-problem and I just need to appreciate Eomer more.)

Miranda Otto doesn’t look like how I picture Eowyn (for one thing I always pictured her hair as more a golden blond rather than a lighter bleached-ish blond – and while obviously Miranda Otto’s beautiful either way, I think her natural warmer hair tone suits her better, so I doubly stand by my opinion that they should have made her hair golden). But looks aside, I think Miranda is really very good as Eowyn – and very good at hiding her Australian accent! That aspect of it didn’t sink in until this re-watch, after I had seen her with her real accent in Flight of the Phoenix. While I could (and possibly will) nitpick about her characterization, I think her character is also well-written on the whole.

And they do a great job of making Grima Wormtongue seem absolutely disgusting on first appearance, so I guess hurrah for that. (I’ve noticed that the technique used in the LOTR movies for making people repulse us on first meeting is to make them weirdly pale and clammy and have their hair cling to their face. And I mean, it does work well.) I do think they should have made him be a bit more subtle, because really, how on earth are we expected to believe that a chappie who looks like this

would ever have been allowed into an advisory position?

Though on the other hand, I also don’t like how Eomer just straight-up attacked him. I quite understand the temptation, but I think Eomer was smart enough to realize it was not going to help matters any.
(EDIT: Noddy has reminded me that this was not made up for the movies – in the book, although we didn’t see it happen, the reason that Eomer was banished was in fact because he threatened Wormtongue. I guess Eomer was just not thinking clearly that day.)

(Also, this is just a little detail, but I wish they had made it clear that “Wormtongue” is the nickname people had started to call him, not his actual name. It seems like a ridiculously on-the-nose naming choice this way.)

I know I complained a couple times in the last post about changing the chronology around and how that lowers the suspense, but I find I don’t mind when we switch back and forth between the Three Hunters and Merry and Pippin with the orcs. I think it feels more natural here. Maybe there are Deep Important Inherent Story Reasons why it feels more natural here, or maybe there’s no rhyme or reason to when I mind and when I don’t. I don’t know. (I will admit, I think it’s just easier to digest attention-span-wise this way.)

I was sadly disappointed with Aragorn and Legolas and Gimli’s meeting with Eomer. You see, I LOVE that scene in the book. It’s one of my all-time favorite LOTR scenes. And while most of the dialogue they use is straight from the book, it’s edited such that it’s not just no longer charming and funny, it doesn’t make sense anymore. They keep Eomer’s “I would cut off your head, Master Dwarf, if it stood but a little higher from the ground” line, but he says it with absolutely no provocation, so he just seems like a hot-tempered jerk. I get that they’re likely trying to emphasize the antagonism between Dwarves and Men…but to threaten decapitation unprovoked pretty much automatically makes you a jerk no matter what background context there is. (In the book, it was in answer to Gimli being Extremely Tactless by speaking up for Galadriel with one of my favorite zingers – “You speak evil of that which is fair beyond the reach of your thought, and only little wit can excuse you” which is absolute GOLD and WHY would you cut that.) Then Legolas stands up for Gimli and Aragorn acts as peacemaker – so those dynamics are as they should be – but with all the cutting that’s done to the scene and to the progression of their relationship, Eomer switches from wanting to kill them to offering them free horses in the space of about two minutes, with precious little happening in between to change his mind. It doesn’t make SENSE.

I kind of like how we keep switching to see what happens with Merry and Pippin as Aragorn is piecing it all together and figuring out what happened to them. That was neat.

Treebeard was another disappointment, though. He looked all right (not how I pictured the Ents, but Such is Life) but I don’t think his personality was captured at all. He didn’t have the warmth and humor and charm of book-Treebeard at all; they sapped all the life out of him, if you’ll forgive the pun. (I won’t blame you if you don’t.)

Then we’re back to Frodo and Sam. I haven’t mentioned this yet, but the sets for Mordor and the surrounding areas are really good. (Perhaps the closest set to my mental image, and that, as we know, is infallible.)

I wasn’t a big fan of how the bit in the Dead Marshes was played – Frodo literally falling in seemed like a Bit Much. But I did like the detail of Gollum being the one to save him, and I also really liked Frodo’s little conversation with Gollum after that. A character dynamic I think the movies portray really well is Frodo’s eager desire to save Gollum from the Ring and save him from himself – his desire to reach into him and get to the good inside of him. And I’ve already mentioned that Gollum is really well-done in general.

Then we get the return of Gandalf the White, and that is mostly good, but there’s one detail that really bothers me. In the books, when they see him and suspect that it’s Saruman, Gimli says they should shoot him before he can speak. Aragorn, however, is insistent that they can’t just shoot an old man. Yes, they are 90% sure that it’s Saruman, but they’re not 100% sure, and they therefore can’t justly kill him. That’s a really important distinction, and it subtly shows you something about the integrity of Aragorn’s character…and that detail is sadly lost in the movies, where it’s Aragorn who instructs Legolas to shoot.

I think Shadowfax was pretty well-cast, don’t you?

Frodo and Sam’s view of the Black Gate was mostly all fine and good. I did not, however, like the thing with Sam randomly falling down in full view of the soldiers, somehow becoming so wedged in the gravel that Frodo can’t possibly move him, and then being so completely camouflaged by the elven cloaks that the captain or whoever he was literally looked straight at them and thought they were rocks. That seemed a bit implausible.

I like how much emphasis they had on Theodred and his death. I feel like that’s a detail that it’s easy to pass over in the books – I for one never thought about it much, to be honest – but obviously it would have had a huge effect on Eowyn and Eomer and Theoden (once he became aware of it) so I’m really glad that they showed that. When Peter Jackson draws out character dynamics that are there in the book or implied in the book, I like it. It’s just when he changes characters or makes things up for no reason that I don’t like it.

I also liked the detail of the banner-thingy breaking loose and travelling from Eowyn to Aragorn. That was cool.

Gandalf’s ostentatious wink at Aragorn after being allowed to keep his staff when going into the Golden Hall was a choice, for sure. Our gang’s meeting with Theoden was all rather over-blown for my tastes – fighting guards all the way along the Hall (Legolas elbowing the guy in the face without even bothering to turn around is the highlight) and Gandalf having to release Theoden from what’s apparently a full-on possession and all that.

I didn’t think it was a great choice to change it so that Theoden was all for killing Wormtongue then and there, though I’d say that ties in with Theoden’s characterization in general (which I’ll touch on more shortly). I do get, though, that they’re trying to emphasize Aragorn’s mercy in so doing…and also make him look even better in front of Eowyn.

Again, I’m glad we saw Theodred’s funeral and Theoden’s grief at his son’s death.

But I don’t like the characterization of Theoden. One of Theoden’s main hallmarks in the books is his kindness and gentle courtesy – that’s what impressed Merry so much that he wanted to fight in his service. Those qualities are wholly absent here. He’s rash, he’s rude, he doesn’t want to listen to advice from anyone, and he’s pretty rude and dismissive when people do venture to give him advice. As aforementioned, while I like drawing out interpersonal conflict that’s already there, I do not approve of turning someone into a different character just to add more conflict.

I also don’t like the dynamic they have between Aragorn and Eowyn. It’s fine from Eowyn’s end, but it almost feels at first like Aragorn’s flirting with Eowyn – or at least showing enough interest in her that it could easily be taken that way. You’d think he would have to realize how she might interpret those little conversations and humorous asides to her and everything.

I also hated the subplot they added with Elrond trying to break up Aragorn and Arwen. They are very intelligent and mature adults who can make their own decisions! Arwen is already fully aware of the sacrifice choosing to stay with Aragorn would entail! Aragorn knows that she’s fully aware, and I don’t think he would try to make that decision for her on the grounds that he and Elrond supposedly know what she wants better than she does! I get they’re trying to add tension, and maybe the viewer’s not supposed to know if Aragorn will end up with Arwen or Eowyn, but it all feels just so unnecessary. There’s already plenty of tension, and The Lord of the Rings is NOT the sort of story that needs a “will they or won’t they?” plotline.

Anyway. After that rant (and before the rant which is incoming in just a second), let me mention something I liked, which was Wormtongue’s silent grief on seeing the army Saruman was sending to destroy what had been his own people. That was a great, subtle bit of humanization.

So now onto Rant #2, about poor Faramir – who should be suing for character defamation.

Faramir’s characterization is so wrong I hardly even know what to say. At least at his introduction, he is quite simply not the same person as the Faramir we meet in the book. Book-Faramir is actually quite stern when we first meet him – but he’s just. Book-Faramir is such a cool and such an interesting character. He’s merciful, he’s peaceful, he’s not at all attracted to power or to warfare – but he’s not at all a starry-eyed-poet type either. I feel like Faramir’s characterization gives you an idea of how justice and mercy are not inherently opposed, and can in fact work in harmony together.

And you lose all that COMPLETELY here. Now we just have an overlooked brother dynamic where Faramir wants to prove himself to his father, and falls into the exact same temptation that Boromir did to do so. That makes it seem like Faramir has just the same set of strengths and weaknesses as Boromir – and he doesn’t. He’s not another Boromir, but his own unique character, and the uniqueness of his character is lost now. And that makes me sad. (In The Return of the King I think they do Faramir’s character better…but if anything I think they fall a bit too much into the “starry-eyed poet” dynamic there.)

The little flashback where we see Boromir and Faramir together was kind of cute, though.

I always hate the part where Frodo semi-tricks Gollum into getting captured by Faramir’s men. It’s just so, so frustrating and squirmy and uncomfortable that Frodo actually had forged a little link to Gollum’s better side – had really won his trust, to an extent – and then (though I’m not really blaming him, since he was in a very tough spot) preyed on and betrayed that trust. That’s not a Peter Jackson thing, since it was just the same in the book. (I may have found it even worse in the book, in fact.) But I still hate it. I have a sort of physical revulsion to this scene.

Also, Faramir’s men are so mean to Gollum and throw him around so. That wasn’t necessary. Poor Gollum. And UGH Faramir’s characterization. I already complained about it, so I’ll just grimace again and move on.

Back at Helm’s Deep, why does Aragorn react the way he does when Gimli is just happy to see him back and alive? It hardly seemed like a “gosh you’re so annoying Gimli” eyeroll was called for under the circumstances.

Regarding Merry and Pippin’s storyline…I can’t remember where the weird scene with the ent-draught is placed, but in my opinion ’twas a good decision to cut it for the theatrical version. It feels very tonally jarring. And then they have to fabricate interpersonal conflict again between Merry and Treebeard. There’s already plenty of conflict! And you’re already CUTTING things! This is not necessary! (I do understand that they’re trying to add more depth to Merry’s character, but I think they’re damaging Treebeard’s character in so doing, and they also have added so much extra character conflict in general that at this point it just feels like too much.)

And then the battle starts, and it’s Very Long. I think I’ve mentioned before that I’m not much of a battle person. (Though Legolas skating down the stairs on his shield whilst shooting arrows the entire time was amusing.) I liked the bit where Aragorn sees the dawn coming through the window and remembers Gandalf saying he he would return that day, though I would have liked it even better if we had just seen the dawn and Aragorn’s reaction to it, without the voice-over, so we could have pieced together ourselves what it meant.

In any case, that final charge and Gandalf showing up with Eomer and everything was pretty cool.

The Ents charging Isengard was pretty cool, too.

While I don’t at all blame Frodo for temporarily going crazy and threatening to kill Sam, since the Ring will do that sort of thing…I feel like an apology afterwards was called for. Even if you’re in a situation where you aren’t responsible for your actions, you can’t just hold your best friend at sword-point and then brush it off without so much as a simple “sorry, Sam.”

I can’t wholly condone the new placement of Sam’s “there’s good in this world, Mr. Frodo, and it’s worth fighting for” speech, since the circumstances of their being in Osgiliath at all are due to character-butchery towards poor Faramir; that being said, I rather liked the way the speech was done…cutting away during the speech to show us how the good was triumphing at that very moment, though Sam and Frodo had no idea of it.

And Gollum’s facial reaction – touched and sorrowful and bitter and hopeless – was perfect. Poor Gollum.

The little conversation Sam and Frodo have near the end about wondering if other people will ever tell their story is one of the few times where I feel like they really show Frodo appreciating Sam, so I liked that.

And that’s that for now! Thinking it over and remembering what exactly happened in which movie, I think that The Two Towers is probably my least favorite of the movies. It changed the plot significantly more than Fellowship did, and I thought that very few of the changes helped the story. This movie especially tried too hard to introduce conflict wherever it possibly could, and in my opinion, that both made the conflict feel forced and harmed a lot of the characterization – which brought the whole movie down a bit for me.

See you at some point in the hopefully near-future in my post on The Return of the King! What are your favorite scenes/characters in The Two Towers? Any major ways that you agree/disagree with my opinions?