|
Post by Catfish on Dec 28, 2002 23:50:17 GMT 10
I thought the movie was good. It wasn't just a fantasy adventury type thing even though it seems like it. Although it had a main storyline with the big war and what not, it had smaller storylines, which give you a better insight into some characters.
I dont know why it's call the Two Towers. It has nothing to do with Two Towers.
I don't know why people were laughing at Gollum when he was talking to himself, having a struggle of his good and evil. All I saw was a creature in pain, fighting within itself, something that I'm sure everyone will do at least once in their lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by singingcirclesaway on Dec 29, 2002 1:12:48 GMT 10
i saw it boxing day, right after FOTR. amazing shit, both of them.
as for people laughing at gollum - he's cute, funny voice, etc. people are going to laugh. i did. and fair enough. TTT requires you to focus and everything, and it's almost like comic relief. yes, i could indentify with him (hello year 12 english) and being torn between 2 extremes, and that's what makes it laughable - it's not me. even though there's this huge story that is far beyond any reality we've experienced, we can still relate to the main characters, and see they face the same problems, more or less. it's a relief, you can laugh it off. so on.
rambleramble.
|
|
|
Post by TheAstronaut on Dec 29, 2002 9:47:15 GMT 10
Its called The Two Towers because there is a direct link between Sauron in Bara^Dur & Saruman in Orthanc, hence the Two Towers.
|
|
|
Post by caelestis on Dec 29, 2002 14:24:33 GMT 10
you're right, but they didn't seem to make a clear reference to those two towers together, only separately, i think.
i saw TTT boxing day, and i'm ready for the last installment. i loved it. but yeah, i had a bit of a chuckle at gollum, but not as much as some other people did in the cinema. it's always interesting seeing other people's reactions to things in movies. gimli provided much more comic relief anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Tiberius on Dec 29, 2002 15:20:37 GMT 10
Yeah, I saw it on boxing day. I liked it, but I didn't love it. Yes it was very pretty looking but it just seemed to plod from scene to scene from event to event. It didn't seem to have the same level of depth and foreboding that the book does (same problem the first movie has). And Gollum as comic relief? Wha tha!? This was wrong. He's not supposed to be funny, he's supposed to be creepy and disturbing. He's supposed to be a frightening look at someone who's lost themselves to evil. Someone who's gone beyond the point of no return. He should be pathetic and disturbing, but he's not supposed to be campy and melodramatic as portrayed here. Bah. So yeah, good but not great. A few other complaints: - That whole scene in Fangorn forest was rushed.
- Where was the talk of the Entwives?
- Where were the Huorns?
- Who and where was Eomer? He was probably in it, but it wasn't very clear.
- Shouldn't Gandalf, Legolas, Gimli & co meet up with Pippen and Merry at Isengard after the Ents defeat Saruman's orcs there?
- Where was the Palantir? Was the odd scene of Elrond and Galadriel talking supposed to be it?
- Where was Shelob? (I know I know, next movie instead, bah)
Lord Of The Rings lite, it is.
|
|
|
Post by singingcirclesaway on Dec 29, 2002 15:55:22 GMT 10
can i just add something very intelligent:
legolas is fucking beautiful. hello need to change underwear. there's something very intriguing about long blonde hair and that boy. rowr.
|
|
|
Post by Tiberius on Dec 29, 2002 16:05:13 GMT 10
Just to add something equally intelligent:
I was thinking something similar about Eowyn.
|
|
|
Post by TheAstronaut on Dec 29, 2002 16:14:52 GMT 10
I think you both have bladder problems.
|
|
|
Post by hawaiianrobot on Dec 29, 2002 19:41:40 GMT 10
What about Aragon? Am I the only one who reckons he is sexy? I think I am...
I still have to see ttt
Should do it this week....hmm
|
|
|
Post by WithoutWords on Dec 29, 2002 23:32:12 GMT 10
ppppffffffft bloodt leglolas
the rest are all drity and grubby and he looks like he;'s just gone to the salon for a blow dry and a facial
bugger off pretty boy
and aragon........mmhmm ruggardly hansome
but have you seen hi inr eal life?
eeee ewwwww
|
|
|
Post by loux2 on Dec 30, 2002 10:39:48 GMT 10
they're both good aragon is all rugged and yum and i agree legolas does look pretty all the time but that's good heehe
|
|
|
Post by fathershark on Dec 30, 2002 10:41:35 GMT 10
I've gotta say, I'm looking forward to ogling Miranda Otto........."The Nostradamus Kid" was my spanking video of choice for many years.
|
|
|
Post by WithoutWords on Dec 30, 2002 16:04:50 GMT 10
i dont like pretty boys
thats what pretty girls are for
|
|
|
Post by Catfish on Dec 30, 2002 18:07:19 GMT 10
Isn't Legolas always looking like he;s just stepped out of a salon because he's Elvish? I noticed in the first movie when they were trying to go over that snowy mountain that he was able to walk on top of the snow and not sink, so I think Elves are meant to be special. Also, his never ending arrows... people always complain about this, but I tell them "He's a frickin Elf! He's meant to have endless arrows!" And he has those Elven Eyes as well, what do they do? What other powers do Elves have?
Aragorn is all yep. I just wonder what happens in the end. I should read the book, but then again I might just wait a year.
And I did notice that there were two towers in the movie, but the only part they really played were for cinematics to pad out a few seconds. The story is really about the big war at Helm's Keep or whatever it is. THe book must've really made it clear about the Two Towers, because I dont think they'd call it The Two Towers unless they have to because of the book.
|
|
|
Post by Tiberius on Dec 30, 2002 18:23:50 GMT 10
The reasons for calling it The Two Towers are made clearer in the book than the movie. If you haven't read the books yet, do so, you're in for a treat.
|
|