Anyone else now or recently reading "Two Towers"?

[wonderfly]

Is anyone else here, like me, reading The Two Towers now, before the movie comes out? When I learned that The Lord of the Rings: FOTR was coming to theaters last December, I decided it was time to refresh myself: the last time I read these books was in Junior High.

So I picked up the Hobbit, (which I highly reccomend anyone read before trying to read the 3 LOTR books), and I was halfway through it when I went and saw FOTR last December. Then, for lots of reasons, I put off reading the 3 main books...until about 3 months back.

I picked up FOTR, and read it again, (and I was surprised about some of the changes in the books). Now, I'm 2/3rds of the way through The Two Towers. Anyone else reading these books right now (or recently), and wanna discuss? I'm hoping to finish the book before the movie hits theatres in 2 weeks.

Things I noticed when I read the first book, (and I remember from when I last read the books years ago):

What's with all the snipets of poetry and song verse? I loved this prose, but when all of the sudden, Tolkien will have one of his characters burst out in song, it distracts from the plot in my opinion. Luckily, this type of singing and poetry decreases in books 2 and 3. I must say, I did like how in FOTR the movie, Bilbo breaks into one of the songs from the book, as he leaves the Shire. It was nice to hear...I guess that must be better than reading it.

Question: Why does Tolkien call them "Goblins" in The Hobbit, and "Orcs" in LOTR's? Is he actually making a distinction between them, or did he just decide to switch names? Yeah, I know their is a distinction between Orcs and Uruk Hai, but the fact that Tolkien no longer uses Goblins was bizaar...

Also, are the trolls in The Hobbit, and the Trolls seen in LOTR's the same? The Trolls in The Hobbit talk, and turn to stone at daylight. The Cave Troll seen in the movie was just a big brute, (though that scene rocked), and he didn't seem capable of speech. Did Tolkien redesign these creatures when writing the LOTR?

Try not to give any huge spoilers for The Two Towers and The Return of the King, if possible. Yeah, I've read these books before, but it was many years ago.

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

I re-read the books after FotR came out. Last time I read them was in High School, so I had forgotten nearly everything except the really major plot points. Was pretty cool to be surprised by the books again. I definitely think the books become more sure-footed as they go on.

Originally posted by wonderfly
What's with all the snipets of poetry and song verse?

I'm not sure if there's an official explanation for them, other than to grant a more epic feel to the book. I'd usually bleep over them if I found them dragging on. For all his gifts, I don't think Tolkien was a terribly good poet.

Question: Why does Tolkien call them "Goblins" in The Hobbit, and "Orcs" in LOTR's?

I could be entirely wrong, but I thought he referred to them at least once in The Hobbit as Orcs (certainly in naming "Orcrist," the Elven sword Thorin ends up with). I also remember something somewhere stating that the two terms were basically interchangable, although I don't remember if that's in the books or not.

Also, are the trolls in The Hobbit, and the Trolls seen in LOTR's the same? The Trolls in The Hobbit talk, and turn to stone at daylight. The Cave Troll seen in the movie was just a big brute, (though that scene rocked), and he didn't seem capable of speech.

I can think of a few possible explanations for this:

1. There could be many varieties of troll, some smarter than others.

2. Even if they were the same race, individual trolls could have varying levels of intelligence -- maybe the ones in The Hobbit were exceptionally smart, or the one in FotR was exceptionally dumb.

3. The scene didn't really call for much speech from the troll, so maybe he could talk, but just didn't.

4. The excessive stupidity of the troll really seemed to be a creation of the movie -- I don't remember anything in FotR to suggest that the troll was particularly stupid or non-verbal.

-- Ed/Ace

[Joe Tully]

Originally posted by Ace the Bathound


1. There could be many varieties of troll, some smarter than others.

2. Even if they were the same race, individual trolls could have varying levels of intelligence -- maybe the ones in The Hobbit were exceptionally smart, or the one in FotR was exceptionally dumb.

3. The scene didn't really call for much speech from the troll, so maybe he could talk, but just didn't.

4. The excessive stupidity of the troll really seemed to be a creation of the movie -- I don't remember anything in FotR to suggest that the troll was particularly stupid or non-verbal.

-- Ed/Ace

Also, remember that Tolkien's world has many different languages. It is possible that the troll just doesn't speak the same language as them.

I think it's most likely that he just didn't feel the need to talk. Despite what you see in the comics, I don't think that you spend a lot of time talking with your enemy when you're trying to crush him. Especially when there's also arrows flying all over the place and too much noise to really understand each other anyways. Besides, what are you going to say? "Hi, I'm going to kill you now, OK?"

[Taiso]

I never made it through "The Two Towers"
I was so bored I just gave up...
Did anyone else experience this?

[Ruffian]

Originally posted by Taiso
I never made it through "The Two Towers"
I was so bored I just gave up...
Did anyone else experience this?

I got lost in the first part of the book. There was just too many names and events to keep track off that I got lost and didn't know where I was anymore. The second half is a lot easier to follow since it only focuses on 3 characters: Froda, Sam, and Gollum. The interaction between those three (or should I say four? ) was pretty cool.

[wonderfly]

Originally posted by Twilight
I got lost in the first part of the book. There was just too many names and events to keep track off that I got lost and didn't know where I was anymore. The second half is a lot easier to follow since it only focuses on 3 characters: Froda, Sam, and Gollum. The interaction between those three (or should I say four? ) was pretty cool.

Frankly, I'm wondering if the second movie will be divided in the same fashion: The first half deals with Aragorn and Company going to fight Sarumon, and the second half deals with Frodo, Sam, and Gollum's journey. I'm 4 chapters into the second half of the book by the way.



I seem to recall from the first time I read these books that the first part of the book thrilled me more than the second half. I'll judge again after I finish the book. Something about the battle at Helm's Deep was just so cool to read...it's definantly going to be the best scene in the new movie. Star Wars battles, eat your heart out!

[oranthal]

i didn't like the books that much because i found it was a little hard to follow. i loved the movie though.

[wonderfly]

Originally posted by Ace the Bathound
Howdy,

I re-read the books after FotR came out. Last time I read them was in High School, so I had forgotten nearly everything except the really major plot points. Was pretty cool to be surprised by the books again. I definitely think the books become more sure-footed as they go on.

Yeah, I must say, the last time I read these books was years ago...and I enjoyed how much these books are surprising me as I go along. I usually don't like reading books a second time, cause I just remember all the major plot points, but Tolkien's packed so much into these books, you could come away with something new each time you read them!

Originally posted by Ace the Bathound


I'm not sure if there's an official explanation for them, other than to grant a more epic feel to the book. I'd usually bleep over them if I found them dragging on. For all his gifts, I don't think Tolkien was a terribly good poet.

Yeah, I felt myself skimming over them myself. I hate to seem Anti poetry(cause I'm not,) but these didn't appeal to me. Perhaps these are more along the lines of what poetry would have been like in that time period: More like Beowulf, then Shakespeare...in other words, a poem that tells a story, and not simply evokes a feeling in you.

Originally posted by Ace the Bathound





I can think of a few possible explanations for this:

1. There could be many varieties of troll, some smarter than others.

2. Even if they were the same race, individual trolls could have varying levels of intelligence -- maybe the ones in The Hobbit were exceptionally smart, or the one in FotR was exceptionally dumb.

3. The scene didn't really call for much speech from the troll, so maybe he could talk, but just didn't.

4. The excessive stupidity of the troll really seemed to be a creation of the movie -- I don't remember anything in FotR to suggest that the troll was particularly stupid or non-verbal.

-- Ed/Ace

Yeah, but I wish Tolkien could have provided better contrasts or details, to explain such differences. I guess Tokien didn't have his handy "Dungeons and Dragons" Monster Manual handy when trying to come up with monster traits!

[Elven Moon]

I read all the books before the first movie came out. It's a little fuzzy now, though. I'd re-read them but a friend borrowed them and she hasn't given them back

[TServo2049]

Originally posted by wonderfly
Frankly, I'm wondering if the second movie will be divided in the same fashion: The first half deals with Aragorn and Company going to fight Sarumon, and the second half deals with Frodo, Sam, and Gollum's journey.

Probably not...it wouldn't hold the viewers' interest long enough. I'm guessing that they're going to cut back and forth between the two storylines (and that's fine with me...)

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

I felt the second book was the weakest of the trilogy. The first one was great, and the third one had a nice apocalyptic feel to it, but the second one was generally tedious. Still, the Two Towers sections themselves are great. When Frodo and Sam "infiltrate" the enemy lair, it's still thrilling stuff.

As for the poetry...fantasy books often have characters who know many songs and ditties they whistle to themselves or each other at times. It adds to the lore of the world. Kinda like a little ditty or popular song you or I may hum to ourselves from time to time.

[wonderfly]

Originally posted by Leaping Larry Jojo
I felt the second book was the weakest of the trilogy. The first one was great, and the third one had a nice apocalyptic feel to it, but the second one was generally tedious. Still, the Two Towers sections themselves are great. When Frodo and Sam "infiltrate" the enemy lair, it's still thrilling stuff.

As for the poetry...fantasy books often have characters who know many songs and ditties they whistle to themselves or each other at times. It adds to the lore of the world. Kinda like a little ditty or popular song you or I may hum to ourselves from time to time.

I read in a recent Time Magazine interview with Peter Jackson that "The Two Towers" will be the one movie where he departs the most from the book. I wonder what that means for us the viewers. I'd say the movie would be great, if the story just jumps back and forth between the two adventurer's tales.

I guess Jackson found another way to bring Arwen into a part of the story she wasn't in. Not that I didn't mind her added screen time in FOTR.

Jackson also says he gives Gollum a bigger role. I don't see how it could get any bigger, he's in most of the second half of the book.

[Mynd Hed]

Question: Why does Tolkien call them "Goblins" in The Hobbit, and "Orcs" in LOTR's? Is he actually making a distinction between them, or did he just decide to switch names? Yeah, I know their is a distinction between Orcs and Uruk Hai, but the fact that Tolkien no longer uses Goblins was bizaar...

I believe that the justification here is that "goblin" is simply a colloquialism (sp?) denoting certain smaller breeds of orc. So all goblins are orcs, but not all orcs are goblins. Since the only orcs Bilbo met in The Hobbit were goblins, that was the word that was used most often. I believe that the term "goblin" is used in a few places in Lord of the Rings proper, especially the appendices, as well as a few of Tolkien's other writings. Could be wrong, though.

I've heard that they're definitely going to be switching back and forth between the Frodo / Gollum / Sam plotline and the "everyone else" plot lines in the Two Towers movie instead of breaking it into two halves the way the book did, and personally I support this decision, as long as they try and keep the actual events as close to the book as possible and only switch up the order of the presentation, not the content. If that makes sense.

And I agree with the various justifications already given for the contrast between the trolls in The Hobbit and the cave troll in Fellowship. Also remember that at one point the narrative describes how Sauron has been breeding a new race of trolls, "no longer slow and stupid, but cunning," so it is more than conceivable that a few different races of trolls exist. Especially since the trolls Bilbo encountered were indiginous to hilly environments, whereas the cave troll in Fellowship lived in, well, a cave. Also remember that in the book, the cave troll makes only a very brief, vague appearance, but in the movie they expanded that a great deal and took some artistic license with the troll's appearance and behavior in order to do so.

[TServo2049]

Jackson will probably figure Arwen into TTT...in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if she replaces someone like Eomer (as she replaced Glorfindel in the last movie)...

[wonderfly]

Originally posted by Mynd Hed


And I agree with the various justifications already given for the contrast between the trolls in The Hobbit and the cave troll in Fellowship. Also remember that at one point the narrative describes how Sauron has been breeding a new race of trolls, "no longer slow and stupid, but cunning," so it is more than conceivable that a few different races of trolls exist. Especially since the trolls Bilbo encountered were indiginous to hilly environments, whereas the cave troll in Fellowship lived in, well, a cave. Also remember that in the book, the cave troll makes only a very brief, vague appearance, but in the movie they expanded that a great deal and took some artistic license with the troll's appearance and behavior in order to do so.

Yeah, but I seem to recall more trolls appearing in book 3. And I don't think any of them talked either, or turn to stone in daylight. My questioning isn't just because of Jackson's interpretation, but Tolkien, whose Trolls in the Hobbit are so different than the trolls in LOTR. But I suppose, just like Sarumon was breeding super orcs, Sauron was breeding supertrolls...

[wonderfly]

Originally posted by TServo2049
Jackson will probably figure Arwen into TTT...in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if she replaces someone like Eomer (as she replaced Glorfindel in the last movie)...

I just saw another commercial for the film last night, and yeah, Arwen's in it somewhere, but I know she doesn't replace Eomer. I've seen picks of Eomer, so they do have some guy playing him. Besides, Eomer plays too important a part. He has to act as King Theoden's consiounce, to counter Wormtongue's lies.

[Ed Liu]

Howdy,

Originally posted by TServo2049
Jackson will probably figure Arwen into TTT...in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if she replaces someone like Eomer (as she replaced Glorfindel in the last movie)...

Well, according to the entry in the IMDb, Eomer is already in the movie. The least reason for her to show up would be to give Aragon the re-forged Narsil, which she did in the first book before vanishing 'till the end. I figure she can also be the direct reason why Aragorn turns down Eowyn rather than the indirect one she serves in the books.

Plus, Liv Tyler is a babe.

-- Ed/Ace

[TServo2049]

I was kidding about her replacing Eomer...I knew that wouldn't happen. I was just making fun of how they replaced Glorfindel with her in FOTR, and joking that she's going to replace a important elf in every film...

[wonderfly]

Originally posted by TServo2049
I was kidding about her replacing Eomer...I knew that wouldn't happen. I was just making fun of how they replaced Glorfindel with her in FOTR, and joking that she's going to replace a important elf in every film...

oh...well, in that case, all is forgiven. You're right, she probably does replace somebody though...

I'm two chapters away from finishing the book, now, in case you were wondering. It's time for my favorite part of the book, (of what I remember from it from the last time I read it). It's also the part I'm looking forward to the most when I go see the movie:

Spoiler:

SHELOB! ALL HAIL GIANT SPIDERS!!! Actually, I expect this scene to be better than the spiders from Harry Potter: Chamber of Secrets...

[Mynd Hed]

I'm two chapters away from finishing the book, now, in case you were wondering. It's time for my favorite part of the book, (of what I remember from it from the last time I read it). It's also the part I'm looking forward to the most when I go see the movie:

Spoiler:

SHELOB! ALL HAIL GIANT SPIDERS!!! Actually, I expect this scene to be better than the spiders from Harry Potter: Chamber of Secrets...

That's my favorite scene out of the entire trilogy, personally. It gives me shivers every time I read it. It really...

Spoiler:

...brings Master Samwise into his own as a dynamic character instead of Frodo's overprotective servant. I really hope they keep it true to the books, as it's a great action scene without any extrapolation on Jackson's part (a la the cave troll). They'll probably do her in CGI, but I hope they do a better job than they did with the cave troll-- I thought the Balrog looked great, and if they do as good a job with Shelob, I'll be ecstatic.

I can understand why Jackson wanted to expand the cave troll scene, as Tolkien kind of skimmed over the cave troll and the orcs in favor of the Balrog (who got excellent movie treatment IMO, right out of the book), but I don't think the same thing is required with this particular scene.