What do You think about The Two Towers (2003)?
The Two Towers is the second part of LOTR. In this installment, the Fellowship is rent and struggles to survive. This book is made up for mirrors and doubling. In the first section, you follow closely the Three Hunters as they hunt their prey across the landscape. With Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli, Tolkien presents a group in chase. It feels like a hunt, and it is a hunt of the sagas.There second trinity is made up of Frodo, Sam, and Gollum. This second threesome echoes in a way the first. They two are on a quest, not to just save two lives, but to save anyone. It is this trinity; however, who faces the most general and is in some ways a false trinity, for Gollum is a reluctant main.Other doubling occurs in the novel. The reader is introduced to Faramir, brother to Boromir, and a worthy and true he is. The character of Faramir is also doubled to a degree by the character of Eomer. Both young men serve in dark and dangerous times, both show the worthiness of men, both protect their country. They represent the new order that will come after the War of the Ring.The sense of change that began in the Fellowship is continued here. There is a sense that Theoden will son give place to his sister-son, Eomer. That he has grown too blind to be an effective leader for much longer. This is not due surely to the influence of Grima Wormtongue (who has the coolest bad guy name ever), but is revealed also in his own character. Look at his treatment, his forgetfulness of Eowyn. When to leave on his war path, he acknowledges Eomer, but is confused when Hama says the people wish to be protected by the House of Eorl. Hama must point Eowyn to her uncle. Shades of Queen Elizabeth II in WWII, perhaps? This theme of disregarding worthiness will also be picked up in The Return of the King.Eowyn is not the only female in the story, and in this installment, she doesn’t have a very big part to play. The other female in the story is Shelob, perhaps the most controversial female character in Tolkien’s work. After all, she is a deadly female spider and that must mean that Tolkien has issues.Unless, he is just afraid of spiders and knows that the female is the deadlier of the species.Joking aside, Towers contains one of the most moving passages anywhere in Tolkien. This passage concerns the character of Gollum. During their trek, Sam and Frodo finally succumb to tiredness, and Frodo falls asleep with his head resting in Sam’s lap. Gollum returns and sees them. Tolkien then writes, “Gollum looked at them. A strange expression passed over his lean hungry face. The gleam faded from his eyes, and they went dim and grey, old and tired. A spasm of pain seemed to twist him, and he turned away, peering back up towards the pass, shaking his head, as if engaged in some interior debate. Then he came back, and slowly putting out a trembling hand, very cautiously he touched Frodo’s knee – but almost the touch was a caress. For a fleeting moment, could one of the sleepers have seen him, they would have thought that they beheld an old weary hobbit, shrunken by the years that had carried him far beyond his time, beyond friends and kin, and the fields and streams of youth, an old starved pitiable thing.”And then Sam wakes and ruins the spell. What makes the passage so moving, what the reader knows here but Samwise doesn’t, is Gollum could have been saved there. If Sam had not been Sam, if he had spoken softly, Gollum would have turned from evil. The passage speaks of loss and missed opportunity so poignantly.Added 12/11/12 - Is just me or is Wormtongue somewhat like Shakespeare's Richard III? It's strange, each time I re-read this series, at least after the release of the Jackson movies, I gain a more respect for the Jackson adaptions, even with the changes in regards to Faramir. The TTs is the fastest paced of the books because it starts with a hunt. But it is also very emotional because of the father/son relationships that appear as well as those of the brothers in all forms.
—Chris
As with my Fellowship of the Ring review, I'm not going to do a proper review. You've more than likely already decided whether or not to read this; I sincerely doubt that this silly little review will convince you otherwise."The Two Towers" is a strange book and movie. It's a strange book because the whole first half/book is about the Quintet - Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, Merry, and Pippin - while the second half/book is all about Sam and Frodo. So if you want to know what Sam/Frodo are up to while the Trio are at Helm's Deep - tough luck. If you want to know what Merry and Pippin are up to while Sam/Frodo are noming with Faramir - figure it out yourself.The movie rectifies this for an audience (switching back and forth between all the protagonists), but, unlike FOTR, veers quite a bit from the source material, upping the ante at Helm's Deep with the arrival of the Elves, moving Shelob's lair to "Return of the King", doing that stupid "OH NOES ARAGORN FELL OFF THE CLIFF and is TOTALLY DEAD!!!" thing, and trying to squeeze more of Arwen/the romance in. Plus, it's the middle book/movie of a trilogy. That could be a death knoll for it.What's more weird is how my thoughts and opinions have changed 180 about this book. When I first read it, I LOVED the first book with the Quintet! Characters come back, there are funny quips, battles, chases, etc. I was SHOCKED when I realized that, nearly a decade later, I was BORED STIFF with these sections. Suddenly the battle banter wasn't witty but odd - laughing your butt off as people are dying left and right? (And it didn't strike the good balance like I felt the movie did.) A huge portion felt like a waste of time as Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli run after Merry and Pippin - until *SPOILER* Gandalf tells them, nope, the hobbits are Totes OK, time to head to Edoras, biotches!! And let's not forget that Tolkien loves to have his characters tell stories that may or may not be related to the story of The Lord of the Rings! In fact, instead of SHOWING US what happens to Merry and Pippin while the Trio are at Helm's Deep, he has Merry TELL US, in a rather boring conversation with the Trio. YAWN.And the second half, which used to bore me to death, nearly sent me into tears (and if you know me, that almost NEVER happens!) when Sam is bent over the still form of Frodo after one of the most exciting battle scenes - a rather simple one between Sam, wielding Sting, and Shelob. I finally saw the split personality Gollum, but more than that, I sympathized with the poor guy. I saw how fragile Frodo was, the courage and bravery and stalwartness of Sam. And even when Sam and Frodo meet up with Faramir and have a jolly conversation about the old days (Tolkien telling stories that may or may not be about the current story!), it was actually rather interesting and NOT BORING! (Though I will admit, Jackson's revision to make Faramir desire the Ring makes total sense, and I felt it was a good change - different, but because the movie was a different beast.)I sit here, contemplating all this, and I'm rather stunned. It goes to show you how time changes a person, how ONE BOOK could mean so many different things to different people or even the same person at a different age. Truly, we are always growing, always changing and what we read and watch changes with us.I must say, I like "The Two Towers" less than FOTR, even still (both book and movie), but while my views on the individual books have changed, I still do enjoy the story. It will be most interesting to see what my thoughts are on the final entry into the LOTR saga.
—Crystal Starr Light
It's obvious that Tolkien crafted his sentences very carefully, in terms of structure as well as word choice. His writing is rich and descriptive, making the reading process a slow one. In my opinion, the books are worth the level of attention they demand. The world Tolkien created here is unbelievably well-thought out and complete. It's so detailed that it could easily be the long-forgotten history of our world-- a better version of our world, perhaps, where darkness is eventually conquered by friendship, loyalty, courage, perseverance, beauty, and hope.For me, one aspect in which the movies triumph the books is characterization. The book characters are more static, more interchangeable, and experience less development than the movie characters. I'm not exactly sure whether this is a flaw of the books or a great achievement of the movies, though.
—Maud
