The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
Having had mixed feelings about The Fellowship of the Ring,
I expected this sequel to likewise have its share of ups and
downs. The Two Towers, however, proves to be a more deeply
flawed film than its predecessor.
Mind you, we have a fabulous narrative and have, in Frodo Baggins
(Elijah Wood), a great protagonist who flies in the face of convention.
Hardly the great warrior of an epic saga, Frodo is a small, meek
person saddled with a quest to destroy the One Ring, which could
itself destroy the world.
This is a perfect subject for a movie, though admittedly not
one easy to adapt. But the cinematic possibilities are endless-provided,
of course, that it is placed in the hands of a filmmaker whose
wellspring of invention is commensurate with that of John Ronald
Reull Tolkien.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. Director Peter Jackson has
made his reputation on schlocky horror films and toilet humor
flicks-not the kind of fare one tends to associate with Tolkien.
Not only that, but The Lord of the Rings is a colossally
expensive endeavor, whose sheer scope would be daunting to even
the most experienced director. That does not necessarily mean
Jackson is not up to the task, but despite the high price tag,
every frame of this film feels like a low-budget horror movie.
Predictably, all the problems of the first film return to afflict
this one-narrative flaws, miscasting, a preoccupation with the
dark side of the story-only this time, in greater quantity. The
result is a production which is cumbersome, overlong, and incessantly
dreary. Still, there are bright spots, particularly among the
cast. Ian McKellen as Gandalf is even better in this film than
he was in the last one. A resurrected healer and spiritual guide,
Gandalf has more in common with Jesus than with Merlin.
Christopher Lee also returns to exude black-hearted villainy
beneath the lily-white robe of Saruman. The Two Towers
then introduces to us King Theoden, wonderfully played by Bernard
Hill. The most impressive new character however, is Gollum. Previously
glimpsed as only a creeping shadow that trails the fellowship,
Gollum plays a larger part in this film, and proves to be one
of its most interesting elements.
At once treacherous and pathetic, Gollum's moral dilemma is believably
compelling, moving the viewer to root for this sad wretch. This
is all the more impressive, as Gollum is an almost completely
computer-animated character, which deserves an Oscar for best
visual effects.
(Actor Andy Serkis provided the voice and played Gollum on the
set, wearing a special suit, over which Gollum's body was later
computer-rendered.)
Unfortunately, the rest of the cast prove to be a mixed bag.
My least favorite is Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn. The wandering
"ranger" who is revealed as heir to the throne of Gondor,
Aragorn must be a brooding but courageous man of swashbuckling
heroism, rugged good looks, and obviously genteel manners. But
in the film, Aragorn is unkempt and devoid of charisma. Mortensen
is a terrific actor, but one better-suited to playing thugs and
oily hippies (though in fairness, it should be pointed out that
he was a last-minute replacement and obviously had little or
no time to prepare for the role).
Elijah Wood makes an adequate lead, but is disappointing as Frodo.
Although one of the best child actors of the 1990s, Wood seems
poorly directed here, with Frodo ever seeming anemic and passionless.
Also, hobbits "are inclined to be fat" in Tolkien's
words, yet except for Sean Astin, all the Hobbits are rather
on the thin side. In fact, the only actor who really seems like
a hobbit is Ian Holm, who was wonderful as Bilbo in the last
film.
It is also hard not to feel that Jackson copped out by shooting
the film in his native New Zealand. To be sure, some of the locations
are grand and impressive, but they all look like the same place,
merely shot from different angles and doctored with computer
compositing. More to the point, New Zealand does not look like
the UK and northern Europe, which is where these films should
have been made (because they are essentially what Tolkien was
describing in his work).
But it is the infidelity to the text which is the biggest sore
point with me. Aragorn's fall (and apparent death) during an
ambush on the caravan was not in the book. Nor did Legolas urge
Aragorn to abandon the refugees at Helm's Deep (which is completely
out of character for Legolas). Neither were Frodo and Sam forcibly
removed to Gondor by Faramir. And never did a host of elven warriors
arrive at Helm's Deep to aid the besieged men.
Jackson justifies these embellishments by claiming that The
Two Towers is a dense and sometimes confusing book. Fair
enough; but why did he not streamline the narrative rather than
add these pointless tangents, which only exacerbate the narrative
flaws and make the film even more cumbersome?
The script is poorly conceived, and, at times, even contradicts
the first film. For instance, in Fellowship of the Ring,
Arwen told Aragorn she would renounce her immortality so that
she could grow old with him. Yet in The Two Towers, Arwen
changes her mind and decides to live on with Aragorn, eternally
young. Well, which is it?
Jackson also seems utterly at sea when it come to the elves.
In the books they are kind, jovial, and genteel in their manners,
yet in the film, they are stern, austere, and humorless. Elrond
is an old fusspot who does little more than sneer and complain
all the time. And while Liv Tyler's poise and ethereal beauty
wonderfully befits Arwen, the character on-screen comes off as
little more than a moonstruck teenager, lying barefoot on her
bed, longing for her dreamy Aragorn.
However, much of the climax of the film revolves around the battle
of Helm's Deep, where a modest army wages an almost hopeless
battle against an invasion of Orcs. The scale of the battle is
epic, but the action on screen is a mess. As in The Fellowship
of the Ring, the fight scenes are confusing, with too many
close-ups and choppy cutting. The entire sequence is overlong
and, coupled with bad lighting and an overpowering sound-mix,
by the battle's end, I felt too miserable to care who won.
Conversely, the scenes featuring Treebeard are considerably better.
Although a CGI character, Treebeard is relatively convincing
in appearance and the scene where he and his fellow "ents"
make their assault on Saruman's stronghold is powerful and tremendously
effective.
Despite some some good elements, The Two Towers is a slow,
turgid film, and ultimately an unsatisfying experience. Yet for
all of their artistic ineptitude, The Lord of the Rings
movies have proven that there is need in our culture for tales
of courage and the mythic heros of legend. Long a maligned genre,
fantasy and mythology are finally regaining the recognition they
deserve, and I have no cause for complaint there since it can
only pave the way for more (and hopefully better) films of this
kind.
Paul Andrew MacLean
© 2002 
Shelton CT 06484 USA
(800) 232-2224 voice
(800) 775-2729 fax
LadyJanet@RenaissanceMagazine.com