Hey you! 👀 Read along with me! 📖 Claim Andy Serkis’ narration of “The Two Towers” on Audible *for FREE:* www.audibletrial.com/twotowers 👈 Every free trial supports the channel!
I never took that Pippin shrank to his original size, but rather that Merry grew enough to remain taller than him from the Ent Draft he stole from Pippin.
That was always my take as well. When Merry says they're "back to normal" at Isengard he's not saying they're back to the heights they were when they left The Shire, rather that they're back to Merry being slightly taller than Pippin.
"These cloaks and brooches were gifted to the entire fellowship and were powerful items that gave both camouflage and comfort for their arduous journey. The cloaks could shift colors between gray, green, and brown depending on the light of day. These cloaks would also be warm or cool to the touch, depending on the temperature needs of the wearer. Their camouflage properties were shown in The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers when Frodo and Sam used a cloak to cover their fall from a ledge whilst scouting The Black Gate." They were not normal cloaks, this dude needs to read his Silmarillion.
I always thought that scene would have worked much better if the soldier wasn't so close, so that it would be a little more believable that the cloak could conceal them so well. When Frodo whips the "cloak" off after the soldier turns away, you can clearly see it is a large piece of heavy canvas that has a supporting structure within it to give it that rock like appearance. In the books, the cloaks simply have a somewhat "magical" ability to camouflage within their surroundings but not do what is depicted in that scene. The soldier should have been peering at the hillside from at least 50 yards away, not literally standing over them.
This is a load of bull. The "stealth" scene with Sam & Frodo is meant to showcase the elven cloaks the hobbits were gifted by Galadriel that render the wearer invisible to unfriendly eyes. It is 100% lore accurate. And the Merry & Pippin scene was an homage to the Tom Bombadil storyline that was cut from the story due to pacing and narrative concision. Just say, "I have no idea what I'm talking about," at the start of your video next time.
Also, what kind of eyesight do Orcs and Goblins have? It may not be all that good. We know Elves have great vision and Humans we understand but who's to say that Goblins and Orcs have super sharp vision? Most creatures in the Earth world don't see that well; resolution is poor. They see objects well enough but not in great detail. Perhaps Orcs all have like 20/40 vision or something.
@@JD-gk7eh Even so, they are also shown to give Legolas, Gimli and Aragorn the same kind of camouflage when the Rohirrim pass right by them. They are not well hidden, but the cloaks are said to be "...light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees."
His issue with the movie scene isn't that the cloaks make them look like a rock to the evil men, but rather that the cloaks are shown in the movie to only work when Frodo covers them both up with the cloak, and from the cuts it looks like the evil men are like 20 feet away when Frodo covers them. Since that's how it works according to PJ, then how in the world did the men not see the hobbits as they were approaching Sam and Frodo writhing on the ground?
Correct! Here it is, since I already did the work of looking through dozens of pages trying to find it for another reply, I will leave it here with you as well to be a little refresher :) The cloaks are magic, they aren't just some nice cloaks, it's even written as such: "Yet they are garments, not armour, and they will not turn shaft or blade. But they should serve you well: they are light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." There is some contention that they aren't truly MAGICAL, in the way we would think, but they are also hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, so to say they are just normal cloaks is also not true. They also help hide Gimli, Aragorn, and Legolas from the eyes of the Rohirrim when they pass by. It's written as such: "The three companions now left the hill-top, where they might be an easy mark against the pale sky, and they walked slowly down the northward slope. A little above the hill’s foot they halted, and wrapping their cloaks about them, they sat huddled together upon the faded grass..." and then a few paragraphs later "In pairs they galloped by, and though every now and then one rose in his stirrups and gazed ahead and to either side, they appeared not to perceive the three strangers sitting silently and watching them." They are only spotted because Aragorn rises and shouts after them, otherwise 105 keen eyed Rohirrim, on the lookout for trouble, would have simply passed them by when all they did was wrap their cloaks around themselves near the base of a grassy hill. So yeah, the cloaks weren't an ass-pull, they legit help to camouflage the wearers from 'unfriendly' eyes.
@118042 Galadriel even says it in the freaking movie: "May these cloaks shield you from unfriendly eyes." The most powerful elven witch/demi-goddess says a prayer over your clothes for protection and ppl think it has no effect. They need imagination.
Yeah, for me it's Frodo casting out Sam. They get seperated because Gollum attacks Sam in the middle of Shelob's lair, NOT because Frodo and Sam fight. That PISSES me off. Their friendship/partnership is way too strong for Gollum to mess with it.
I agree. Having them separated by the combined attacks of Golum and Shelob makes much more sense and makes the encounters much more dramatic and gives opportunities for much more spectacular action sequences. I could never understand why Jackson and his team chose to have them separated in that way, as it only made the story worse, even for the movie medium.
For me, it's when the witch king beats Gandalf and yet in both the book and first movie he manages to hold off all 7 at once on weathertop while his power is handicapped.
yeah - first time reading the book I was waiting and waiting for Galdalf to get slapped by the witch king... And now, watching the movies, that scene feels so against the grain. I actually love the scene with them drinking the Ent drafts, and while I think the movie could have skipped banishing Sam... I do kind of like it and feel like it makes sense in-world, even if Tolkein went a different direction. But Gandalf's moment isn't a character difference... it's a complete flip of a power balance with a leveled-up maiar.
Low key I roll my eyes whenever I see his undoing. Apparently if you're a woman you can hack off a Fell Beast's head like that poor water Buffalo in Apocalypse Now (RIP). Apparently the mighty Witch King can be downed in a minute if you throw enough estrogen at him 🙄 BRB just loading a tampon cannon to take down the Nazgul, shouldn't take more than 30 seconds
@@wolpertinger. Estrogen has nothing to do with it, really. What screwed him over and made him killable in the first place was Merry's enchanted Númenorean blade breaking his magical protection. After that, any random dude could have rammed a blade where is head was and done him in - it's just that there was no dude around to do it, while Éowyn was. The 'prophecy' wasn't that the Witch-king *couldn't* be killed by a man, but simply that he *wouldn't* be. He, and many readers like yourself, simply took it the wrong way and ran with the misconception.
In the book, Gandalf and the Witch King confront each other when the gates are brought down by Grond. The Witch King then appears in the gate, ready to enter the city and Gandalf stands in his way. Then they hear the horns of Rohan as the riders begin to ride into battle and the Witch King is drawn away. Gandalf is about to pursue him onto the battle field but Pippin appears and warns of Faramir's soon demise at the hands of his insane father, Denethor. Gandalf is pulled away reluctantly and the Witch King is then able to slay Theoden where as, if Gandalf had been able to pursue him he could have prevented this. It's another moment of the "tragic tradeoff" that Tolkien often employs. He saves Faramir at the cost of letting the Witch King wreck havoc.
For me it was the absolute lack of acknowledgement that Theoden king receives after his death on the Pelennor fields. No one grieved or mentioned him, but Eomer runs to his injured sister and then there is a whole mini scene of Aragorn using his elven skills to heal her wounds. Yet they could have taken the same time to show king Theoden's dead body. He was one of the main characters in the whole trilogy. NOT ONE MENTION. Not even in the extended edition of the third film.
Personally, the part I disliked the most was adding in that "movie style" misunderstanding scene where Gollum frames Sam for eating all the hard elf bread.
I always thought that Frodo's threats to Gollum were not actually from him at all, but a rare moment of the ring itself sort of using Frodo as its talking-piece. The ring itself abandoned Gollum because he was "too good" at keeping it concealed for himself. It WANTS Frodo to take it into Mordor, or get caught along the way, & Gollum taking it back underground would undo all of the progress it's made trying to be discovered. So this is an example of the "evil" of the ring spelling out its own doom- it is warning him, "you take me from this hobbit, & I will send you straight to hell", not knowing that this curse it lays upon him will result in Smeagol taking the ring down with him.
One thing Gibi seemed to miss which is an important change between the books and the movies is while it's true that Sam never fell and got buried in rocks in the books, their movements DID still attract some unwanted attention from the Haradrim, as some of the soldiers did see rocks sliding down the steep slope from Sam, Golum and Frodo's movements farther up the slope and did to to investigate, and the hobbits did use their lothlorien cloaks for camouflage to help them avoid being spotted. I think Jackson was trying to capture that event in his Sam fell scene, but just want too far into the spectacle that he broke imersion there, which it did have that affect for me too, as I could never figure out how the Haradrim soldiers couldn't see Sam and Frodo as they were going down the slope nor when Frodo was trying to help Sam up before using his cloak to conceal them. Nor did the extent of Sam's burial make any sense. I think that was a scene where the producers got too caught up in making spectacle that the forgot the storytelling they'd been doing elsewhere in the movies.
The cloaks are magic, they aren't just some nice cloaks, it's even written as such: "Yet they are garments, not armour, and they will not turn shaft or blade. But they should serve you well: they are light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." There is some contention that they aren't truly MAGICAL, in the way we would think, but they are also hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, so to say they are just normal cloaks is also not true. They also help hide Gimli, Aragorn, and Legolas from the eyes of the Rohirrim when they pass by. It's written as such: "The three companions now left the hill-top, where they might be an easy mark against the pale sky, and they walked slowly down the northward slope. A little above the hill’s foot they halted, and wrapping their cloaks about them, they sat huddled together upon the faded grass..." and then a few paragraphs later "In pairs they galloped by, and though every now and then one rose in his stirrups and gazed ahead and to either side, they appeared not to perceive the three strangers sitting silently and watching them." They are only spotted because Aragorn rises and shouts after them, otherwise 105 keen eyed Rohirrim, on the lookout for trouble, would have simply passed them by when all they did was wrap their cloaks around themselves near the base of a grassy hill. So yeah, the cloaks weren't an ass-pull, they legit help to camouflage the wearers from 'unfriendly' eyes.
Maybe you are just speaking hastily, but in the movie, Pippin doesn’t shrink, Merry just also has enough Ent draft to balance things back to their respective heights. Though I don’t remember their heights being noted as different in the books.
I do remember them being noted as taller in the books, though I also remember them getting the ent draft not from Treebeard, but from another ent who's not included in the movies, Quickbeam, while they're staying at Quickbeam's house while the rest of the ents take their entish time making a decision. You see, Quickbeam's rather hasty by ent standards and has already made up his mind to go to war with Isengard. The other, more deliberate ents needed a few more days to finally reach that decision.
I think at the end or in the appendix it’s said that merry is the tallest hobbit recorded and pip is a close second. But I can’t remember where it was said.
Treabeard doesn't know how the entwives look like, not because he doesn't remember, but because ents - as he explains at another point - tend to be changed by the world that surrounds them. Therefore, after the centuries of separation, the entwives might look quite different from when Treabeard last saw them.
@@lida7529 Or he simply forgets how they look like because it have been three millenias since he last saw them and unlike men, elves, dwarves and hobbits, the ents and entwives don't draw portraits of each other to remember them with so they rely on their memories, which can disappear after a very long time.
"Scouring of the Shire" aside, I think they missed a real opportunity when they changed the meeting of the resurrected Gandalf at the edge of Fangorn Forest. In the book, Legolas has an arrow nocked and ready to loose because they were not sure who they were meeting. Legolas was the first (I think) to recognize Gandalf the White and he fires the arrow straight up into the air, shouting "Mithrandir", and Gandalf sets the arrow on fire as it flies up. That would've been so cool, and it would only take like 5 seconds of screen time.
A bit of clever foreshadowing by Tolkien with Frodo’s threats to Gollum; given after Gollum takes The Ring back from Frodo that he immediately falls off a cliff into fire.
My only problem with the elven cloak scene is that the Easterlings are already walking in Sam and Frodo's direction before Frodo decides to pull the cloak over them. And while it could be that they're behind some larger rocks, it's not clear where the rocks are or what angle the Easterlings are approaching them from. This makes it look like Sam and Frodo has such massive plot armour that you could see someone trapped underneath a lot of gravel and sand, watch someone else try to dig them out while you're walking towards them and then conveniently forget everything just because there's now a giant rock where they used to be. What the scene needed was to make it explicitly clear that the Easterlings' vision was obstructed by something else before they got to Sam and Frodo.
I completely agree. Out of all the changes I mentioned, that detail is always the worst to me. If they would’ve been behind a rock or something then it could be excused. But how in the world did they not see the hobbits when walking up. 😂
@@shaggywannabe Bingo, you nailed it Shaggy. It's also mentioned when the Rohirrim are passing by Legolas Gimli and Aragorn, "In pairs they galloped by, and though every now and then one rose in his stirrups and gazed ahead and to either side, they appeared not to perceive the three strangers sitting silently and watching them." Which is even MORE wild when you consider that, unlike in the movies, they aren't hiding in a rocky crag, they are just crouched near the base of a grassy hill with their cloaks around them, and 105 Rohirrim on the lookout for trouble rode right past them before Aragorn called out to them.
The cloaks were hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, and while they don't specifically say they are magical like, MAGIC magical, it is written that "Yet they are garments, not armour, and they will not turn shaft or blade. But they should serve you well: they are light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." So, not like "I cast fireball!" magic, but with a hint of protective magic more likely to keep heat, cold, and prying eyes at bay.
The cloaks are camoflage not shapechanging. They will assume the colors of your surroudings but not make you apprear to be a boulder from 2 ft away. The cloaks would have turned a mottled grey and black on the talus slope, perhaps even having a few shiny areas to reflect light like small quartz, feldspar, and mica faces but magic in Tolkien is subtle not overt and suddenly turning into a rock under close observation is pretty overt.
I kinda disagree with your take on Sam in the rocks. That bit did confuse me for a time, so I started overanalyzing it. Gotta remember how short this dude is, and if you watch when he falls there is a good amount of loose rock falling with him. And we get that shot from a ways off, directly from the Easterlings' perspective. There's no visible hobbit, just a cloud of dust and rubble. Not to mention if their boots are clearly loud, and the loudest part of the rockslide will be right at the end and they're far enough away the sound they hear will be at least half a second late. Not sure how they don't see Frodo, tbf. Assuming Mr. Baggins can quickly get to Sam in the dust cloud before they see him, there is a little bit of a ditch they are in. It was not visually shown well, because everything is just grey rock (including the hobbits) but it looks like it to me. So from far off, they really aren't visible to men's eyes. Probably only had line of sight when Frodo looked up, and then ducked his head down to grab the cloak. As for the cloaks, that is exactly how they shrouded the Three Hunters before meeting The Riders of Rohan. If you've read The Fall of Gondolin (I don't remember if this but it's in the Silmarion version), Tuor gets a similar c cloak from Ulmo. But ... back to Sam again. While it's effect is primarily a visual camouflage enchantment, it's not unreasonable that it would protect against scratches, bumps, and bruises of a 60-70lb hobbit falling in a gravel-based accident. And when you look at those rocks burying Sam up to his chest, you have to remember that he and those rocks are all half the size of Sean Astin and the rocks he was in. He's really not that deep. Frodo wasn't able to pull him out as much as Sam was able to pull himself out after he's had a moment to catch his breath and Frodo have him a stable arm to hold onto. Overall, I'm right with you. And after reading the Tom Bombadil chapters, I don't like PJ's scene in Treebeard's home anymore.
7:16 - 7:30 I don't think Sam being buried would've caused that much damage. He's a hobbit, so being buried to the middle of his torso would've been, what, two and a half feet of gravel?
I loved Sam's recitation of the Oliphant poem, it would have been nice if they could have included it somewhere - perhaps during an extended rabbit stew scene?
Regarding timeline: The day Frodo spent watching the black gate was the same day when Gandalf, Theoden and comp. visited Isengard and Gandalf broke Saruman's staff (i.e. 5 days after Merry and Pipin set off with Treabeard for the Ent Mood.
Those men marching to the The Black Gate are another allies of Mordor, Easterlings from Rhûn (as you can see by their samurai-like armor, inspired from Asia which is east from Europe if we compare Middle-earth being that continent, since Tolkien saw Middle-Earth as being a pre-historic version of our own world, The Shire being England and so forth), which is confirmed in the books. Also, I don't mind these changes as they serve the movies purpose and I don't see how the omitted material would have worked as a film. The stone slide and the dash for the Gate only for Gollum to stop Frodo and Sam in order to prevent their capture and therefore Sauron getting The Ring back, was added for the sake of drama, as Fran Walsh and Philipa Boyens point out there wouldn't be any drama for them to just be on the cliff standing there. Also, it wasn't really big rocks that buried Sam but rather lots of smaller stones and gravel, so I don't how see that could break Sam's bones (seriously, you're overthinking and overlooking stuff at the same time, no offense). I like the scene with Merry and Pippin because of it is lighthearted comedy brought to otherwise quite dark movie with a lot of heavy things going on, plus I like how they referenced the parts that there are in the book plus the homage to Tom Bombadil and The Old Forest. I don't care it didn't happen quite in the book but it works out. While I understand why this scene is just in the extended version, it's still a pity that it wasn't used and it takes a long time for Merry and Pippin to come back after the scene where Treebeard says that he told Gandalf to keep them safe, to when we see them after Saruman have sent his Uruk Hai army to Helm's Deep. Like some have already stated, Pippin didn't shrink back but Merry was growing past Pippin, making them in proportion to their heights as before but doesn't make a big deal about it.
We all love Ol' Tree Beardil 😂 honestly though merging Tom and Tree Beard is probably one of the best changes in my opinion just because it acknowledges Tom's presence in the source material, also speaking of Tom for those who don't know he appears in other media set in Jackson's version of Middle-Earth (pre the Hobbit) and I'm not on about the LEGO games lol, no Tom's in LotR: Battle for Middle-Earth II as a summonable hero who will prance around the battlefield, singing the Tom Bombadil song/poem (I forgot it's been ages) and sending enemies flying as he dances, it's the funniest thing ever to me and I love it.
Agreed. That's just the way books are adapted into films: things get moved around, and the fact that they still included it shows their dedication to remaining faithful to the book
Treebeard is a great character, though after rereading the books, I realized there's another great Ent character that we miss in the movies, who's often forgotten because of his exclusion from the movies, Mari and Pippen's 2nd ent friend, Quickbeam. In fact, if I remember that part of the book correctly, he's actually the one that gives Mari and Pippin the ent drink that permanently changes the pair of hobbits.
Thank you for including this scene. Just why? This could (and should) have been easily left out entirely. This along with the Witch King scene where he destroys Gandolph’s staff and is about to kill him when Rohan’s horn’s are heard and he stops. Just unnecessary garbage.
I can't remember the movie chronology as well, but didn't movie Sam also hear Gollum around the same time frame talking to himself and loudly declaring that he would kill the hobbits while they were sleeping, to which Sam impulsively tried to throttle Gollum?
Legolas surfing on the shield while shooting orc is just too silly. I almost want to make my own edit of the extended editions of the movie just to remove that scene.
There's another incredible take a while before Aragorn fall into the chasm in The Two Towers, where Legolas ride a horse by a fancy jumping on the run, that left me out of words back then in cinema when I saw it for the first time.
Besides the fact that the evil men approaching the Black Gate in the film are Easterlings instead of Haradrim, they are also marching from the wrong direction. Arriving from the right side of the screen would be correct for Haradrim marching from the south, but the Easterlings should be approaching from the north/northeast, aka the left side of the screen.
You are incorrect the men marching into the Black Gate are Easterlings(in the book inplied to be from Rhun), and are a different allied people to Sauron. The Haradrim are from the South, and have a more direct path into Mordor from the South, Morder is completely cut off from the North with the Exception of the Black Gate. There are in fact four main ways into Mordor and Two of them are in the South East of Mordor, Minas Morgul, and the Black Gate. It makes no sense for Haradrim Foot Soldiers to wander across Ithilian to the Black Gate when they can(and later do in the movies) use Minas Morgul to enter Mordor. So in conclusion the Wicked men in this scene are Easterlings.
To be honest I was always just happy to have Old Man Willow and the ent draught get a mention in the films. I think it makes perfect sense to merge the Old Forest and Fangorn when they're very similar settings, and it's nice to have Tom Bombadil at least referenced through some of his lines being given to Treebeard. "Heed no nightly noise" is a great line of Tom's that I'm glad they managed to sneak into the films.
Though I don't remember the ent drink being given to them by Treebeard but rather Quickbeam, while he and the hobbits wait for the rest of the ents to get around to making their decision to go to war. During that period that lasts for days or even weeks, the hobbits are staying with Quickbeam at his house, so since Quickbeam, the hasty ent is not included in the movies, I'd attribute that to also having Quckbeam's role being appended onto Treebeard, along with a few of Bombadil's lines.
Mega fan here. My biggest issues with the movies are as follows: The whole army of the dead part. Peter Jackson said he never liked the army of the dead. His solution was to make it one of the most useless parts of the movie. And Legolas being ridiculously OP.
I kinda agree with the exclusion of Tom Bombadil from the movies. His presence kinda... Confuses those new to high fantasy. When I read about people reading through the books for the first time and they're new to Fantasy, they always have a hard time understanding why Tom doesn't play an active role in Middle Earth's resistance. A lot of modern stories revolve around gaining power at all costs and using every tool at your disposal. Fantasy is really one of the last genres in storytelling that have reserved power figures that _could_ solve problems if they chose to, but don't because that's not the nature of their character or their role in the story. I think this is also the reason why Jackson never went into depth about what Gandalf and Sauron are as beings, and about how powerful Gandalf truly was. Because it probably would have upset audiences new to the genre and Tolkien's work about why Gandalf didn't do more to help. And Tom's presence would have REALLY confused a lot of viewers. Especially with his interaction with The One Ring. Or lack thereof. Ultimately, I think Jackson did a great job at adapting Tolkien's work in a way that audiences both experienced and new to Fantasy could enjoy. And the Blackgate scene in particular I suspect was meant to show just how dangerous Mordor was. One slip up, and the journey would be over.
In that scene where Frodo tells Gollum that if he put on the precious and commanded Gollum to throw him into the fire that Gollum would have no choice but to obey, he actually goes as far as to say that would indeed bee his command.
The bit I hate most is when Sam is cast out by Frodo. He falls down and finds the precious lembas bread. Does he salvage the precious bread? Nooooooo ... he crushes it up and throws it away 😮. Madness.
I saw the movies before I read the books, I was about 12 or 13 when the Two Towers came out. The scene where Sam falls and Frodo covers him with the elven cloth, always threw me off, even as a kid. In the movies you don't know the elven cloth can act as camouflage, but even still... that and the idea they planned on running through the front door of Mordor was unbelievable.
I always had a theory that Old Man Willow was actually an Ent that went "tree-ish." It sort of makes sense that a creature that could once walk and talk amongst the trees would grow to be bitter and angry at all the living things that may come to rest on him when he was once a much stronger being.
Regarding the entwives, I've always interpreted that he doesn't know what they would look like now, as they both change through the years (the whole monologe about sheep and sheperd and how they become like one another.. ) as he certainly remembers his old wife in her youth.
I still think the most egregious scene is in The Return of the King, when Aragorn gets his video game power up and shoehorned reason to suddenly get serious about becoming king.
Sam wouldn't necessarily have had a bunch of broken bones due to being buried that deep after he fell because he clearly wasn't buried in stones... It's likely that the hillside was covered in deep layers of dry loosely packed ash and silt while having a thin layer of gravel on top - let's remember the type of environment they're in here. While the top layer of gravel and stone would allow the Hobbit's weight to be more widely distributed thus enabling them to traverse the terrain without sinking, it's likely that Sam fell through an area where the layer of stone/gravel was extremely thin or otherwise nonexistent, causing him to sink into the ash/silt which essentially acted like dry quicksand (yes, this is a thing). Granted it would have taken Frodo and Gollum *much* longer to dig him out, but otherwise the scenario would at least be plausible... I believe this was added to the sequence in order to raise the stakes of the situation a bit while demonstrating the magical capabilities of the Elven cloak, perhaps to set up their use for a future scene that just never ended up making it into either version of the film or was never even shot to begin with. In fact, I could swear that I recall hearing something about this at some point in the past. I don't recall the specifics as to whether or not the scene was actually filmed or not or just left on the cutting-room floor, but I do believe that there was supposed to be another scenario involving Frodo and Sam using the cloaks to hide from some orcs while actually in Mordor and the scene outside the Black Gate was supposed to serve as a "Checkov's gun" type of thing to set that all up and establish that the cloaks possessed magical stealthy properties.
You explained all of the differences but your only critique was that you thought the gravel scene was too unrealistic and that pippin “shrank” at the end of the movie. My impression was that Merry simply grew taller than him by the end due to the entire draft. The only problem I personally have is that the elvish cloaks are never used again which is a HUGE wasted opportunity and means that the establishing scene here never really pays off. Everything else is perfectly fine for a movie adaptation. Peter Jackson simply didn’t have the time to include HOURS of in-movie story so he simplified what he could and included as much relevant info as possible. Sam’s character works really well in the movies because we don’t have the TIME to slowly build up his distrust in Gollum. Also the ffing Chad knows his worth and clearly sees when Frodo is being played so tries his very best to protect his best friend and master. He wouldn’t work as a quiet, introspective character, especially to make the later “betrayal” scene where Frodo kicks him out of the group work. His vocal hatred of Gollum helps Gollum manipulate Frodo which is perfect for a shortened version of the story. Also, sorry to say this but these books are freakishly bloated with descriptions and slow-paced dialogue. This works just fine for BOOKS (at least if you have the patience for it and aren’t an ADHD tween like I was when I read them), but can you IMAGINE how long and weirdly paced the movies would’ve been if everything was included? That’s what makes adaptions ADAPTIONS. If LOTR was a series, that would be different. But I think it works really well as a movie. No scene is wasted. Almost every scene establishes something with a clear pay-off by the end. That is what a good movie is.
I wonder if Jackson didn't have Pippen shrink back down again was because he spent so much effort on getting the sizes of hobbits right that to change the size of two of the hobbits part way through the movies would have been very tough to get right in all the subsequent scenes - most of the two Towers and all of Return of the King. Shrinking him back down quickly took care of that.
I’ve read the novels many times (every summer since 1995) I’ve seen the movies many times (maybe 20) I love both. I understand the many changes Jackson had to make. My only “real” problems with the movies are: Faramir Aragorn pitching a tent in front of Gondor because he refuses to enter the city until “the people” realize he’s king (which he proves through his healing powers) Frodo at the cracks of doom: that speech needed to be made. “I have come but I do not choose to do what I came to do. The ring is mine”. I hate it was shortened to just “the ring is mine” and also I hate Frodo fighting gollum to get the ring back. I prefer gollum just falling over the edge on his own and screaming “precious!” as he fell.
To elaborate on Aragorn: In the novel he knows he will be King of Gondor but he is waiting for the right time. Even after the battle is won he recognizes his time has not come…yet. And he refuses to be treated as King until it’s time. The pitching of a tent is a huge moment for his character. In the movie his “king-ness” is briefly mentioned at the council of Elrond and in dialogue between Gandalf and denethor and in the made-up scene between Aragorn and Elrond before Aragorn goes into the mountain. Then at the end he has a crown put on his head. Aragorn’s destiny is a very minor plot point on the films. It’s a larger plot point in the novels: hence the name of the third novel
To me the issue is everything that happens before the cloak is used, the back and forth between zoomed shots of them and the guard makes it so goofy, it's ridiculous how he didn't see them before they were protected.
I never took it as the hobbits reverting/shrinking in the movie. Just that Merry drank himself back to being the taller of the two. Already mentioned, but those elvish cloaks are S-Tier. It was a nod to the audience on their ability to hide / remain unseen. Which Tolkien absolutely wrote about. The rock sinking on the other hand was forced to utilize the illusion.
Hey, I have a question I feel like I haven't been able to get a straight updated answer from google. Is there an Omnibus set of all the published Tolkien material? Failing that,mfors anyone have an updated list in canon chronological order? I want to include all hisfa letters and the Father Christmas letters. I also can never tell which short stories are in which book because sometimes google talks about them ile the stories are sold individually too. Thanks to anyone that can help me!
I have nomproblem with the cloaks camoflaging them, though the distance is a problem. But hiw does the cloak conceal the backpack thst Frodo is wearing outside the cloak?
This is where Jackson goes most wrong. He omits most of the ents part of the story, for absolutely no reason, then expands the battle far beyond what it should be (which we’ll get to soon, I expect.) this is what ruins the second film for me, omitting crucial character story for vast amounts of CGI battle. It loses the heart of Two Towers.
Let's be so for real though, the ents are boring af. The movies were already very long, and any additional ent dialogue would add hours to the films 😅 my ADHD chipmunk brain runs at mach 2 and the ents talk waaaaaaay too slow to keep my attention. I'd rather see battles or dialogue between other characters
Lots of people already said it, but camouflage was a specific attribute mentioned in the text that the cloaks of Lorien granted the wearer. Also, I dont know why you thought Pippin shrank to his original size in the movie. Both him and Merry end up taller than they were, though the movie doesn't remark on this explicitly since I believe this gets brought up in the Scouring of the Shire chapter, which is cut.
On the one hand, I definitely agree that elements of the fall down the cliff scene are silly, but I addition to their cloaks, that are sort of supposed to do that, they are Hobbits. Even back in that book, the Hobbits are supposedly notable, at least by Gandalf, for their heightened stealth, and since this seems to be an ability they just "have", even if they are individuals who have never trained it up, I feel like it is probably as much just being beneath the notice of bigger folk, as it is paying attention, and soft steps. Maybe there was also a little bit of providence in there, too. In the end, I also like that it is a direct portrayal of these cloaks actually doing something, in a way we can see. At times, LotR cam actually feel really low-magic, despite that being wrong, and among the things they received for their journey, the cloaks were among the most important, and visible, throughout the work, bur then we get to a point where stealth is no longer important; our heroes are eirher frontlining epic battles, or skulking through places no one else epuls go, and thus no eyes to be hidden from. I'm certainly not going to sit here, and tell other people what to like, or that they are wrong for what they don't like; everyone's welcome to make those decisions for themselves, but I'm mostly good with it. The sliding down part is kind of silly, and not being seen before getting hidden is kind of crossing a line, as is how buried Sam became, but I'm personally fine with the hiding bit; that's apparently what even layperson Hobbits can just do, and then they have D&D cloaks of elvenkind, which are pretty good for stealth. 😊 If Yolkien had been a more modern time writer, we might even see a spot on the Gamgee family tree that leads up to Snake. Think of what he could do with just a cardboard box, even where a cardboard box had no business being.😊
I found it really weird how much the changes from the source material kept the essence, plot, and overall lore. The movies - especially the extended edition - did a really good job of it. It's extremely rare for a movie or show to do that. It's unsettling in a good way. Edit: To the point made at the end, most of the changes feature events that are in the books, but at different times and places. For instance, they did use the cloaks for camouflage, and did nearly get caught due to something akin to the landslide caused by Sam.
The worst scene is Legolas Shield-Surfing. That was the moment they've broke balance. Remember Moria? How they barely killed one troll? And they have to combine effort, giving Legolas time for precise shot? Well that is nothing to post-surfing Legolas, he is now the most op character in the universe, stronger than Nazgul, stronger than Gandalf. He can easily kill elephant, he can kill hundred orcs while hanging upside-down on a bat. It is all started from shield-surfing! That scene is undermines the whole idea of fellowship, the optimal party would have been Gandalf+Aragorn+Frodo+6 elves. What else? Atmosphere is ruined. I can feel a strong Joss Whedon vibe from that moment, “Make it dark, make it grim, make it tough, but then, for the love of God, tell a joke.”, as he once said. Shield-surfing is a joke. Unnecessary joke! Yes, I do understand drama laws demands emotional swings win-lose-win-lose, but shield-surfing does not feel as a heroic moment, it is silly, he does not even achieve much, he have a bow, bow is ranged weapon, surfing is not needed!
I just wanted to take a quick moment to thank you for this amazing work! The amount of time I finished your playlist while I’m working is wow. It has made me understand the lore better. Also, these videos have made me want to read the book, shout out to you for that. So thank you!
The cloaks are magic, they aren't just some nice cloaks, it's even written as such: "Yet they are garments, not armour, and they will not turn shaft or blade. But they should serve you well: they are light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." There is some contention that they aren't truly MAGICAL, in the way we would think, but they are also hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, so to say they are just normal cloaks is also not true. They also help hide Gimli, Aragorn, and Legolas from the eyes of the Rohirrim when they pass by. It's written as such: "The three companions now left the hill-top, where they might be an easy mark against the pale sky, and they walked slowly down the northward slope. A little above the hill’s foot they halted, and wrapping their cloaks about them, they sat huddled together upon the faded grass..." and then a few paragraphs later "In pairs they galloped by, and though every now and then one rose in his stirrups and gazed ahead and to either side, they appeared not to perceive the three strangers sitting silently and watching them." They are only spotted because Aragorn rises and shouts after them, otherwise 105 keen eyed Rohirrim, on the lookout for trouble, would have simply passed them by when all they did was wrap their cloaks around themselves near the base of a grassy hill. So yeah, the cloaks weren't an ass-pull, they legit help to camouflage the wearers from 'unfriendly' eyes.
The changes to the relationships between Frodo, Sam an Gollum is probably the most impactful in the trilogy. And very sad for most book fans. Thoughts on why PJ thought he has to do this?
Yeah, I remember the Black Gate scene in the movie feeling really weird and cringeworthy, back when I first saw The Two Towers movie in the cinema. And although I had encountered and played The Hobbit as a text-adventure game on my ZX Spectrum as a teen in the '80s. It hadn't really left me compelled enough to read any of Tolkien's books like the movies did. - I guess what I'm trying to say is that, my first feeling of cringiness from watching the scene was completely unaffected by Tolkien's original version, since I had not read any of his books by that point... It just seemed to stick out like a sore thumb, even before I knew the original story.
The scene when frodo tells Sam to go home. Biggest middle finger to Tolkien fans. Bigger than that stupid ghost army crap PJ put in. Worst of the 3 movies.
Is there a reason you called them evil men and not men of Rhun or Easterlings? Because I'm pretty sure those soldiers are Loke-Gamp Rim, which is a part of the Rhunic army. I know its not a big thing but I was just curios because the evil men armies do have names which is Rhun, Harad, and Umbar.
Nah, they gotta be evil, otherwise we'd have to re examine how we feel about our heroes gleefully slaughtering them while keeping score as if the lives they were ending had no value beyond fueling their bro bonding.....
yeah I don't know, I often refer to them as easterlings, haradrim and corsairs of umbar (or the corsairs for short) because I don't believe them to be evil but simply corrupted.
@@DrewLSsix they could still be evil what I'm saying is that you could use the faction name. I mean it can still be shown that they are evil by the fact that they are allied with Sauron. Shows that not all of the men are good.
@@CursedAnqxl yeah I get that with the Corsairs. They are pirates and possibly only really care about coin, Sauron probably just brought them into loyalty. But still the Easterlings/Rhun and Haradrim are pure evil. Though I do not really know why. Is it ever said why those two are evil?
Quick answer for all of you: It’s easier to say “evil men” cause, as you all have mentioned, there are multiple names for them and the different regional groups. If I called them one name, I’d probably get comments telling me I forgot the other possible names. 😂 So to make things easier, I think we can just call them “evil men”.
The worst in The Two Towers? Even worse than shield-surfing Legolas? How about Faramir being dumb for most of his time in the movie? How about Gimli huffing and puffing and tripping while the three heroes are tracking the Uruk Hai? How about the Warg attack and Gimli utters the modern term "nervous system" and Legolas' weird way of mounting a horse?
I find it odd you have a problem with the magical elf cloaks hiding Frodo and Sam from the evil men when just a few books ago they allowed a whole pack of Rohirrim to run past the three hunters without seeing them.
‘I did not mean the danger that we all share,' said Frodo. 'I mean a danger to yourself alone. You swore a promise by what you call the Precious. Remember that! It will hold you to it; but it will seek a way to twist it to your own undoing. Already you are being twisted. You revealed yourself to me just now, foolishly. Give it back to Sméagol you said. Do not say that again! Do not let that thought grow in you! You will never get it back. But the desire of it may betray you to a bitter end. You will never get it back. In the last need, Sméagol, I should put on the Precious; and the Precious mastered you long ago. If I, wearing it, were to command you, you would obey, even if it were to leap from a precipice or to cast yourself into the fire. And such would be my command. So have a care, Sméagol!’ ************************************************ This alludes to a theme in the books that Sméagol has to keep his oath to Frodo taken 'on the precious', otherwise it will punish him. It results in the climax in Mount Doom, when Sméagol breaks his oath and as a consequence the ring (!) makes him stumble and fall into the cracks of Doom, and effectively destroying itself. That's an interpretation of course, but not an uncommon one. It's an important moral point of the entire trilogy: Resist and endure evil, until eventually it destroys itself. Peter Jackson changed this whole theme, wanting Frodo and Gollum to fight for it at the end. Hence this scene here was also not important any more. For a lover of the books, that's a a shame, but I assume they needed the climax at Mount Doom to be more dramatic for mass audiences...
The deeper you get into Two Towers, the more I remember why I ended up hating Peter Jackson's trilogy. Visually stunning, and a great film, technically speaking, but a very poor adaptation of the source material.
Hated the landslide. Loved the impossible stealth of the cloak. It shouldn't work on Nazgul, but a few men pledged to the enemy or some orcs? Why not, it was cool. If only the rest with like body-crushing rocks and a soldier who was looking right at them until they Solid Snake into the nearest Elvish Cardboard Box … er, I mean, hide under Frodo's cloak … no, that was dumb. If the cloak trick had been used to hide from a patrol or something, that'd be one thing, but this scene was ridiculous as it was. Wish as always that they'd allowed Pippin to be seen as having grown some more. He did a lot of growing up in a year.
Honestly I didn't mind the changes within the scenes of Frodo, Sam and Gollum at the Morannon. It was a little bit more dramatic than in the book. But in the book it is just dialogue and that might be a bit boring for a movie packed with action. And it illustrated the quality of the Lothlorien cloaks nicely after they omitted that in the scene where the three hunters meet the Rohirrim. I was sorry for the character change in Treebeard. I would have liked it much better if they had just kept him as he was in the book. I was quite disappointed when the Ents decided to do nothing and when it needed Merry and Pippin to show them the devastating damage that Sarumans Orks had done to Fangorn Forrest. As if they were completely ignorant about that. For me the most awful moment in the Two Towers movie was the completely made up and unnecessary scene with Eowyn bringing Aragorn that disgusting soup. I really hated that. Why can't a woman who is a trained fighter not produce an acceptable soup? Hell! Noone complains about Aragorns culinary skills. But because she is to be established as a shieldmaiden she must be a lousy cook!
Yeah, it's weird that they made the three hunters hide in a rocky crag in the movie, yet in the book they're just near the base of a grassy hill with their cloaks wrapped around them, but since it isn't ever explained in the movies that the cloaks are actually hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, or that it's written in the books "you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." Without that context, it makes sense that they didn't portray the three hunters as sitting on a hill with cloaks over them as 105 keen-eyed Rohirrim road straight past.
that's weird, because i read the books before the movies came out, and i remember there being a part with the cloak saving them. could be a mandala effect... scene/event tied into the more detailed description of the cloaks Galadriel gave them when she gave them all their gifts. like, when she was describing the elven rope (which explained why it hurt Gollum), she said something about the cloaks that i can't/too lazy to quote. imo, the worst thing PJ did was what he did to Faramir. Faramir was basically the only human to not be tempted by the ring, ever... Faramir was special.
Correct! Here it is, since I already did the work of looking through dozens of pages trying to find it for another reply, I will leave it here with you as well to be a little refresher :) The cloaks are magic, they aren't just some nice cloaks, it's even written as such: "Yet they are garments, not armour, and they will not turn shaft or blade. But they should serve you well: they are light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." There is some contention that they aren't truly MAGICAL, in the way we would think, but they are also hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, so to say they are just normal cloaks is also not true. They also help hide Gimli, Aragorn, and Legolas from the eyes of the Rohirrim when they pass by. It's written as such: "The three companions now left the hill-top, where they might be an easy mark against the pale sky, and they walked slowly down the northward slope. A little above the hill’s foot they halted, and wrapping their cloaks about them, they sat huddled together upon the faded grass..." and then a few paragraphs later "In pairs they galloped by, and though every now and then one rose in his stirrups and gazed ahead and to either side, they appeared not to perceive the three strangers sitting silently and watching them." They are only spotted because Aragorn rises and shouts after them, otherwise 105 keen eyed Rohirrim, on the lookout for trouble, would have simply passed them by when all they did was wrap their cloaks around themselves near the base of a grassy hill. So yeah, the cloaks weren't an ass-pull, they legit help to camouflage the wearers from 'unfriendly' eyes.
@@118042 thanks! yeah, think it was the tree and stone reference... although, i could have sworn the scene at the gate wasn't a complete ass-pull either, but it has been awhile since i read the actual books sadly. regardless, still say Faramir was one of the biggest/worst changes. i get that it creates an extra cinema conflict that requires less explaining. however, the simple fact that, other than Aragorn who may himself have been controlling himself by his own will, book Faramir not only resisted the ring he looked at it with unveiled contempt makes him special and is unheard of in the human race. a human that could resist the will of a Valar.
I didnt mind Faramir's temptation because to me it didnt play out as him being tempted by power in traditional sense. He wanted the ring in the hope that his Father would be proud of him He even says "the ring will go to Gondor" not that he wants it for himself
@Jimbobiscuit to me it it wasn't dissimilar to Borromir... In the books Faramir was basically the chosen one. Had visions and training. Basically says he'd rather spit on it than pick it up if he saw it sitting on the ground. Borromir was just sent because he was Theodens favorite. Pretty sure they just didn't want to explain things at the time like Tom, or the Entwater, or Battle of Helm's deep, or Saruman and "The Scouring of The Shire".
Speaking of the Old Man Willow in the moiview - it's not actually a willow. Why? Because the leaves that Merry and Pippin got buried under are from an oak. So, either you can call this tree "Old Man Oak" or just think that this is just one of the trees that, like Old Man Willow, became carnivorous and agressive.
@@factorfantasyweekly I thought in the extended Old Forest scene we had Old Man Willow. When I watched the elf-cloak scene as a child, I was surprised that the cloak did look like one of the rocks: I believe the criticism over it being unrealistic (which I have seen on 2016 answers on Quora, as well as Random Film Talk's discussion of the Extended Two Towers), refers to the fact the Easterling gimps who look at the cloaks should have seen what the "rock" was at close range, and the fact they should have seen Sam: however, it seems Sam quickly was swallowed by sand, which is why his bones were not broken and how Frodo quickly got him out. It also should be said they were wearing their elf-cloaks the whole journey, and used them to watch the Haradrim enter the Black Gate (they and Gollum were on the height of course and hidden by rocks: all three were careful to make sure the Haradrim didn't spot them).
The cloak was magic and it was like that in the books. The "humor" and "banter" between Legolas and Gimli is the worst part about the movies. So unfunny and over the top. And the "surfing" and general "moves" of Legolas. It's silly and looks bad. EDIT: Everybody loves Legolas but to me it's by far the worst character in the movie.
Most of these problems are created by the fact that the three books are not of equal length. They moved Shelob to The Return of the King which left open a huge hole in the Two Towers forcing them to create excessive padding in the 2nd film. Frodo and Sam's journey to Osgiliath is one such example. This, despite cutting so much from the first film. The other portion of the film trilogy that has become nearly unwatchable for me is the battle in the Chamber of Marzubul. All that hokey CGI, bodies flying around everywhere with no regard to physics or human anatomy. It's embarrassing to watch. In the book, the scene plays out as a quick skirmish that is shocking in it's sudden and apparent demise of the main character. It's shocking because it's so sudden and unexpected. In the film version, it's like watching slow molasses pour onto a plate on a winter day. By the time Frodo is finally stabbed Im yawing and looking at my watch.
Did JRR Tolkien kill an elephant IRL? I remember reading an autobiography in school of some british writer who was a soldier in one of the world wars where he was in india or somewhere like that and he had to kill an elephant that had previously rampaged through a village. The point of the chapter was that he only did it so he wouldnt look stupid or weak in front of the natives and he regretted it. I cant remember if it was from Tolkien or someone else though
I’m afraid this isn’t some of your best work here. As some others have mentioned the cloaks they were given by the elves were magical and most definitely camouflaged the wearer. And with merry and pippin’s scene I’m getting the sense that what you’re insinuating here is that the movies should’ve been an exact replica of the books, word for word in dialogue and picturing exactly what is described elsewhere and in the exact same sequence. These movies would’ve been many hours longer if that would’ve been done. It is an adaptation. And it is not going to be the same, that’s just how it goes with movie adaptations, directors are going to cut things and move things around in order to not make a 10 hour movie. I’m totally fine when people critique these movies and make videos about the major differences but this amount of nit picking is a little much in my opinion. And if your goal here is not to say it should have been done differently but just to expose those differences and highlight them that is one thing, but I don’t think that was very well done in this video
Also, after they successfully hide from the evil dudes, they immediately get up an hide behind a big rock.... when they are hidden by the cloak the shot of the dudes, there is no big rock. The hobbits get up an take one or two steps an hide again. If the men were standing right infront of the cloak, they would be standing on the rock or atleast it would be in shot...
I agree this bad scene could have been removed however I think it's not so bad because it reminds us these hobbits are really just young kids, not superheroes, normal kids in extraordinary situations. Lost and a long way from home. But that they are still just kids out of their depth.
Relative to a 3000 year old Legolas,, a 200+ year old Gimli, a 80+ year old Aragorn, a 8000 year old Gandalf and a 10,000 year old treebeard, the hobbits are children compared to them etc
@@94462 Are you under an impression that Legolas would be faring any better going to Mordor? It was a quest where _everyone_ would be out of their depth. And Gandalf was the oldest of them all - older than the world itself, actually.
I thought I was the only person who thought the first scene was stupid. I thought it was something I missed from the book but I guess nahh it’s just stupid.
Great as always! The scene of them drinking the water and growing is among my least favorite in the movies and should have been left out. I know it was an homage to Tolkien's original story, but it just came out silly and ridiculous. For example, if the Hobbits want to be taller, why not just keep drinking the water until they were 6 feet tall or whatever? Just not a good scene. As for the Black Gate, I have one thing to add to what Gibby said. It may just be me, but those two soldiers by the cloak/rock looked like women to me. I know you can't see much, but their eyes just look like women and we know Jackson often used women made to look like men. Look closely and see what you think. That brings me to what I think is the absolute worst scene in the whole movie trilogy. Unfortunately, it's in the last movie and won't be talked about for a long time. I am dying to talk about it as I do think it's the worst and was totally unnecessary. But I'll wait (I'm not really "dying" in case you're concerned). As always, I love the analysis in this great series!
There is a difference between having a negative opinion and being toxicly negative. Negativity get views and likes on social media, it's the lazy way of getting big
Hey you! 👀 Read along with me! 📖 Claim Andy Serkis’ narration of “The Two Towers” on Audible *for FREE:* www.audibletrial.com/twotowers 👈 Every free trial supports the channel!
Where is the dead marshes part
We covered that in episode 24! 🙏🏼
This video is dumb they were elven cloaks you tool
I never took that Pippin shrank to his original size, but rather that Merry grew enough to remain taller than him from the Ent Draft he stole from Pippin.
That was always my take as well. When Merry says they're "back to normal" at Isengard he's not saying they're back to the heights they were when they left The Shire, rather that they're back to Merry being slightly taller than Pippin.
Yeah same, I never considered it could have been interpreted any other way.
Same here.
Ditto
But their height compared to everyone else is back to what it was too in the movie.
I loved the cloak scene. It was a magical cloak, not some rag from second hand shop.
Too dorky
"These cloaks and brooches were gifted to the entire fellowship and were powerful items that gave both camouflage and comfort for their arduous journey. The cloaks could shift colors between gray, green, and brown depending on the light of day. These cloaks would also be warm or cool to the touch, depending on the temperature needs of the wearer. Their camouflage properties were shown in The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers when Frodo and Sam used a cloak to cover their fall from a ledge whilst scouting The Black Gate."
They were not normal cloaks, this dude needs to read his Silmarillion.
@@jarlwhiterun7478we loved it in the theater in 02
@@Palendromedamn i’m so jealous you got to experience them in the theater, i wasn’t even born 😢
I always thought that scene would have worked much better if the soldier wasn't so close, so that it would be a little more believable that the cloak could conceal them so well. When Frodo whips the "cloak" off after the soldier turns away, you can clearly see it is a large piece of heavy canvas that has a supporting structure within it to give it that rock like appearance.
In the books, the cloaks simply have a somewhat "magical" ability to camouflage within their surroundings but not do what is depicted in that scene. The soldier should have been peering at the hillside from at least 50 yards away, not literally standing over them.
This is a load of bull. The "stealth" scene with Sam & Frodo is meant to showcase the elven cloaks the hobbits were gifted by Galadriel that render the wearer invisible to unfriendly eyes. It is 100% lore accurate. And the Merry & Pippin scene was an homage to the Tom Bombadil storyline that was cut from the story due to pacing and narrative concision. Just say, "I have no idea what I'm talking about," at the start of your video next time.
Also, what kind of eyesight do Orcs and Goblins have? It may not be all that good. We know Elves have great vision and Humans we understand but who's to say that Goblins and Orcs have super sharp vision? Most creatures in the Earth world don't see that well; resolution is poor. They see objects well enough but not in great detail. Perhaps Orcs all have like 20/40 vision or something.
@@JD-gk7eh Even so, they are also shown to give Legolas, Gimli and Aragorn the same kind of camouflage when the Rohirrim pass right by them. They are not well hidden, but the cloaks are said to be "...light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees."
@@JD-gk7ehthey used the cloaks to hide from the Easterlings, not orcs.
Just cos it showcases how the capes work. That ultimately never comes up again so it serves the plot in no way
His issue with the movie scene isn't that the cloaks make them look like a rock to the evil men, but rather that the cloaks are shown in the movie to only work when Frodo covers them both up with the cloak, and from the cuts it looks like the evil men are like 20 feet away when Frodo covers them. Since that's how it works according to PJ, then how in the world did the men not see the hobbits as they were approaching Sam and Frodo writhing on the ground?
The cloaks are magical and given to the entire Fellowship by the Elves. Tolkien had a line in the book that says it camoflauges against enemies.
Correct! Here it is, since I already did the work of looking through dozens of pages trying to find it for another reply, I will leave it here with you as well to be a little refresher :)
The cloaks are magic, they aren't just some nice cloaks, it's even written as such: "Yet they are garments, not armour, and they will not turn shaft or blade. But they should serve you well: they are light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." There is some contention that they aren't truly MAGICAL, in the way we would think, but they are also hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, so to say they are just normal cloaks is also not true.
They also help hide Gimli, Aragorn, and Legolas from the eyes of the Rohirrim when they pass by. It's written as such: "The three companions now left the hill-top, where they might be an easy mark against the pale sky, and they walked slowly down the northward slope. A little above the hill’s foot they halted, and wrapping their cloaks about them, they sat huddled together upon the faded grass..." and then a few paragraphs later "In pairs they galloped by, and though every now and then one rose in his stirrups and gazed ahead and to either side, they appeared not to perceive the three strangers sitting silently and watching them."
They are only spotted because Aragorn rises and shouts after them, otherwise 105 keen eyed Rohirrim, on the lookout for trouble, would have simply passed them by when all they did was wrap their cloaks around themselves near the base of a grassy hill.
So yeah, the cloaks weren't an ass-pull, they legit help to camouflage the wearers from 'unfriendly' eyes.
@118042 Galadriel even says it in the freaking movie: "May these cloaks shield you from unfriendly eyes." The most powerful elven witch/demi-goddess says a prayer over your clothes for protection and ppl think it has no effect. They need imagination.
Yeah, for me it's Frodo casting out Sam. They get seperated because Gollum attacks Sam in the middle of Shelob's lair, NOT because Frodo and Sam fight. That PISSES me off. Their friendship/partnership is way too strong for Gollum to mess with it.
I agree. Having them separated by the combined attacks of Golum and Shelob makes much more sense and makes the encounters much more dramatic and gives opportunities for much more spectacular action sequences. I could never understand why Jackson and his team chose to have them separated in that way, as it only made the story worse, even for the movie medium.
Agree. I think Frodo casting Sam away changes something fundamental about their relationship as was a bad call as compared to the books.
100000% tbis one and trashing Faramir are two things I will NEVER say was okay! EVER!!
Shelobs Lair is done way better in the books
@@garrettohyeah7365 I honestly couldn't stand the New Zealand tarantula they used. It bugged the crap outta me
For me, it's when the witch king beats Gandalf and yet in both the book and first movie he manages to hold off all 7 at once on weathertop while his power is handicapped.
yeah - first time reading the book I was waiting and waiting for Galdalf to get slapped by the witch king... And now, watching the movies, that scene feels so against the grain. I actually love the scene with them drinking the Ent drafts, and while I think the movie could have skipped banishing Sam... I do kind of like it and feel like it makes sense in-world, even if Tolkein went a different direction. But Gandalf's moment isn't a character difference... it's a complete flip of a power balance with a leveled-up maiar.
Low key I roll my eyes whenever I see his undoing. Apparently if you're a woman you can hack off a Fell Beast's head like that poor water Buffalo in Apocalypse Now (RIP). Apparently the mighty Witch King can be downed in a minute if you throw enough estrogen at him 🙄 BRB just loading a tampon cannon to take down the Nazgul, shouldn't take more than 30 seconds
tbh this was cut from the 'normal version' because jackson doubted it
@@wolpertinger. Estrogen has nothing to do with it, really. What screwed him over and made him killable in the first place was Merry's enchanted Númenorean blade breaking his magical protection. After that, any random dude could have rammed a blade where is head was and done him in - it's just that there was no dude around to do it, while Éowyn was.
The 'prophecy' wasn't that the Witch-king *couldn't* be killed by a man, but simply that he *wouldn't* be. He, and many readers like yourself, simply took it the wrong way and ran with the misconception.
In the book, Gandalf and the Witch King confront each other when the gates are brought down by Grond. The Witch King then appears in the gate, ready to enter the city and Gandalf stands in his way. Then they hear the horns of Rohan as the riders begin to ride into battle and the Witch King is drawn away. Gandalf is about to pursue him onto the battle field but Pippin appears and warns of Faramir's soon demise at the hands of his insane father, Denethor. Gandalf is pulled away reluctantly and the Witch King is then able to slay Theoden where as, if Gandalf had been able to pursue him he could have prevented this. It's another moment of the "tragic tradeoff" that Tolkien often employs. He saves Faramir at the cost of letting the Witch King wreck havoc.
For me it was the absolute lack of acknowledgement that Theoden king receives after his death on the Pelennor fields. No one grieved or mentioned him, but Eomer runs to his injured sister and then there is a whole mini scene of Aragorn using his elven skills to heal her wounds. Yet they could have taken the same time to show king Theoden's dead body. He was one of the main characters in the whole trilogy. NOT ONE MENTION. Not even in the extended edition of the third film.
Personally, the part I disliked the most was adding in that "movie style" misunderstanding scene where Gollum frames Sam for eating all the hard elf bread.
It's worse when they ad the scene where Sam finds it like he needed to reminded he didn't take it even though he knew he hadn't previously
I always thought that Frodo's threats to Gollum were not actually from him at all, but a rare moment of the ring itself sort of using Frodo as its talking-piece. The ring itself abandoned Gollum because he was "too good" at keeping it concealed for himself. It WANTS Frodo to take it into Mordor, or get caught along the way, & Gollum taking it back underground would undo all of the progress it's made trying to be discovered. So this is an example of the "evil" of the ring spelling out its own doom- it is warning him, "you take me from this hobbit, & I will send you straight to hell", not knowing that this curse it lays upon him will result in Smeagol taking the ring down with him.
One thing Gibi seemed to miss which is an important change between the books and the movies is while it's true that Sam never fell and got buried in rocks in the books, their movements DID still attract some unwanted attention from the Haradrim, as some of the soldiers did see rocks sliding down the steep slope from Sam, Golum and Frodo's movements farther up the slope and did to to investigate, and the hobbits did use their lothlorien cloaks for camouflage to help them avoid being spotted. I think Jackson was trying to capture that event in his Sam fell scene, but just want too far into the spectacle that he broke imersion there, which it did have that affect for me too, as I could never figure out how the Haradrim soldiers couldn't see Sam and Frodo as they were going down the slope nor when Frodo was trying to help Sam up before using his cloak to conceal them. Nor did the extent of Sam's burial make any sense. I think that was a scene where the producers got too caught up in making spectacle that the forgot the storytelling they'd been doing elsewhere in the movies.
Apparently they have real poor visibility in those helmets. Perhaps they were in need of glasses 😅
The cloaks are magic, they aren't just some nice cloaks, it's even written as such: "Yet they are garments, not armour, and they will not turn shaft or blade. But they should serve you well: they are light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." There is some contention that they aren't truly MAGICAL, in the way we would think, but they are also hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, so to say they are just normal cloaks is also not true.
They also help hide Gimli, Aragorn, and Legolas from the eyes of the Rohirrim when they pass by. It's written as such: "The three companions now left the hill-top, where they might be an easy mark against the pale sky, and they walked slowly down the northward slope. A little above the hill’s foot they halted, and wrapping their cloaks about them, they sat huddled together upon the faded grass..." and then a few paragraphs later "In pairs they galloped by, and though every now and then one rose in his stirrups and gazed ahead and to either side, they appeared not to perceive the three strangers sitting silently and watching them."
They are only spotted because Aragorn rises and shouts after them, otherwise 105 keen eyed Rohirrim, on the lookout for trouble, would have simply passed them by when all they did was wrap their cloaks around themselves near the base of a grassy hill.
So yeah, the cloaks weren't an ass-pull, they legit help to camouflage the wearers from 'unfriendly' eyes.
Maybe you are just speaking hastily, but in the movie, Pippin doesn’t shrink, Merry just also has enough Ent draft to balance things back to their respective heights.
Though I don’t remember their heights being noted as different in the books.
Lol “speaking hastily” 😂 I love it…
Pippin was originally smaller of the two but I don't recall any size difference mentioned after they have grown.
I do remember them being noted as taller in the books, though I also remember them getting the ent draft not from Treebeard, but from another ent who's not included in the movies, Quickbeam, while they're staying at Quickbeam's house while the rest of the ents take their entish time making a decision. You see, Quickbeam's rather hasty by ent standards and has already made up his mind to go to war with Isengard. The other, more deliberate ents needed a few more days to finally reach that decision.
I think at the end or in the appendix it’s said that merry is the tallest hobbit recorded and pip is a close second. But I can’t remember where it was said.
When Mary and Pippin are reunited with the others in the book during the "salted pork" scene it is noted that both are taller with thicker hair.
Treabeard doesn't know how the entwives look like, not because he doesn't remember, but because ents - as he explains at another point - tend to be changed by the world that surrounds them. Therefore, after the centuries of separation, the entwives might look quite different from when Treabeard last saw them.
@@lida7529 Or he simply forgets how they look like because it have been three millenias since he last saw them and unlike men, elves, dwarves and hobbits, the ents and entwives don't draw portraits of each other to remember them with so they rely on their memories, which can disappear after a very long time.
@@mevb No. He clearly remembers what Fimbrethil looked like in her youth, and he describes how the entwives were changed by their hard work.
@irena4545, yep. After they migrated east they planted orchards and farmfields and the heat of the sun affected their complexion.
@@mevbmy thoughts exactly lol
You're right. He talks about sheep and shepherd and how they tend to change towards one another. And he remembers his wife in her youth.
"Scouring of the Shire" aside, I think they missed a real opportunity when they changed the meeting of the resurrected Gandalf at the edge of Fangorn Forest.
In the book, Legolas has an arrow nocked and ready to loose because they were not sure who they were meeting. Legolas was the first (I think) to recognize Gandalf the White and he fires the arrow straight up into the air, shouting "Mithrandir", and Gandalf sets the arrow on fire as it flies up.
That would've been so cool, and it would only take like 5 seconds of screen time.
A bit of clever foreshadowing by Tolkien with Frodo’s threats to Gollum; given after Gollum takes The Ring back from Frodo that he immediately falls off a cliff into fire.
My only problem with the elven cloak scene is that the Easterlings are already walking in Sam and Frodo's direction before Frodo decides to pull the cloak over them. And while it could be that they're behind some larger rocks, it's not clear where the rocks are or what angle the Easterlings are approaching them from.
This makes it look like Sam and Frodo has such massive plot armour that you could see someone trapped underneath a lot of gravel and sand, watch someone else try to dig them out while you're walking towards them and then conveniently forget everything just because there's now a giant rock where they used to be. What the scene needed was to make it explicitly clear that the Easterlings' vision was obstructed by something else before they got to Sam and Frodo.
I completely agree. Out of all the changes I mentioned, that detail is always the worst to me. If they would’ve been behind a rock or something then it could be excused. But how in the world did they not see the hobbits when walking up. 😂
"Absurd moment of stealth" isnt that an elven cloack? Always assumed it was imbued with powers like the rope.
Easy to miss, but when Galadriel gifts them the cloaks, it is mentioned that they "shield you from unfriendly eyes."
@@shaggywannabe Bingo, you nailed it Shaggy. It's also mentioned when the Rohirrim are passing by Legolas Gimli and Aragorn, "In pairs they galloped by, and though every now and then one rose in his stirrups and gazed ahead and to either side, they appeared not to perceive the three strangers sitting silently and watching them." Which is even MORE wild when you consider that, unlike in the movies, they aren't hiding in a rocky crag, they are just crouched near the base of a grassy hill with their cloaks around them, and 105 Rohirrim on the lookout for trouble rode right past them before Aragorn called out to them.
The cloaks were hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, and while they don't specifically say they are magical like, MAGIC magical, it is written that "Yet they are garments, not armour, and they will not turn shaft or blade. But they should serve you well: they are light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." So, not like "I cast fireball!" magic, but with a hint of protective magic more likely to keep heat, cold, and prying eyes at bay.
The cloaks are camoflage not shapechanging. They will assume the colors of your surroudings but not make you apprear to be a boulder from 2 ft away. The cloaks would have turned a mottled grey and black on the talus slope, perhaps even having a few shiny areas to reflect light like small quartz, feldspar, and mica faces but magic in Tolkien is subtle not overt and suddenly turning into a rock under close observation is pretty overt.
I kinda disagree with your take on Sam in the rocks. That bit did confuse me for a time, so I started overanalyzing it. Gotta remember how short this dude is, and if you watch when he falls there is a good amount of loose rock falling with him. And we get that shot from a ways off, directly from the Easterlings' perspective. There's no visible hobbit, just a cloud of dust and rubble. Not to mention if their boots are clearly loud, and the loudest part of the rockslide will be right at the end and they're far enough away the sound they hear will be at least half a second late. Not sure how they don't see Frodo, tbf.
Assuming Mr. Baggins can quickly get to Sam in the dust cloud before they see him, there is a little bit of a ditch they are in. It was not visually shown well, because everything is just grey rock (including the hobbits) but it looks like it to me. So from far off, they really aren't visible to men's eyes. Probably only had line of sight when Frodo looked up, and then ducked his head down to grab the cloak.
As for the cloaks, that is exactly how they shrouded the Three Hunters before meeting The Riders of Rohan. If you've read The Fall of Gondolin (I don't remember if this but it's in the Silmarion version), Tuor gets a similar c cloak from Ulmo. But ... back to Sam again. While it's effect is primarily a visual camouflage enchantment, it's not unreasonable that it would protect against scratches, bumps, and bruises of a 60-70lb hobbit falling in a gravel-based accident. And when you look at those rocks burying Sam up to his chest, you have to remember that he and those rocks are all half the size of Sean Astin and the rocks he was in. He's really not that deep. Frodo wasn't able to pull him out as much as Sam was able to pull himself out after he's had a moment to catch his breath and Frodo have him a stable arm to hold onto.
Overall, I'm right with you. And after reading the Tom Bombadil chapters, I don't like PJ's scene in Treebeard's home anymore.
I don't mind either scene personally, neither one takes me out of the movie or makes me think less of the picture as a whole.
I mean it was a magic cloak. I dont see the issue with that scene
I like that you make intentional steps not to be toxic, we need that especially in regards to LOTR TH-cam haha
Got a source for that?
7:16 - 7:30 I don't think Sam being buried would've caused that much damage. He's a hobbit, so being buried to the middle of his torso would've been, what, two and a half feet of gravel?
I loved Sam's recitation of the Oliphant poem, it would have been nice if they could have included it somewhere - perhaps during an extended rabbit stew scene?
RIP bunnies 😭
Regarding timeline: The day Frodo spent watching the black gate was the same day when Gandalf, Theoden and comp. visited Isengard and Gandalf broke Saruman's staff (i.e. 5 days after Merry and Pipin set off with Treabeard for the Ent Mood.
You shout-out mistakes in the films, but you use an animation of a hobbit wearing BOOTS?!
SUE ME (but don’t actually… pls)
Those men marching to the The Black Gate are another allies of Mordor, Easterlings from Rhûn (as you can see by their samurai-like armor, inspired from Asia which is east from Europe if we compare Middle-earth being that continent, since Tolkien saw Middle-Earth as being a pre-historic version of our own world, The Shire being England and so forth), which is confirmed in the books.
Also, I don't mind these changes as they serve the movies purpose and I don't see how the omitted material would have worked as a film. The stone slide and the dash for the Gate only for Gollum to stop Frodo and Sam in order to prevent their capture and therefore Sauron getting The Ring back, was added for the sake of drama, as Fran Walsh and Philipa Boyens point out there wouldn't be any drama for them to just be on the cliff standing there. Also, it wasn't really big rocks that buried Sam but rather lots of smaller stones and gravel, so I don't how see that could break Sam's bones (seriously, you're overthinking and overlooking stuff at the same time, no offense).
I like the scene with Merry and Pippin because of it is lighthearted comedy brought to otherwise quite dark movie with a lot of heavy things going on, plus I like how they referenced the parts that there are in the book plus the homage to Tom Bombadil and The Old Forest. I don't care it didn't happen quite in the book but it works out. While I understand why this scene is just in the extended version, it's still a pity that it wasn't used and it takes a long time for Merry and Pippin to come back after the scene where Treebeard says that he told Gandalf to keep them safe, to when we see them after Saruman have sent his Uruk Hai army to Helm's Deep. Like some have already stated, Pippin didn't shrink back but Merry was growing past Pippin, making them in proportion to their heights as before but doesn't make a big deal about it.
If you think you'll walk away after being buried, waist deep, in a landslide. Youre crazy. Lots of small stones will obliterate your legs
We all love Ol' Tree Beardil 😂 honestly though merging Tom and Tree Beard is probably one of the best changes in my opinion just because it acknowledges Tom's presence in the source material, also speaking of Tom for those who don't know he appears in other media set in Jackson's version of Middle-Earth (pre the Hobbit) and I'm not on about the LEGO games lol, no Tom's in LotR: Battle for Middle-Earth II as a summonable hero who will prance around the battlefield, singing the Tom Bombadil song/poem (I forgot it's been ages) and sending enemies flying as he dances, it's the funniest thing ever to me and I love it.
Agreed. That's just the way books are adapted into films: things get moved around, and the fact that they still included it shows their dedication to remaining faithful to the book
Treebeard is a great character, though after rereading the books, I realized there's another great Ent character that we miss in the movies, who's often forgotten because of his exclusion from the movies, Mari and Pippen's 2nd ent friend, Quickbeam. In fact, if I remember that part of the book correctly, he's actually the one that gives Mari and Pippin the ent drink that permanently changes the pair of hobbits.
That scene where frodo and aragorn "lean forward(!)" when fleeing the orcs in kazad dum always made me furious.
Thank you for including this scene. Just why? This could (and should) have been easily left out entirely. This along with the Witch King scene where he destroys Gandolph’s staff and is about to kill him when Rohan’s horn’s are heard and he stops. Just unnecessary garbage.
I can't remember the movie chronology as well, but didn't movie Sam also hear Gollum around the same time frame talking to himself and loudly declaring that he would kill the hobbits while they were sleeping, to which Sam impulsively tried to throttle Gollum?
Legolas surfing on the shield while shooting orc is just too silly. I almost want to make my own edit of the extended editions of the movie just to remove that scene.
Legolas in the Hobbit is even worse, but the shield surfing scene could be removed to good effect.
There's another incredible take a while before Aragorn fall into the chasm in The Two Towers, where Legolas ride a horse by a fancy jumping on the run, that left me out of words back then in cinema when I saw it for the first time.
Can't you do something like that in Breath of The Wild?
I thought this too, that is until the hobbit movies came out…
Besides the fact that the evil men approaching the Black Gate in the film are Easterlings instead of Haradrim, they are also marching from the wrong direction. Arriving from the right side of the screen would be correct for Haradrim marching from the south, but the Easterlings should be approaching from the north/northeast, aka the left side of the screen.
*Every time* I watch this with my kids I must resist the urge to say this. But I am overjoyed this bothers someone else!
My god how have I never realised this until now?
You are incorrect the men marching into the Black Gate are Easterlings(in the book inplied to be from Rhun), and are a different allied people to Sauron. The Haradrim are from the South, and have a more direct path into Mordor from the South, Morder is completely cut off from the North with the Exception of the Black Gate. There are in fact four main ways into Mordor and Two of them are in the South East of Mordor, Minas Morgul, and the Black Gate. It makes no sense for Haradrim Foot Soldiers to wander across Ithilian to the Black Gate when they can(and later do in the movies) use Minas Morgul to enter Mordor.
So in conclusion the Wicked men in this scene are Easterlings.
To be honest I was always just happy to have Old Man Willow and the ent draught get a mention in the films. I think it makes perfect sense to merge the Old Forest and Fangorn when they're very similar settings, and it's nice to have Tom Bombadil at least referenced through some of his lines being given to Treebeard. "Heed no nightly noise" is a great line of Tom's that I'm glad they managed to sneak into the films.
Though I don't remember the ent drink being given to them by Treebeard but rather Quickbeam, while he and the hobbits wait for the rest of the ents to get around to making their decision to go to war. During that period that lasts for days or even weeks, the hobbits are staying with Quickbeam at his house, so since Quickbeam, the hasty ent is not included in the movies, I'd attribute that to also having Quckbeam's role being appended onto Treebeard, along with a few of Bombadil's lines.
We actually learn that merry grew taller a lot more earlier on in the book. Tolkien hints at it, then explains is a better tale for later.
👍
Mega fan here. My biggest issues with the movies are as follows:
The whole army of the dead part. Peter Jackson said he never liked the army of the dead. His solution was to make it one of the most useless parts of the movie.
And Legolas being ridiculously OP.
I kinda agree with the exclusion of Tom Bombadil from the movies. His presence kinda... Confuses those new to high fantasy. When I read about people reading through the books for the first time and they're new to Fantasy, they always have a hard time understanding why Tom doesn't play an active role in Middle Earth's resistance.
A lot of modern stories revolve around gaining power at all costs and using every tool at your disposal. Fantasy is really one of the last genres in storytelling that have reserved power figures that _could_ solve problems if they chose to, but don't because that's not the nature of their character or their role in the story.
I think this is also the reason why Jackson never went into depth about what Gandalf and Sauron are as beings, and about how powerful Gandalf truly was. Because it probably would have upset audiences new to the genre and Tolkien's work about why Gandalf didn't do more to help. And Tom's presence would have REALLY confused a lot of viewers. Especially with his interaction with The One Ring. Or lack thereof.
Ultimately, I think Jackson did a great job at adapting Tolkien's work in a way that audiences both experienced and new to Fantasy could enjoy. And the Blackgate scene in particular I suspect was meant to show just how dangerous Mordor was. One slip up, and the journey would be over.
In that scene where Frodo tells Gollum that if he put on the precious and commanded Gollum to throw him into the fire that Gollum would have no choice but to obey, he actually goes as far as to say that would indeed bee his command.
The bit I hate most is when Sam is cast out by Frodo. He falls down and finds the precious lembas bread. Does he salvage the precious bread? Nooooooo ... he crushes it up and throws it away 😮. Madness.
I saw the movies before I read the books, I was about 12 or 13 when the Two Towers came out. The scene where Sam falls and Frodo covers him with the elven cloth, always threw me off, even as a kid. In the movies you don't know the elven cloth can act as camouflage, but even still... that and the idea they planned on running through the front door of Mordor was unbelievable.
I always had a theory that Old Man Willow was actually an Ent that went "tree-ish." It sort of makes sense that a creature that could once walk and talk amongst the trees would grow to be bitter and angry at all the living things that may come to rest on him when he was once a much stronger being.
Regarding the entwives, I've always interpreted that he doesn't know what they would look like now, as they both change through the years (the whole monologe about sheep and sheperd and how they become like one another.. ) as he certainly remembers his old wife in her youth.
I still think the most egregious scene is in The Return of the King, when Aragorn gets his video game power up and shoehorned reason to suddenly get serious about becoming king.
Sam wouldn't necessarily have had a bunch of broken bones due to being buried that deep after he fell because he clearly wasn't buried in stones... It's likely that the hillside was covered in deep layers of dry loosely packed ash and silt while having a thin layer of gravel on top - let's remember the type of environment they're in here. While the top layer of gravel and stone would allow the Hobbit's weight to be more widely distributed thus enabling them to traverse the terrain without sinking, it's likely that Sam fell through an area where the layer of stone/gravel was extremely thin or otherwise nonexistent, causing him to sink into the ash/silt which essentially acted like dry quicksand (yes, this is a thing). Granted it would have taken Frodo and Gollum *much* longer to dig him out, but otherwise the scenario would at least be plausible... I believe this was added to the sequence in order to raise the stakes of the situation a bit while demonstrating the magical capabilities of the Elven cloak, perhaps to set up their use for a future scene that just never ended up making it into either version of the film or was never even shot to begin with. In fact, I could swear that I recall hearing something about this at some point in the past. I don't recall the specifics as to whether or not the scene was actually filmed or not or just left on the cutting-room floor, but I do believe that there was supposed to be another scenario involving Frodo and Sam using the cloaks to hide from some orcs while actually in Mordor and the scene outside the Black Gate was supposed to serve as a "Checkov's gun" type of thing to set that all up and establish that the cloaks possessed magical stealthy properties.
You explained all of the differences but your only critique was that you thought the gravel scene was too unrealistic and that pippin “shrank” at the end of the movie. My impression was that Merry simply grew taller than him by the end due to the entire draft. The only problem I personally have is that the elvish cloaks are never used again which is a HUGE wasted opportunity and means that the establishing scene here never really pays off. Everything else is perfectly fine for a movie adaptation. Peter Jackson simply didn’t have the time to include HOURS of in-movie story so he simplified what he could and included as much relevant info as possible. Sam’s character works really well in the movies because we don’t have the TIME to slowly build up his distrust in Gollum. Also the ffing Chad knows his worth and clearly sees when Frodo is being played so tries his very best to protect his best friend and master. He wouldn’t work as a quiet, introspective character, especially to make the later “betrayal” scene where Frodo kicks him out of the group work. His vocal hatred of Gollum helps Gollum manipulate Frodo which is perfect for a shortened version of the story.
Also, sorry to say this but these books are freakishly bloated with descriptions and slow-paced dialogue. This works just fine for BOOKS (at least if you have the patience for it and aren’t an ADHD tween like I was when I read them), but can you IMAGINE how long and weirdly paced the movies would’ve been if everything was included? That’s what makes adaptions ADAPTIONS. If LOTR was a series, that would be different. But I think it works really well as a movie. No scene is wasted. Almost every scene establishes something with a clear pay-off by the end. That is what a good movie is.
The worst scene in Two Towers is when Faramir is tempted by the ring.
I wonder if Jackson didn't have Pippen shrink back down again was because he spent so much effort on getting the sizes of hobbits right that to change the size of two of the hobbits part way through the movies would have been very tough to get right in all the subsequent scenes - most of the two Towers and all of Return of the King. Shrinking him back down quickly took care of that.
I’ve read the novels many times (every summer since 1995)
I’ve seen the movies many times (maybe 20)
I love both. I understand the many changes Jackson had to make.
My only “real” problems with the movies are:
Faramir
Aragorn pitching a tent in front of Gondor because he refuses to enter the city until “the people” realize he’s king (which he proves through his healing powers)
Frodo at the cracks of doom: that speech needed to be made. “I have come but I do not choose to do what I came to do. The ring is mine”. I hate it was shortened to just “the ring is mine” and also I hate Frodo fighting gollum to get the ring back. I prefer gollum just falling over the edge on his own and screaming “precious!” as he fell.
To elaborate on Aragorn:
In the novel he knows he will be King of Gondor but he is waiting for the right time. Even after the battle is won he recognizes his time has not come…yet. And he refuses to be treated as King until it’s time. The pitching of a tent is a huge moment for his character.
In the movie his “king-ness” is briefly mentioned at the council of Elrond and in dialogue between Gandalf and denethor and in the made-up scene between Aragorn and Elrond before Aragorn goes into the mountain. Then at the end he has a crown put on his head. Aragorn’s destiny is a very minor plot point on the films. It’s a larger plot point in the novels: hence the name of the third novel
@@jasonandkathleenbarker6306 A minor plot point? He’s one of the lovers, of course is a magpie plot point!
To me the issue is everything that happens before the cloak is used, the back and forth between zoomed shots of them and the guard makes it so goofy, it's ridiculous how he didn't see them before they were protected.
Elves in Helms Deep is the most atrocious change in my opinion.
The scene when Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli attack the corsair ships is the worst scene in Lotr hands-down.
Hobbits are small, the avalanche burying him that deep is believable
I never took it as the hobbits reverting/shrinking in the movie. Just that Merry drank himself back to being the taller of the two.
Already mentioned, but those elvish cloaks are S-Tier. It was a nod to the audience on their ability to hide / remain unseen. Which Tolkien absolutely wrote about. The rock sinking on the other hand was forced to utilize the illusion.
Still better than all the Rings of Power combined.
Hey, I have a question I feel like I haven't been able to get a straight updated answer from google.
Is there an Omnibus set of all the published Tolkien material? Failing that,mfors anyone have an updated list in canon chronological order? I want to include all hisfa letters and the Father Christmas letters. I also can never tell which short stories are in which book because sometimes google talks about them ile the stories are sold individually too.
Thanks to anyone that can help me!
I have nomproblem with the cloaks camoflaging them, though the distance is a problem. But hiw does the cloak conceal the backpack thst Frodo is wearing outside the cloak?
This is where Jackson goes most wrong. He omits most of the ents part of the story, for absolutely no reason, then expands the battle far beyond what it should be (which we’ll get to soon, I expect.) this is what ruins the second film for me, omitting crucial character story for vast amounts of CGI battle. It loses the heart of Two Towers.
Yes! Completely agree. And same for Return of the King.
Let's be so for real though, the ents are boring af. The movies were already very long, and any additional ent dialogue would add hours to the films 😅 my ADHD chipmunk brain runs at mach 2 and the ents talk waaaaaaay too slow to keep my attention. I'd rather see battles or dialogue between other characters
Lots of people already said it, but camouflage was a specific attribute mentioned in the text that the cloaks of Lorien granted the wearer.
Also, I dont know why you thought Pippin shrank to his original size in the movie. Both him and Merry end up taller than they were, though the movie doesn't remark on this explicitly since I believe this gets brought up in the Scouring of the Shire chapter, which is cut.
On the one hand, I definitely agree that elements of the fall down the cliff scene are silly, but I addition to their cloaks, that are sort of supposed to do that, they are Hobbits. Even back in that book, the Hobbits are supposedly notable, at least by Gandalf, for their heightened stealth, and since this seems to be an ability they just "have", even if they are individuals who have never trained it up, I feel like it is probably as much just being beneath the notice of bigger folk, as it is paying attention, and soft steps. Maybe there was also a little bit of providence in there, too. In the end, I also like that it is a direct portrayal of these cloaks actually doing something, in a way we can see. At times, LotR cam actually feel really low-magic, despite that being wrong, and among the things they received for their journey, the cloaks were among the most important, and visible, throughout the work, bur then we get to a point where stealth is no longer important; our heroes are eirher frontlining epic battles, or skulking through places no one else epuls go, and thus no eyes to be hidden from.
I'm certainly not going to sit here, and tell other people what to like, or that they are wrong for what they don't like; everyone's welcome to make those decisions for themselves, but I'm mostly good with it. The sliding down part is kind of silly, and not being seen before getting hidden is kind of crossing a line, as is how buried Sam became, but I'm personally fine with the hiding bit; that's apparently what even layperson Hobbits can just do, and then they have D&D cloaks of elvenkind, which are pretty good for stealth. 😊 If Yolkien had been a more modern time writer, we might even see a spot on the Gamgee family tree that leads up to Snake. Think of what he could do with just a cardboard box, even where a cardboard box had no business being.😊
So what was the original path for Frodo and Sam ? Enterring Mordor by the Black Gate ?
I found it really weird how much the changes from the source material kept the essence, plot, and overall lore. The movies - especially the extended edition - did a really good job of it. It's extremely rare for a movie or show to do that. It's unsettling in a good way.
Edit: To the point made at the end, most of the changes feature events that are in the books, but at different times and places. For instance, they did use the cloaks for camouflage, and did nearly get caught due to something akin to the landslide caused by Sam.
Theoden's exorcism is much worse.
The worst scene is Legolas Shield-Surfing. That was the moment they've broke balance. Remember Moria? How they barely killed one troll? And they have to combine effort, giving Legolas time for precise shot?
Well that is nothing to post-surfing Legolas, he is now the most op character in the universe, stronger than Nazgul, stronger than Gandalf. He can easily kill elephant, he can kill hundred orcs while hanging upside-down on a bat. It is all started from shield-surfing! That scene is undermines the whole idea of fellowship, the optimal party would have been Gandalf+Aragorn+Frodo+6 elves.
What else? Atmosphere is ruined. I can feel a strong Joss Whedon vibe from that moment, “Make it dark, make it grim, make it tough, but then, for the love of God, tell a joke.”, as he once said. Shield-surfing is a joke. Unnecessary joke! Yes, I do understand drama laws demands emotional swings win-lose-win-lose, but shield-surfing does not feel as a heroic moment, it is silly, he does not even achieve much, he have a bow, bow is ranged weapon, surfing is not needed!
I just wanted to take a quick moment to thank you for this amazing work! The amount of time I finished your playlist while I’m working is wow. It has made me understand the lore better. Also, these videos have made me want to read the book, shout out to you for that. So thank you!
So glad you’re enjoying the series! Happy I can play a part in getting someone to read the book again or for the first time. Happy reading! 🙏🏼
Yeah okay the Cape thing is nonsencial but that horn sound was fantastic and the Easterlings looked very cool
Oh yea the door and the Easterlings are cool. Even with Jackson’s errors, he made things look epic. 👀
The cloaks are magic, they aren't just some nice cloaks, it's even written as such: "Yet they are garments, not armour, and they will not turn shaft or blade. But they should serve you well: they are light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." There is some contention that they aren't truly MAGICAL, in the way we would think, but they are also hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, so to say they are just normal cloaks is also not true.
They also help hide Gimli, Aragorn, and Legolas from the eyes of the Rohirrim when they pass by. It's written as such: "The three companions now left the hill-top, where they might be an easy mark against the pale sky, and they walked slowly down the northward slope. A little above the hill’s foot they halted, and wrapping their cloaks about them, they sat huddled together upon the faded grass..." and then a few paragraphs later "In pairs they galloped by, and though every now and then one rose in his stirrups and gazed ahead and to either side, they appeared not to perceive the three strangers sitting silently and watching them."
They are only spotted because Aragorn rises and shouts after them, otherwise 105 keen eyed Rohirrim, on the lookout for trouble, would have simply passed them by when all they did was wrap their cloaks around themselves near the base of a grassy hill.
So yeah, the cloaks weren't an ass-pull, they legit help to camouflage the wearers from 'unfriendly' eyes.
The changes to the relationships between Frodo, Sam an Gollum is probably the most impactful in the trilogy. And very sad for most book fans. Thoughts on why PJ thought he has to do this?
Yeah, I remember the Black Gate scene in the movie feeling really weird and cringeworthy, back when I first saw The Two Towers movie in the cinema. And although I had encountered and played The Hobbit as a text-adventure game on my ZX Spectrum as a teen in the '80s. It hadn't really left me compelled enough to read any of Tolkien's books like the movies did.
- I guess what I'm trying to say is that, my first feeling of cringiness from watching the scene was completely unaffected by Tolkien's original version, since I had not read any of his books by that point... It just seemed to stick out like a sore thumb, even before I knew the original story.
The scene when frodo tells Sam to go home. Biggest middle finger to Tolkien fans. Bigger than that stupid ghost army crap PJ put in. Worst of the 3 movies.
I dont know... It was the ring talking, makes the effect of it that much more obvious the toll it's taking.
@znk0r None of it was in the books.
@TheTrueBobDole and we are here talking about a movie. If you want the books read the books or listen to the 60hr audiobook.
@znk0r Oh gee, by that logic ROP is the bestest thing ever! 🙄
Is there a reason you called them evil men and not men of Rhun or Easterlings? Because I'm pretty sure those soldiers are Loke-Gamp Rim, which is a part of the Rhunic army.
I know its not a big thing but I was just curios because the evil men armies do have names which is Rhun, Harad, and Umbar.
Nah, they gotta be evil, otherwise we'd have to re examine how we feel about our heroes gleefully slaughtering them while keeping score as if the lives they were ending had no value beyond fueling their bro bonding.....
yeah I don't know, I often refer to them as easterlings, haradrim and corsairs of umbar (or the corsairs for short) because I don't believe them to be evil but simply corrupted.
@@DrewLSsix they could still be evil what I'm saying is that you could use the faction name. I mean it can still be shown that they are evil by the fact that they are allied with Sauron. Shows that not all of the men are good.
@@CursedAnqxl yeah I get that with the Corsairs. They are pirates and possibly only really care about coin, Sauron probably just brought them into loyalty. But still the Easterlings/Rhun and Haradrim are pure evil. Though I do not really know why. Is it ever said why those two are evil?
Quick answer for all of you: It’s easier to say “evil men” cause, as you all have mentioned, there are multiple names for them and the different regional groups. If I called them one name, I’d probably get comments telling me I forgot the other possible names. 😂 So to make things easier, I think we can just call them “evil men”.
I liked the Black Gate scene better when it was in The Wizard of Oz.
The worst in The Two Towers? Even worse than shield-surfing Legolas? How about Faramir being dumb for most of his time in the movie? How about Gimli huffing and puffing and tripping while the three heroes are tracking the Uruk Hai? How about the Warg attack and Gimli utters the modern term "nervous system" and Legolas' weird way of mounting a horse?
I find it odd you have a problem with the magical elf cloaks hiding Frodo and Sam from the evil men when just a few books ago they allowed a whole pack of Rohirrim to run past the three hunters without seeing them.
‘I did not mean the danger that we all share,' said Frodo. 'I mean a danger to yourself alone. You swore a promise by what you call the Precious. Remember that! It will hold you to it; but it will seek a way to twist it to your own undoing. Already you are being twisted. You revealed yourself to me just now, foolishly. Give it back to Sméagol you said. Do not say that again! Do not let that thought grow in you! You will never get it back. But the desire of it may betray you to a bitter end. You will never get it back. In the last need, Sméagol, I should put on the Precious; and the Precious mastered you long ago. If I, wearing it, were to command you, you would obey, even if it were to leap from a precipice or to cast yourself into the fire. And such would be my command. So have a care, Sméagol!’
************************************************
This alludes to a theme in the books that Sméagol has to keep his oath to Frodo taken 'on the precious', otherwise it will punish him. It results in the climax in Mount Doom, when Sméagol breaks his oath and as a consequence the ring (!) makes him stumble and fall into the cracks of Doom, and effectively destroying itself. That's an interpretation of course, but not an uncommon one. It's an important moral point of the entire trilogy: Resist and endure evil, until eventually it destroys itself.
Peter Jackson changed this whole theme, wanting Frodo and Gollum to fight for it at the end. Hence this scene here was also not important any more.
For a lover of the books, that's a a shame, but I assume they needed the climax at Mount Doom to be more dramatic for mass audiences...
The deeper you get into Two Towers, the more I remember why I ended up hating Peter Jackson's trilogy. Visually stunning, and a great film, technically speaking, but a very poor adaptation of the source material.
Hated the landslide. Loved the impossible stealth of the cloak. It shouldn't work on Nazgul, but a few men pledged to the enemy or some orcs? Why not, it was cool. If only the rest with like body-crushing rocks and a soldier who was looking right at them until they Solid Snake into the nearest Elvish Cardboard Box … er, I mean, hide under Frodo's cloak … no, that was dumb. If the cloak trick had been used to hide from a patrol or something, that'd be one thing, but this scene was ridiculous as it was.
Wish as always that they'd allowed Pippin to be seen as having grown some more. He did a lot of growing up in a year.
Honestly I didn't mind the changes within the scenes of Frodo, Sam and Gollum at the Morannon. It was a little bit more dramatic than in the book. But in the book it is just dialogue and that might be a bit boring for a movie packed with action. And it illustrated the quality of the Lothlorien cloaks nicely after they omitted that in the scene where the three hunters meet the Rohirrim.
I was sorry for the character change in Treebeard. I would have liked it much better if they had just kept him as he was in the book. I was quite disappointed when the Ents decided to do nothing and when it needed Merry and Pippin to show them the devastating damage that Sarumans Orks had done to Fangorn Forrest. As if they were completely ignorant about that.
For me the most awful moment in the Two Towers movie was the completely made up and unnecessary scene with Eowyn bringing Aragorn that disgusting soup. I really hated that. Why can't a woman who is a trained fighter not produce an acceptable soup? Hell! Noone complains about Aragorns culinary skills. But because she is to be established as a shieldmaiden she must be a lousy cook!
Yeah, it's weird that they made the three hunters hide in a rocky crag in the movie, yet in the book they're just near the base of a grassy hill with their cloaks wrapped around them, but since it isn't ever explained in the movies that the cloaks are actually hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, or that it's written in the books "you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." Without that context, it makes sense that they didn't portray the three hunters as sitting on a hill with cloaks over them as 105 keen-eyed Rohirrim road straight past.
The cloaks given to them by the elves where explicitly said to keep harmful eyes from them.
that's weird, because i read the books before the movies came out, and i remember there being a part with the cloak saving them. could be a mandala effect...
scene/event tied into the more detailed description of the cloaks Galadriel gave them when she gave them all their gifts. like, when she was describing the elven rope (which explained why it hurt Gollum), she said something about the cloaks that i can't/too lazy to quote.
imo, the worst thing PJ did was what he did to Faramir. Faramir was basically the only human to not be tempted by the ring, ever... Faramir was special.
Correct! Here it is, since I already did the work of looking through dozens of pages trying to find it for another reply, I will leave it here with you as well to be a little refresher :)
The cloaks are magic, they aren't just some nice cloaks, it's even written as such: "Yet they are garments, not armour, and they will not turn shaft or blade. But they should serve you well: they are light to wear, and warm enough or cool enough at need. And you will find them a great aid in keeping out of the sight of unfriendly eyes, whether you walk among the stones or the trees." There is some contention that they aren't truly MAGICAL, in the way we would think, but they are also hand-woven by Galadriel and her maidens, so to say they are just normal cloaks is also not true.
They also help hide Gimli, Aragorn, and Legolas from the eyes of the Rohirrim when they pass by. It's written as such: "The three companions now left the hill-top, where they might be an easy mark against the pale sky, and they walked slowly down the northward slope. A little above the hill’s foot they halted, and wrapping their cloaks about them, they sat huddled together upon the faded grass..." and then a few paragraphs later "In pairs they galloped by, and though every now and then one rose in his stirrups and gazed ahead and to either side, they appeared not to perceive the three strangers sitting silently and watching them."
They are only spotted because Aragorn rises and shouts after them, otherwise 105 keen eyed Rohirrim, on the lookout for trouble, would have simply passed them by when all they did was wrap their cloaks around themselves near the base of a grassy hill.
So yeah, the cloaks weren't an ass-pull, they legit help to camouflage the wearers from 'unfriendly' eyes.
@@118042 thanks! yeah, think it was the tree and stone reference... although, i could have sworn the scene at the gate wasn't a complete ass-pull either, but it has been awhile since i read the actual books sadly.
regardless, still say Faramir was one of the biggest/worst changes. i get that it creates an extra cinema conflict that requires less explaining. however, the simple fact that, other than Aragorn who may himself have been controlling himself by his own will, book Faramir not only resisted the ring he looked at it with unveiled contempt makes him special and is unheard of in the human race. a human that could resist the will of a Valar.
I didnt mind Faramir's temptation because to me it didnt play out as him being tempted by power in traditional sense. He wanted the ring in the hope that his Father would be proud of him
He even says "the ring will go to Gondor" not that he wants it for himself
@Jimbobiscuit to me it it wasn't dissimilar to Borromir... In the books Faramir was basically the chosen one. Had visions and training. Basically says he'd rather spit on it than pick it up if he saw it sitting on the ground. Borromir was just sent because he was Theodens favorite. Pretty sure they just didn't want to explain things at the time like Tom, or the Entwater, or Battle of Helm's deep, or Saruman and "The Scouring of The Shire".
Man I wonder how the films would be like if there were no changes made!
50 hours combined 😂
not a commercial success
Speaking of the Old Man Willow in the moiview - it's not actually a willow. Why? Because the leaves that Merry and Pippin got buried under are from an oak. So, either you can call this tree "Old Man Oak" or just think that this is just one of the trees that, like Old Man Willow, became carnivorous and agressive.
Good point!
@@factorfantasyweekly I thought in the extended Old Forest scene we had Old Man Willow. When I watched the elf-cloak scene as a child, I was surprised that the cloak did look like one of the rocks: I believe the criticism over it being unrealistic (which I have seen on 2016 answers on Quora, as well as Random Film Talk's discussion of the Extended Two Towers), refers to the fact the Easterling gimps who look at the cloaks should have seen what the "rock" was at close range, and the fact they should have seen Sam: however, it seems Sam quickly was swallowed by sand, which is why his bones were not broken and how Frodo quickly got him out. It also should be said they were wearing their elf-cloaks the whole journey, and used them to watch the Haradrim enter the Black Gate (they and Gollum were on the height of course and hidden by rocks: all three were careful to make sure the Haradrim didn't spot them).
I've been fast forwarding the scenes with any hobbits since about 2004
If I had never read the books the movies would have been great . But knowing the story makes the movies a disappointment .
What I want to know is how Frodo and Sam expected to get through the black gate without getting caught. How was that supposed to work? 😂
The cloak was magic and it was like that in the books. The "humor" and "banter" between Legolas and Gimli is the worst part about the movies. So unfunny and over the top. And the "surfing" and general "moves" of Legolas. It's silly and looks bad.
EDIT: Everybody loves Legolas but to me it's by far the worst character in the movie.
This video and all the comments are just so wacky and hilarious in equal measure 😂
Yea, that must have been a lot of work!
I love this series. Thanks.
Most of these problems are created by the fact that the three books are not of equal length. They moved Shelob to The Return of the King which left open a huge hole in the Two Towers forcing them to create excessive padding in the 2nd film. Frodo and Sam's journey to Osgiliath is one such example. This, despite cutting so much from the first film.
The other portion of the film trilogy that has become nearly unwatchable for me is the battle in the Chamber of Marzubul. All that hokey CGI, bodies flying around everywhere with no regard to physics or human anatomy. It's embarrassing to watch. In the book, the scene plays out as a quick skirmish that is shocking in it's sudden and apparent demise of the main character. It's shocking because it's so sudden and unexpected. In the film version, it's like watching slow molasses pour onto a plate on a winter day. By the time Frodo is finally stabbed Im yawing and looking at my watch.
Did JRR Tolkien kill an elephant IRL? I remember reading an autobiography in school of some british writer who was a soldier in one of the world wars where he was in india or somewhere like that and he had to kill an elephant that had previously rampaged through a village. The point of the chapter was that he only did it so he wouldnt look stupid or weak in front of the natives and he regretted it. I cant remember if it was from Tolkien or someone else though
Very different Tree-O's.
💀😂
We all know they have to redo the script somewhat to get it all in the time allowed.
If you want the full story then read the books.
Personally, I think the movie would've been better served to provide a little more info on huorns, too.
I’m afraid this isn’t some of your best work here. As some others have mentioned the cloaks they were given by the elves were magical and most definitely camouflaged the wearer. And with merry and pippin’s scene I’m getting the sense that what you’re insinuating here is that the movies should’ve been an exact replica of the books, word for word in dialogue and picturing exactly what is described elsewhere and in the exact same sequence. These movies would’ve been many hours longer if that would’ve been done. It is an adaptation. And it is not going to be the same, that’s just how it goes with movie adaptations, directors are going to cut things and move things around in order to not make a 10 hour movie. I’m totally fine when people critique these movies and make videos about the major differences but this amount of nit picking is a little much in my opinion. And if your goal here is not to say it should have been done differently but just to expose those differences and highlight them that is one thing, but I don’t think that was very well done in this video
Also, after they successfully hide from the evil dudes, they immediately get up an hide behind a big rock.... when they are hidden by the cloak the shot of the dudes, there is no big rock. The hobbits get up an take one or two steps an hide again. If the men were standing right infront of the cloak, they would be standing on the rock or atleast it would be in shot...
I agree this bad scene could have been removed however I think it's not so bad because it reminds us these hobbits are really just young kids, not superheroes, normal kids in extraordinary situations. Lost and a long way from home. But that they are still just kids out of their depth.
Frodo has turned 50 and Sam is in his forties...
Relative to a 3000 year old Legolas,, a 200+ year old Gimli, a 80+ year old Aragorn, a 8000 year old Gandalf and a 10,000 year old treebeard, the hobbits are children compared to them etc
@@94462 Are you under an impression that Legolas would be faring any better going to Mordor? It was a quest where _everyone_ would be out of their depth.
And Gandalf was the oldest of them all - older than the world itself, actually.
Isn't the Pippin / Merry scene a deleted scene? It isn't in the theatrical release of the movie I don't think.
I thought I was the only person who thought the first scene was stupid. I thought it was something I missed from the book but I guess nahh it’s just stupid.
Weird things to get hung up on.
Great as always! The scene of them drinking the water and growing is among my least favorite in the movies and should have been left out. I know it was an homage to Tolkien's original story, but it just came out silly and ridiculous. For example, if the Hobbits want to be taller, why not just keep drinking the water until they were 6 feet tall or whatever? Just not a good scene.
As for the Black Gate, I have one thing to add to what Gibby said. It may just be me, but those two soldiers by the cloak/rock looked like women to me. I know you can't see much, but their eyes just look like women and we know Jackson often used women made to look like men. Look closely and see what you think.
That brings me to what I think is the absolute worst scene in the whole movie trilogy. Unfortunately, it's in the last movie and won't be talked about for a long time. I am dying to talk about it as I do think it's the worst and was totally unnecessary. But I'll wait (I'm not really "dying" in case you're concerned).
As always, I love the analysis in this great series!
Hahaha I agree, that scene was super inecessary and dumb.
Having a "negative" opinion about something isn't toxic that's so gay
Tru ☝️
There is a difference between having a negative opinion and being toxicly negative. Negativity get views and likes on social media, it's the lazy way of getting big
How is it gay? Most gay people I know are very positive.
Easterlings.