Details in Peter Jackson’s “The Two Towers” that Only Book Superfans Would Notice

[@lotsofspots]

My favourite part of Legolas saying "unless my eyes are cheated by some spell", is that implies that he thinks Gandalf would use magic to fake having a nicer horse.

[@katlamb4606]

😂😂

[@yomamma.ismydaddy216]

Eh I don’t think it implies that.. it’s just acknowledging the possibility [even if it’s unlikely] that he could be incorrectly perceiving what he’s seeing.. that doesn’t mean Legolas thinks Gandalf would do that, just that he understands that his perception is not 100% infallible and there’s also many magical things in middle earth so even if his eyes were ‘cheated by some spell’ it wouldn’t even necessarily be something Gandalf was doing.. but your comment is funny to think about lol

[@gandalfolorin-kl3pj]

Melon Geek: Again and again you prove your erudition. Great job. I always enjoy your videos. Namarie.

[@factorfantasyweekly]

It also makes sense why Sam forgot he had rope in the book, considering that it wasn't a gift to him but rather just something he grabbed off the boats to bring along. Of course since they make a point of giving it to him as a gift in the FotR, he doesn't forget it in the next film.

[@JSBrown303]

Gimli's line about sprinting does make sense in some ways. Sprints are short quick races that don't require a lot of stamina, unlike the marathon they were currently running. Rhinos are a good example of Gimli's line. They are relatively short and stocky, yet they are fast and strong in short sprints. But in long runs they fall back.

[@yohan9101]

Great video Mr Geek 👍

[@anarionelendili8961]

Re: Old Man Willow scene. It is not in the same place as in the books, but thematically it fits. We know Fangorn has huorns, they come to Helm's Deep (well, outside of it), so it is not so out of place to meet a huorn in Fangorn, and if anyone other than Tom Bombadil would know how to deal with one, it would be Treebeard. That is why I took it more as a homage, and it helps to set up the forest in the extended cut (not so fond of it actively thumping the orcs, but a visual medium vs. a literary one, I guess).

[@Jorge-ml4ln]

God knows I love Jackson's adaptation, but the protagonism stolen from Eomer in this film (Two towers) is criminal, only surpassed perhaps by Faramir's adaptation. Oh and the complete exclusion of Imrahil, but that corresponds to the Return of the King I guess.

[@nblmqst1167]

Very interesting to hear and read people's takes on the movies. For me, the movies are all about the visuals. I never expected the movies to be 100% faithful to the books so was happy with getting the feel of the books, but the visuals were much, much more than I ever expected and I love the movies for that alone.

[@neildaly2635]

Thanks for the good work, particularly pointing there is no nice Sméagol/Gollum. Slinker is just more passively evil than Stinker.

[@Paul2hip8]

The elvish rope change is making a magic item have a keyword/activation word while in the movie it is just a magic item and its a little clearer

[@pwmiles56]

Lightening Frodo's fall heightens the contrast with the horror of Gollum's appearance. I think it's quite a good handling of the emotional beats.

[@dasaen]

Wow I never thought of it, but yeah the swearing on the ring change does make them look more naive in the movie. In the book I had the sense both Frodo and Sam know that Gollum is just wanting to betray them, they are just in an impossible situation. To me the small changed that feels very different is the actual ending moment. I always thought when Rosie puts Eleanor on Sam’s lap, is a way of basically returning him to the reality of being a father, to continue his life in happiness of what is ahead of him, and not his adventures. In the movie they do more of a cinematic hug, I feel they try to play it as more heartwarming for people that don’t have the experience of the kid being put on your lap for you to take care of them, which is a good choice, but did change it for me.

[@ByzCathGAA]

I still say that Jackson’s Lord of the Rings movies (which I still don’t prefer to watch) greatly surpass that of what Amazon has done. Books over movies, always (especially with Tolkien’s complete works).

[@thewingedringer]

What Amazon has done is hire a bunch of hacks and give them a billionaire dollars.

[@Andy__A]

One cannot even compare Amazon with LOTR movies. Every video on Peter Jackson's changes should be sent to the ROP production team as a manual to start with. Not talking about Hobbit movies of course

[@themeangene]

The funny thing is Amazon went into the project with goals in mind and fumbled it. They wanted a wider range of representation so they made every culture modern day California instead of separating people and having people from (humans, not elves ) Rhun & the South look distinct. I'm sorry I can't take it seriously when Numenor looks like San Francisco. Elves also arose before the sun and barely reproduce yet they somehow evolved just as much as men have lol Likewise they wanted to originally set themselves apart from Jackson. They could have done that by correctly representing elves instead of being stoic humorless beings. Nope. They made elves worse. Now they're stoic in some scenes and blubbering more than humans do in others.

[@Leahi84]

I feel like the Gimli line about being good sprinters was obvious sarcasm, because they would all know that's not true. lol

[@exantiuse497]

That's what I thought. He's just slinging some banter he knows is nonsensical/sarcastic because he is tired of running

[@stevemonkey6666]

Did the rope really fall when Sam said "Galadriel"? I don't remember that

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

The book leaves it open technically but Sam clearly thinks so, and I think we’re meant to believe him.

[@robertmiller9735]

When Faramir says the lines about the fallen Harad trooper, he's clearly scolding Sam for objectifying him as "the enemy". This shows Faramir's level of morality and civilization (as it does for Sam in the book). Of course the fact that they only do this because the dead man was human-and would never do it for an orc-is still a problem.

[@DoinkReacts]

Perfect video. Perfect.

[@NickBR57]

The "Elvish rope trick" was disappointing in the film and I dudnt see why they didn't do it like the original either. It fits the characters better. The transfer of Old Man Willow from the Withywindle to Fangorn really jarred. The whole addition of Brego and Aragorn going downstream and being found by Brego is completely unnecessary and wasted time that could have been used for good scenes that were left out - or adding a few lines like the swearing on the ring that you mentioned. In fact, that whole Warg battle should never have been added, using up precious film time. Elrond was done a lot of injustice in the films, IMO, leaving out his motivations and the complexity of the threads he was balancing. Just found your channel and loving these videos. So much content to catch up with, I see in your pkaylists....

[@yomamma.ismydaddy216]

In the books it’s not an ambush when Frodo and same first encounter gollum… they see him coming down the cliff towards him and he doesn’t see them, then he falls down the last little bit and they pounce on him lol

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

In other words, they ambush him lol.

[@yomamma.ismydaddy216]

@@TolkienLorePodcast I guess but it doesn’t seem like any more of an ambush than what happened in the movie. The movie version even seems like more of an ambush since Frodo and Sam intentionally lure gollum in by pretending to be asleep and then sneak attack him when he gets close enough

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

@yomamma.ismydaddy216 an ambush is an attack from a concealed position. They’re not concealed in the movie.

[@kilsonx8262]

I think Gimli says "we dwarves are NOT RAW sprinters", not "we dwarves are NATURAL sprinters" that re-contextualizes it better, and that's how I've always heard it!

[@andrewplck]

Bur then the other line "very dangerous on a the short distances" makes no sense.

[@kilsonx8262]

@andrewplck yes it does make sense because he's saying we're not good at long distance, but we are good at short distances

[@thewingedringer]

@@andrewplck it means he's gonna cut you down

[@andrewplck]

@@thewingedringer oh, ok.

[@pwmiles56]

He definitely says "We dwarves are natural sprinters. Very dangerous over short distances." Which makes perfect sense as a comedic line.

[@gustav394]

22:02 That is not really 20th century morality, it is more clichéed movie morality. One expression of 20th century morality, that I think people of many various views would agree on, were the Nuremberg trials, under which half of those on trial were sentenced to death. And generally the 20th century was full of expressions of "smite the wicked" morality, especially if one looks at not just liberal democratic countries. Maybe the kind of morality expressed in those movies was actually a reaction to that. And of course even people who oppose the death penalty usually don't say clichéed stuff like that.

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

It’s 20th century morality in the sense that it didn’t become prevalent until that century. That doesn’t mean it was the only moral position; that’s never the case.

[@FatphobeforLife]

I don't know if you could make a whole video out of this, as it's one of those "what if" scenarios. But I wonder how the Vanyar regarded the Noldor. And maybe even more of interest, how did ANY Valinorian elves regard any elves who chose to migrate to Valinor in the Third Age? Was there some prejudice? Fear? Maybe even awe for some like Elrond and Galadriel, less so for any exploits (because maybe we're talking about Vanyar who did many heroic things in the War of Wrath) and more so for their simple endurance of a condition--life outside the blessings of the Valar, and also for their knowledge? Did the Prof speculate in ancillary materials about this? I have to admit I tend to dismiss Tolkien speculation about stuff I am pretty sure he never considered because it's silly, like "vs" contest along the lines of Beorn vs Shelob or Smaug vs a Stone giant. I just roll my eyes when I see that stuff in some other feeds at times.

[@deikudarkheart159]

I believe in the book whenever Gollum speaks it always reass as "Gollum says" never Smeagol no matter which one js speaking.

[@bintube5269]

I don’t think anyone thinks Aragorn stopping Theoden was the right thing to do 😅

[@exantiuse497]

It was the right thing to do, from many perspectives. From the POV of the story, if he had killed Grima, then the Fellowship never would have obtained the Palantir (Grima throws it down from the tower in the book, and kills Saruman who falls down with the stone in the movie). If they didn't have the Palantir, then Sauron would not have thought Aragorn had the ring, meaning he wouldn't have sprung his attack before he was ready nor fallen for Aragorn's deception at the Black Gate, meaning Minas Tirith would have likely fallen and Frodo never would've made it to Mount Doom. Killing Wormtongue then and there would likely have resulted in defeat for the good guys From a moral perspective, Theoden would have slain Wormtongue in anger which would have put the burden of murder on his soul - even if he had the legal right to execute Grima his motive would have been anger which matters. In the movie this is even more pronounced because Theoden at that point didn't know his son was dead let alone that Wormtongue was involved - he was literally doing it purely out of wrath, and on the stairs of his royal hall, both literally and figuratively staining it with blood Finally, Tolkien repeatedly emphasises the importance of mercy, the folly of thoughtless killing and the choice of when NOT to take a life. Aragorn stopping Theoden is very Tolkinean

[@bintube5269]

@@exantiuse497 Aragorn man-handling Theoden in his own kingdom is not Tolkinean at all. In fact it's the same problem as Aragorn beheading a defenceless Mouth of Sauron ironcially. And Gandalf beating Denethor, the Steward of Gondor, with a big stick and then everyone going about their day. And I would even argue Aragorn bowing to the hobbits at the end along with everyone else in the kingdom. These are complete inventions that disrespect the hierarchy and social etiquette of the setting of the books.

[@nickbonavita1379]

It's been 24 years since the movies came out are you book people ever going to understand that you can't take three books that takes 54 hours to read and make them into three 3 hour movie and not change a lot. Are you willing to sit in a movie theater for 18 hours per movie ??? You will notice that at the start of the movie it says " BASED on the books by JRR Tolkien " not an exact copy of. Think about what a mess we would have gotten if Peter Jackson had given in to the studios and made it into only one movie. Go after that garbage called Rings of Power who are deliberately erasing and rewriting Tolkien's work and leave Peter alone.

[@FatphobeforLife]

Tolkien Lore makes it very clear all the time that there are good cinematic reasons for Peter Jackson's changes of the book lore a lot of the time, and he spends time explaining them. Sometimes he will explain why, from his perspective, the change is of little value. But this (and other) video is SPECIFICALLY about the differences between book and movie and is stated to be so in the thumbnail label, so I'm not sure what it is you are objecting to. Are you saying that videos of this kind, which aim to compare book and movie as their stated goal, shouldn't be made at all and have no place? I'd have to heartily disagree with that position.