Why is TTT the least liked movie?

[samwarg]

Weighing in here, I believe PJ has said that he was not satisfied with certain parts of the 3 movies. No matter how good of a job we've done, don't we always look back and say "I wish I'd done this different or....."? I know I do. We could go on forever criticising this part or that part of the films couldn't we? Despite the un-perfectness of the three movies, they are still my favorites of all time. Is one movie "better" than the other two? Not in my view-----I love them all. In regards to criticism of his work, I suspect PJ feels a bit like I do when folks pick the green things and the red things out of the chicken pot pie that I've made.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

sam, I think your point of view is refreshing.

[Túrin Turambar]

True, but characters talking about the plot is something that should always be avoided (except in mystery stories).

Why is that? I have heard that statement many times, yet I have never seen a compelling argument to support it.

It’s a matter of efficiency and pacing. A scene where new material is not revealed or which does not result in action being taken does little to further the plot. They add deadweight, and are especially troublesome in a plot-driven story like LotR. In a story as complex as LotR, some such scenes are unavoidable, but TTT (especially in the middle) is burdened with them.

It's also better to show rather than tell where possible.

[Primula Baggins]

I would argue that a scene that reveals character, especially if that character motivates later action, is not necessarily deadweight.

[Túrin Turambar]

I would argue that a scene that reveals character, especially if that character motivates later action, is not necessarily deadweight.

No, it isn't, even though dynamic character development is better. Still, TTT has more of them than FotR and RotK, and it slows the movie down somewhat.

[Alatar]

It’s a matter of efficiency and pacing. A scene where new material is not revealed or which does not result in action being taken does little to further the plot. They add deadweight, and are especially troublesome in a plot-driven story like LotR. In a story as complex as LotR, some such scenes are unavoidable, but TTT (especially in the middle) is burdened with them.

It's also better to show rather than tell where possible.

The point being that movies should not always be about moving the plot forward. Thats a misconception that has been thrust upon us by the modern scriptwriters' shool of thought and the limited attention span of the modern audience. Many of the greatest pieces of cinema "suffer" from the so called flaws that would never happen in a modern screenplay. Thats why so much of modern cinema seems formulaic and clichéd. Because it is. Because people insist on following stupid formulae that give the best return of investment, namely a solid film every time, but never anything remarkable.

[Túrin Turambar]

It’s a matter of efficiency and pacing. A scene where new material is not revealed or which does not result in action being taken does little to further the plot. They add deadweight, and are especially troublesome in a plot-driven story like LotR. In a story as complex as LotR, some such scenes are unavoidable, but TTT (especially in the middle) is burdened with them.

It's also better to show rather than tell where possible.

The point being that movies should not always be about moving the plot forward. Thats a misconception that has been thrust upon us by the modern scriptwriters' shool of thought and the limited attention span of the modern audience. Many of the greatest pieces of cinema "suffer" from the so called flaws that would never happen in a modern screenplay. Thats why so much of modern cinema seems formulaic and clichéd. Because it is. Because people insist on following stupid formulae that give the best return of investment, namely a solid film every time, but never anything remarkable.

*Shrug*

The question is why TTT is the least liked of the three films around these sites. I’ve offered what I think is a reasonable answer. Good storytelling involves being efficient and killing several birds with one stone. That’s the advice that a book on writing fiction will give you.

[Primula Baggins]

Alatar's right, though, that the current fashion for headlong storytelling with everything extraneous stripped out is just that: a fashion. Many great films and great books are not structured that way.

[Alatar]

I just realised I never actually addressed the question. Firstly, I'd like to point out that TTT is the least liked only in the Tolkien community. Most people I know who aren't Tolkien fans think it was the best film of the three. I think it really has to do with the changes. There are enough of them to annoy almost every fan. While I have no problem with Faramir, I hate Aragorns near death. While the Ents decision didn't bother me overly, I was incensed at the convoluted twisting of logic that made Théoden look like a fool for holing up in Helms Deep. (Like facing them in open battle would have been a better move than fighting from a position of strength?)

So, its not so much that there was any one major change, like Sam sending Frodo away, but that there were multiple little niggly ones that would get to most fans eventually. That, I think is why its the least liked among fans. As I say, non-fans seem to have no problem with it.

[Faramond]

My Dinner with Andre ... there's a movie with no plot, and telling instead of showing. Breaks all the rules. Great movie.

[Túrin Turambar]

I knew this was around somewhere. From the abridged TTT script :

SEAN ASTIN
Secret entrance? Why the hell didn't you tell us sooner?


GOLLUM
Because then our part of the adventure would have been concise and entertaining, completely absent of useless scenes that could easily be edited out of the film. It would hardly belong in this trilogy at all!


They go in a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DIRECTION to get to the SECRET ENTRANCE.


ELIJAH WOOD
Jesus, what a complete waste of time so far. Two hours of adventuring, completely undone within seconds. What could possibly be more boring?


We are treated to more of BILLY and DOMINIC riding the GODDAMN TALKING TREE.


ELIJAH WOOD
Oh yeah.

[anthriel]

LM:

I liked TTT the best of the three. Why? Because it had the most horses.


Actually, the answer is something like that. I liked the focus on characters, more, in that film; I liked getting to know the people of Rohan.

That being said, I GREATLY disliked Aragorn's plunge off the cliff. It absolutely jarred me. So wrong, you know? And I'm always left thinking... oh, right, so Leggy and Gimli wouldn't go LOOK for him? They would just ride on off? That is so unlike them... surely following those hobbits who had been abducted by the orcs was a low percentage success kind of activity. They wouldn't have taken a shot that Aragorn had survived that fall, and searched for him?

Just wrong.

[Primula Baggins]

That's what happens when you go at it backwards, bending the story out of its organic shape to bring about character development, instead of having the characters and their development determine (at least some of) the events in the story.

That being said, I can sympathize with the pressures on the writers in TTT. Some of their holes they dug themselves into, but others were imposed by Tolkien's story and the constraints of film compared to text narrative.

[yovargas]

I knew there was a reason a liked ya.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

I tot up all those precious seconds and minutes where Jackson wanders off the story to insert his inferior additions and think how they could have been used. Still all the same I enjoyed TTT. The opening was brilliant. Gollum was a revelation. Rohan despite a few dodgy lines and landscapes was magnificently realised. Helm's Deep was wonderfully dramatic, perhaps too dramatic when compared to the Pelennor. The trudge of Sam and Frodo and Gollum and their debates were captured without tedium. The trouble is that the small things that were bad were like a tiny stone in an expensive shoe, more irritating than their size would suggest.

I just remembered that line of Éomer's where he says the stuff of legends stands up in plain sight. That was the intrinsic appeal of Jackson's film.

[samwarg]

I refuse to say one LotR movie is "better" than the other two. The Two Towers is just full of magic moments and I love it dearly. They are the bestest movies ever made and I wouldn't be here if not for them. Probably none of us would. With that said, If I had my way, the three movies would be re-done with no deviations from the book at all, other than minor adjustments to timelines, perhaps. They'd each be at least 8 hours long and we'd be able to smell the balrog's burning brimstone, Gimli's flatulence and Aragorn's B.O. I'd want a swig of that ent draft, too. Oh, and I'd want to join the hobbits at the Green Dragon for a pint or two, or three. Yeah, and I'd want to go spend the week with Bilbo in his hobbit-hole and attend his birthday party and hang out under the party tree and...and....

[yovargas]

I'll pass on the dwarf flatulence.

[eborr]

I think my major problem with TTT is that it came after FOTR, I really love that film, I was expeecting more of the fellowship and lo in the opening moments it lived up to my expectation. And then it went down, stupid plot deviations, smaltzy horse kissing, nasty muddy CGI wargs, terrible green(blue) screens, some average acting, the wholly artificial tinsion of Osgiliath, the indifferent ents, abseiling horses with crampons on their hooves, it does have some sublime moments - Aragon's death scene - the performances of Saruman and Grima, the first sight of Gandalf the white,l the recut battle scenes in the EE.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

I'll pass on the dwarf flatulence.

Was there a bit somewhere in HOME that said that was how they communicated long distance in their tunnels?

[Primula Baggins]

I believe it was the infamous Letter 147B, written very, very late on a convivial Christmas Day. . . .