Yeah, so he changed some parts . . . but with reason.

Rating: Null/10 (9 January 2003)

I've never actually written a review for IMDB before but I felt the need in this case for three reasons: 1) I loved the books; 2) I've loved both movies so far; and 3) Because I just read a review by someone saying you could not do both.
This person mainly took issue with the changing of certain parts and the absence of others. I'm briefly going to address a few of the differences between the book THE TWO TOWERS and Peter Jackson's cinematic interpretation of it and why I feel the differences were, in the vast majority of cases, more than justified. I may touch on one or two SPOILERS in the process so readers beware.
The first point I would like to address is that of the length of the three books. This reviewer claimed it was ridiculous for Peter Jackson (hereafter PJ) to have left some of the latter portions of the Two Towers (hereafter TT) story for inclusion in The Return of the King (hereafter ROTK) because ROTK was already the longest volume. This, in fact, is an inaccurate statement. While ROTK does contain the most pages, a large portion of those pages are dedicated to the Appendices. In reality, ROTK contains the LEAST number of pages actually dedicated to the story - that being 374. The Fellowship of the Ring (hereafter FOTR) contains 509 pages dedicated to the main story, making it the longest. TT rings in at 435 story pages. Right from the start then we can see that ROTK can reasonably borrow some story from TT to make it match the length and style of the first two movies.
To further support the extraction of some story from TT for placement in ROTK is the fact that TT is actually the most in-depth and involved of the three books (though some may disagree with me I suppose). I say that for a few simple reasons. FOTR is the beginning of a number of stories which prepare to diverge and ROTK is the conclusion of a number of stories which once again converge. TT, on the other hand, is the book in which these divergent stories must be dealt with and developed.
As most people are aware, it is almost always impossible to make a movie exactly mirror a book. There is much that reads well but does not film well. An example mentioned by John-Rhys Davies (Gimli the Dwarf) is that in the book of FOTR, Gimli asks Galadriel for a strand of hair from her head as a gift and she gives him three. That may read well, but imagine trying to film that. Zoom in as she plucks three hairs from her head and then hands them to Gimli? Doesn't make for a very nice scene, nor would it even be possible to SEE the hairs. In the extended version of the FOTR film they deal with it differently and leave it out of the theatrical version altogether.
In the book of TT, Frodo complains about the weight of the ring countless times and keeps stumbling because of it. Had they shown it in the movie any more than they did it would have just become annoying.
Here's a bit of a spoiler. In the book of TT, King Theoden's nephew, Eomer, and all of the Rohirrim, accompany the King and his people to Helm's Deep, along with Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli. Eomer fights alongside them at the battle of Helm's Deep and then at dawn Gandalf arrives on the crest of the hill with Erkenbrand of Westfold and all his men and turns the tide of the battle. In the movie, Eomer and the Rohirrim are banished from Rohan by Grima Wormtongue and ride away North. At dawn, after the battle of Helm's Deep has carried on all night, Gandalf arrives on the crest of the hill to save the day with Eomer and the Rohirrim. This may seem like a useless change from the book but it is not. In the book of TT, after showing up to help with the battle of Helm's Deep, Erkenbrand is a fairly minor character with not much time devoted to him, if any at all (he may play a part in the battle during ROTK but I can't quite remember). This change was simply a way of keeping the main storyline and events very similar to the book without having to take the time to introduce a brand new but minor character. Consider, this movie already had the task of introducing Gollum/Smeagol, Theoden, Eomer, Eowyn, Grima Wormtongue, Faramir, Treebeard and the Ents and explaining the Return of Gandalf. That's at least eight major characters . .. seven of them completely new. There simply would not be enough time or enough value in introducing such a character as Erkenbrand, hence PJ slightly adjusted the flow of events to put more light on one of the major characters.
As far as Aragorn and the so-called love stories . . . the only love story that is MEANT to be a love story is that of Arwen and Aragorn. Even this storyline - taken from the appendices - is meant to give us further insight to Aragorn and his past and his turmoil. The Aragorn/Arwen plot is not meant to provide a light quality to the movie or simply to attract people who may not be otherwise interested. It serves a purpose. It shows that even love, which in these types of stories (and hopefully in real life) can have the strongest ability to motivate us and keep us hoping has been darkened and soiled with doubt by the shadow of Mordor. The relationship between Aragorn and Eowyn is not a romance at all. Eowyn says early on that she fears a cage and having no chance or hope for valor. She sees the possibility of attaining these things at Aragorn's side. This is evidenced by the relationship she ends up in during ROTK. Neither of these storylines should leave us feeling warm and fuzzy, they should have an uncomfortable feeling to them.
This reviewer also claimed both FOTR and TT were badly directed and edited. I don't think I even need to respond to that comment. The actors did magnificent jobs and whose vision do you think they were carrying out. the LOTR movies have been two of the most stunning films I can remember without crossing the border to being just an excuse for CG effects.
I think that these movies are a credit to the books and could not have been done better. I praise PJ for his work and look forward to the ROTK movie with anticipation. Clearly it is possible for someone to love both the books and the movies . . . lest we forget that almost everybody who worked on the films were fans of Tolkien and had read the books numerous times.
Go see the movie and enjoy it!
Hope this wasn't too long :)