Can die-hard Tolkien fans forgive Jackson his flights of fancy?

Rating: 9/10 (31 December 2002)

SPOILERS AHEAD
First let me say that with `Fellowship Of The Ring' Peter Jackson did what many people thought would be impossible: he made a movie that satisfied both die-hard Tolkien fans as well as the general movie-going public. Writing as one of those die-hard Tolkien fans, I forgave him the many omissions and occasional departures from the book: some annoying telescoping of events in the departure from the Shire, the total absence of Glorfindel, Arwen's incantation at the Ford (do I need to say that, in the book, Elrond is responsible for the wall of water and that Gandalf is responsible for the appearance of the water horses?), and Galadriel's `evil' moment to name but a few. (This list could have been longer, but the extended DVD has righted many wrongs.)
However, with `Two Towers', the omissions and departures took us too far from the original, something that Jackson was aware of when he said that this movie was the one most different to the books. I can forgive Jackson for pumping up the sexual tension wholly absent in Tolkien's rather staid love triangle. I can't forgive him for doing it at the expense of playing fast and loose with Arwen's immortality and Elrond's affability. Aragorn's trip over the cliff and subsequent `resurrection' was totally unnecessary - and too much like Gandalf's Moria dive - especially since we hadn't yet seen Aragorn's dramatic door-opening scene from the trailer. Merry and Pippin spent way too much of the film perched on Treebeard's shoulders - Treebeard has a house, remember, and the ent draught the hobbits drink there becomes somewhat important by the time of the Scouring of the Shire. Also, Treebeard should have known what was going on in his forest, rather than being `surprised' into battle by a rare clever moment on Pippin's part (and the other ents came out of the forest remarkably quickly, didn't they?) Faramir turned out to be too much like his brother. In fact, the whole capture of Frodo and Sam and their being taken to Osgiliath was too drawn out (unnecessary padding in a three hour movie?) I also felt he gave away too much of the winged Nazgul; in Tolkien's book, they are a distant dread not directly encountered until the battle of Gondor.
Having said all that, I feel that the general movie-going public will probably enjoy Jackson's version of `Two Towers' even more than `Fellowship Of The Ring' which was perceived as a bit slow. I, too, was stunned by the brilliantly conceived opening of `Two Towers'. And there were many moments of further brilliance throughout: the tension-building editing during the Great Chase (although I would have liked to have seen Merry and Pippin's reaction to seeing Gandalf - on the extended DVD perhaps?); the opening of the Black Gate; Legolas mounting Gimli's horse mid-charge; the whole of the Helm's Deep battle scene, especially Theoden's last charge and Jackson's own spear-hurling cameo (although I would have liked to have seen more of Legolas' and Gimli's competition - on the extended DVD?); the oliphaunts; and the highlight of the entire movie: the ents destruction of Isengard. All in all, that is enough for me to give the movie a 9 out of 10 rating despite all my previous negativity. Furthermore, `Return of the King' will be a better movie than it might have been, given what remains of Tolkien's second book left for the next movie. So in the end, with a 10 out of 10 `Fellowship Of The Ring' and (I'll go out on a limb here) a 10 out of 10 `Return of the King', I'm sure die-hard fans will well and truly forgive Peter Jackson his flights of fancy in `Two Towers'.