Paceing

[Sween]

One of the major complaints that people had with FOTR was that it moved along at a thousand miles an hour (I personally liked this) this was in stark contrast with the books as they had a pretty steady ride till they got to Bree at least! Now as for Two Towers which as a book moves at pretty much breakneck speed (Aragorn and them dont stop running till half way through Return of the King) he felt the need to slow things down a lot.

There was a lot of inserted sceans and the whole way to helms deep probaly wasted a good hour of the movie without really doing anything. All in all things moved along slower when they should of got quicker. Now the same can be said of the whole 'day trip to Osgaliath' situation with Frodo and Sam this to me seemed to be pretty much only making up time and things for them to do whilst all the others were having a good old fight!

Now the later i have issues with mainly because there is far more intresting things that they could of been doing (the crossroads etc etc)

But the former is the one that really confuses me! Why has he felt the need to slow it down? Its more exciting to keep the tempo up. Its one of the most reference points in the books and tension building that they simply have no time and are pretty much nackred (well you would be after all the running round middle earth) but also for the next film there is a hell of a lot to do so the tempo is going to have to become rediclious. But at the same time we seem to have a lot of bits when Aragorn will be in the company of the king (lots of shots of him in the Rohan camp)

Can anyone with better knoledge of film making explain to me why in the first film he went from a breakneck speed to in the second a really slow pace?

[Black Breathalizer]

It's amazing how two people can view the same film and see things totally different. I thought TTT was just as 'up tempo' as FOTR was.

Also, the "inserted scenes" you mentioned are key to the telling of the tale. Everything Jackson did was a balance of two things: 1) the principals of good screenwriting; and 2) Tolkien's vision. Scenes like the warg attack, Aragorn's fall, and the trip to Osgiliath are excellent examples of how he successfully achieved this delicate balance.

You have every right to disagree with Jackson's choices. Just don't assume the filmmakers made their choices without a thorough understanding of Tolkien's themes and lengthy discussions about how best they could best illustrate them through film.

[Earniel]

I don't have much knowledge of film-making but I don't think TTT was any slower in pacing than FoTR, at least I didn't perceive it as much. Both movies seemed to be moving at a serious speed. It's true that the tempo is a lot higher than in the book, though I must say it does not bother me much, it seemed to work for the FoTR-movie. A higher tempo creates a bit of tension that can IMHO improve a movie. However I think it got a wee bit over-done in TTT. Personally I wouldn't have minded if they slowed some scenes down! The way the scenes shifted from Helm's Deep to the ents, to Osgiliath and back again nearly gave me a headache. I could hardly follow which battle I was watching. Very confusing and only half as enjoyable as it could have been.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Also, the "inserted scenes" you mentioned are key to the telling of the tale. Everything Jackson did was a balance of two things: 1) the principals of good screenwriting; and 2) Tolkien's vision. Scenes like the warg attack, Aragorn's fall, and the trip to Osgiliath are excellent examples of how he successfully achieved this delicate balance.
You're statements are so ridiculous they're just starting to make me laugh. :D

The reason why Jackson had so much fast paced action compared to the book - is because Jackson made an action movie. Jackson doesn't know how to make an intelligent movie. I do feel that TT was just as "fast" paced as FotR - it was just in a different way. With the massing of armies and preparation and various small battles leading up to Helms Deep. FotR should have been a slower pace and it should have been picking up as the story moves along.

Action movies - which Jackson made - have a much faster, in your face feel.

[mithrand1r]

Sween,

Overall, I thought the pacing was better in FOTR than TT.

This may have been more due to my eagerness of a new LOTR movie than anything else.

For me, the three hrs of FOTR went by without notice.

In TT there were points when I was wondering about the time.
[ie. Will Frodo & Sam get to the crossroads?,
Will Frodo see shelob?
How much time are we going to prepare for the battle of helms deep,
My how hasty are the ents :p (if you have the DVD view the Ent scenes at 2x speed. I think it is very funny.)]

In some respects, I expected the pacing of the movie to be quicker than the books. So much material to squeeze into the alloted time. (3 hours per film is still not quite enough time for LOTR. :p) ALthough I think that with 3 hours per film one could create a film adaptation of LOTR that is (1) enjoyable and (2) stays accurate to the spirit of LOTR if not completely accurate.

[Sheeana]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
The reason why Jackson had so much fast paced action compared to the book - is because Jackson made an action movie.

It probably has a lot to do with trying to fit in an enormous amount of events more than anything.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Sheeana
It probably has a lot to do with trying to fit in an enormous amount of events more than anything.
No - because he didn't have to extend the many action scenes out. He could have allowed the audience to catch their breath in FotR. He could have brought the pace down a bit and had more characterization and more of the emotional scenes like the Gift Giving. This would have slowed the movie down a bit.

[The Gaffer]

Originally posted by Sheeana
It probably has a lot to do with trying to fit in an enormous amount of events more than anything.
I'd agree with that as far as TTT goes. The fact that there are three quite separate plot lines running, in which the events had to stay more or less in synch, must've been a huge challenge.

My main criticism of pacing was in FOTR, which had some pointless action stuff inserted and could've benefited from including some more reflective moments like the gift scene.

[Sween]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
I'd agree with that as far as TTT goes. The fact that there are three quite separate plot lines running, in which the events had to stay more or less in synch, must've been a huge challenge.

My main criticism of pacing was in FOTR, which had some pointless action stuff inserted and could've benefited from including some more reflective moments like the gift scene.

But two towers is slow down compared to the books i would say he added an hours worth of material which simply was not there

[The Gaffer]

Sure. I reckon they decided early doors in the scripting process where they were going to break each film. Having opted for Helm's Deep as the end of TTT, I guess they wanted to build up the background to Saruman's war against Rohan a bit more so that it stood as a story in itself.

[Sween]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
Sure. I reckon they decided early doors in the scripting process where they were going to break each film. Having opted for Helm's Deep as the end of TTT, I guess they wanted to build up the background to Saruman's war against Rohan a bit more so that it stood as a story in itself.

Yeah but its allready well established in the book Saurman was drawing off the steength of Rohan to help Mordor in its attacks against Gondor!

I just found that Two Towers of maybe all the books is the fastest moving (well the start of returnof the king)! To me it just seemed to lack the dramatic we have no time tension of the book

[The Gaffer]

Originally posted by Sween
To me it just seemed to lack the dramatic we have no time tension of the book
Agreed. That's probably why I didn't enjoy it as much as FOTR.

Interestingly, my wife, who hasn't read the books, thought that TTT was better, and made more sense, than FOTR.

[Sheeana]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
My main criticism of pacing was in FOTR, which had some pointless action stuff inserted and could've benefited from including some more reflective moments like the gift scene.

Yep, I completely agree. Just as a preface, I don't like the movies (with JD on this one.) But I feel that the assumption that the pacing is off just because of the action is erroneous, so I was simply pointing it out.