Why were they so vague about what the two towers were?

Why were they so vague about what the two towers were?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=_qE5FSG6K0Y
youtube.com/watch?v=1pId1L1ReSE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

In the movies it's Baradur and Isengard, in the book Tolkien wasn't definite

>Vague
>Tolkien wasn't definite

Are you both autistic?
What other towers could the title even be referring to?
Dol Guldur is not a valid answer

Cirith Ungol

also why were they so vague about who the Lord of the Rings was? Also, what were the rings?

>Loosely, any pair from a set of six towers in the story could plausibly fit the title: Cirith Ungol, Orthanc, Minas Tirith, Barad-dûr, Minas Morgul, and the Hornburg.

The rings were magic bitch tokens that Sauron had his gay lover forge for everybody

but it turns out the magic bitch tokens were shotgun collars like in that one Fallout game and so the hero of men cut off his hand so he couldn't press the button

the poster literally shows the two towers they are talking about. also: >youtube.com/watch?v=_qE5FSG6K0Y

why didn't the eagles just fly them to the two towers?

Saruman literally monologs about how the alliance of the two towers was indestructible while the camera pans from Isengard to Barad-dûr

idk but those Jedi movies should take notes from LOTR's titles

see

What do you expect from one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises though.

Seriously each episode following the boy hobbit and his fellows from Middle-Earth as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Christopher Tolkien vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; he made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for his father's estate. The LotR series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Tolkien's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that he has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of The Two Towers by the same JK Rowling. She wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading The Lord of the Rings at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read JK Rowling." And she was quite right. She was not being ironic. When you read "The Lord of the Rings" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

>tfw annoyed while watching this in the cinema when they were 2 hours in and hadn't even entered the first tower yet.

I'm sorry, but it just doesn't work in this context

>Tolkien wrote, "The Two Towers gets as near as possible to finding a title to cover the widely divergent Books 3 and 4; and can be left ambiguous." At this stage he planned to title the individual books. The proposed title for Book III was The Treason of Isengard. Book IV was titled The Journey of the Ringbearers or The Ring Goes East. The titles The Treason of Isengard and The Ring Goes East were used in the Millennium edition.

>In letters to Rayner Unwin Tolkien considered naming the two as Orthanc and Barad-dûr, Minas Tirith and Barad-dûr, or Orthanc and the Tower of Cirith Ungol. However, a month later he wrote a note published at the end of The Fellowship of the Ring and later drew a cover illustration, both of which identified the pair as Minas Morgul and Orthanc. In the illustration, Orthanc is shown as a black tower, three-horned, with the sign of the White Hand beside it; Minas Morgul is a white tower, with a thin waning moon above it, in reference to its original name, Minas Ithil, the Tower of the Rising Moon. Between the two towers a Nazgûl flies.

>"To stand against the might of Sauron and Sauron... and the union of the two towers"

Lets see, Sauron and Saruman, each occupy a tower. I wonder if it was Isengard and Baradur.

>went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."
god damn yanks

I don't see the alure of teh ring, it just looks like a normal ring to me

What about now

Wow! That's a big ring for me!

Who is "they"? In either the books or the movie we are told who the Lord of the Rings is.

really? then who is it? Even Frodo can't master the ring by the end, so not even the main character could be the Lord of the Ring!

Sauron you fucking idiot. Try paying attention to movies instead of browsing reddit on your phone.

Why is it called return of the king when sauron doesn't return?

if he was the lord then how come he wasn't invisible when he wears it in the beginning? he couldn't even use it's main power, how was he its lord?

>There are faggots who unironically don't understand what the ring is
It's ideology, plain and simple. The book describes the ring as "small and perfect". These two words are very important.
The non-vulgar definition of perfection is "something that is pure act". Everything in the universe either is - act - or can be - potency. For example, you are alive in act and dead in potency. The ring being perfect means that it can't be anything else.

Now, notice how everyone in possession of The Ring wants to twist the world into something that they deem the right thing? Galadriel wants to make Lothlorien beautiful and ever-lasting, Boromir wants to use The Ring as a weapon and Sam wants to make Mordor into a garden (kek).

The temptation of the One Ring is that it is a simple explanation for the world. A "small" and "perfect" definition of the reality. It's a critique of all the ideologies popping and trying to simplify the complexities of the world in simple terms and damned be the consequences and those who get in the way.
>Weapon for the warrior
>Kingdom for the queen
>Garden for the gardener

Frodo is resistant to The Ring because he is complacent and has no idealisms or desire to change the world. So is Sam and the rest of the Hobbits. It's not a simple lack of ambition, but rather an acceptance of reality instead of the will to oversimplify the world and force things to fit.

As a catholic, Tolkien drew inspiration from Chesterton and Orthodoxy is a notable inspiration for the concepts in the book. In the first chapter of the book, Chesterton openly discusses that madness is basically reasoning within a small amount of information and locking yourself away from the everything else until the point where you can't accept that these things exist and you alienate yourself from the rest of the world. Much like the One Ring, you get consumed by your delusion

t. Free-time philosophy reader

>J-j-j-jokes on you I was only pretending to be retarded
Last post you get troll.

I'll be honest I was obviously trolling for the most part, but why didn't the ring make Sauron invisible? I read the books but that was years ago.

>not posting the updated version

pretty good explanation, senpai

The ring shifts mortal beings into the wraith world. As a Maia Sauron already exists in both the seen and unseen world.

Oh my god, you are such a fucking retard. You think if you just wear the ring it makes you invisible? There are retarded kids who know better than you. Oh my fucking god, faggot. Listen, dipshit. The ring enhances your overall power. If gandalf or sauroman were to wear the ring, it would make them powerful as shit. Frodo and bilbo are just hobbits, they can't do shit, so it just makes them invisible by sending them into the wraith world, or the shadow realm or whatever the fuck they call it. If they were to wear it for too long, they would fade into the world and come under full control of sauron. But someone like tom bombadil is so powerful he couldn't give a shit about the ring, there's no temptation for him and nothing happens to him. If Sauron were to hold the ring, it would take the entire world's army just to have a shot at killing him.

Yawn

these to answers are very conflicting. I'm probably going with the first one.

Thanks, senpai.

>Free time philosophy reader
Please stop saying this. It's fucking cringy

They say the same thing. What do you think is conflicting?

>Now, notice how everyone in possession of The Ring wants to twist the world into something that they deem the right thing? Galadriel wants to make Lothlorien beautiful and ever-lasting, Boromir wants to use The Ring as a weapon and Sam wants to make Mordor into a garden (kek).
Good job naming 3 people 2 of which were never "in possession of The Ring"

one says that it's a matter of the persons desires, the other says that it just makes everyone invisible except for Maia.

It does both you moron

lol, yeah bro, that guy did a good job of being a god damn retard.

>the other says it just makes everyone invisible except for Maia.

That's not what it says. Sauron is the master of the ring, and has full control over it. Everyone else is subject to the ring's power. How much control the ring has over you is determined by how powerful you are. The ring shifts the hobbits in the shadow realm because they're weak. The ring does this because it wants to be found. There are lots of different types of power, and the ring is going to have a different effect on the wearer based on that.

how? says
>You think if you just wear the ring it makes you invisible? There are retarded kids who know better than you. Oh my fucking god, faggot. Listen, dipshit. The ring enhances your overall power. If gandalf or sauroman were to wear the ring, it would make them powerful as shit. Frodo and bilbo are just hobbits, they can't do shit, so it just makes them invisible by sending them into the wraith world, or the shadow realm or whatever

but says
>The ring shifts mortal beings into the wraith world. As a Maia Sauron already exists in both the seen and unseen world.

do you not see how those statements conflict?

>do you not see how those statements conflict?

No I don't. They say the same thing.

You are most welcome my esteemed colleague.

They were not, you weren't paying attention
youtube.com/watch?v=1pId1L1ReSE
Orthanc and Barad Dur

Oh daaaaaaamn

>Baneposting in Sup Forums tier
SOMEONE GET THIS HOTHEAD OUTTA HERE!

I'm still reading the first book i got for 50 cents.

it's funny how Tolkien ages Frodo 18 years in a paragraph and then will spend like a third of the book describing them walking from Bag End to Bree...partying and hanging out with elves, Tom Bombadil, Farmer Maggot, frodo's decoy house...and jack shit happens. a spooky ghost captures them and is instantly defeated...

Jackson was a fucking genius for omitting all this garbage, but it's instantly great again once they get to Bree.

I always thought it was the tower of samuran and the eye-sauron tower. Well, at least in the movie it's pretty clear.

But in the books its clear that Minas Tirith and Minas Morgul are the two towers as they face off against one another and both have minas (the evils word for tower/citadel) in their name

The eagles weren't just birds, they were some magic angel bullshit, and same reason gandalf cant just wrreck shit, they're constrained in what they can do by the LOTR 'god'.

That list is fucking awful

All books are paced brilliantly. The same pacing exists in the movies, but you obviously need to omit the majority of the books to achieve this. Doesn't take a genius to figure that out. You read many books, son?

>all plot holes are answered by "God did it"

LOTR apologists are the creationists of the literary world.

You don't need to own the One Ring to be tempted by it. Where did you get that idea from?
They were the ones I was discussing with a friend just yesterday, so they were the ones most fresh in my mind. (They are also the easiest to understand)

It's been a while since I last read the books, but let's see what I can get for Frodo.

He's burdened with the One Ring, but doesn't really want it and immediately hides it out of sight and actively pushes it to other people: Gandalf, Galadriel and Aragorn (I don't recall if it was movie only, tho). This is Frodo acknowledging that the world is bigger than himself, effectively reffusing to create his own world.

Then, during the Council, understanding that no one else has the strength of character he has, Frodo resigns to the duty of the bearer, but still actively reffuses to take over the Ring and only uses it out of necessity.

After escaping from Boromir, Frodo comes to his senses that the members of the Fellowship would try and take the Ring and use it, so he has to progress all by himself.

I really don't recall much of it afterwards. Frodo's relationship with Smeagol is based on the Ring and the fact that Frodo is its master. Since Gollum is enslaved to the ideology and Frodo owns that ideology, Gollum is, in a certain way, enslaved by Frodo.

As an analogy, imagine Sup Forums meeting Hitler personally and having what Sup Forums perceives as National Socialism twisted by what Hitler actually meant. E.g. Sup Forums hates muslims, but Hitler thought they were ok. So Sup Forums (Gollum) would try to get rid of Hitler (Frodo) and have the ideology.

Hope it helped. If thread is still up tomorrow I may go on, 'cause I'm off to bed.

Eh, I just don't want to misguide anyone into thinking I really know shit in depth. It's mostly a hobby for me and compared to some people I happen to know, It's quite shallow.

Thats literally the canon.
Read the silmarillion

>loving review of The Two Towers by the same JK Rowling. She wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading The Lord of the Rings at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read JK Rowling." And she was quite right. She was not being ironic. When you read "The Lord of the Rings" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

>Rowling
>Stephen King

Ya done goofed user. But desu that part made me chuckle more than the rest of the attempt/

It's canon in reality too. Read the bible.

>The film
Orthanc and Barad Dur. Saruman literally says this around the start of the film, just as he starts stripping apart Fangorn forest.
>the book
It's Orthanc and Cirith Ungol.

Femanon here

I really like this explanation.

>Sauron
>lives in black tower
>is evil

>Sauronman
>lives in black tower
>Gandalf is surprised when he turns out to be evil

>as a woman

Fuck off, lady

>You don't need to own the One Ring to be tempted by it.

Don't fucking try and shift the argument. YOU are the one who decided to say the word possession, and then listed 2 fucking characters that never possessed it.

He was wrong and now he is correcting, what's so wrong about that?

Why are you still entertaining this retard? He hasn't even read the books probably dude!

Because like every bullshitter he adds another lie, by claiming I had somewhere stated that only those that possessed the Ring were tempted by it, a blatant fucking lie designed purely to move attention away from his own bullshit.

...

Can I see your vag?

so who was the lord of the rings, anyway? it was all too vague

Tolkein said himself that Sam was the lord of the ring.

It was Sheev

He said that Sam was the true hero of the story, but I don't know if Tolkien ever said that Sam was the lord of the rings. Seeing as Sauron commissioned the making of the rings of power, it can be said that he was the Lord of the Rings

The books LITERALLY SAY Sauron is Lord of the Rings.

So does the movie!

All these fucking threads prove is there are legions of morons who don't pay attention to anything BUT are still more than happy to claim they understand it.

sure thing

...

>the Hornburg

Now that's reaching

...

sounds like how zizek describes every film

I agree, love the books but fellowship is a bit tough to get through in the beginning

I love LOTR threads

Is this bait?

>Don't forget Weathurrrtop and Amon Hurr

I guess Minas tirith doesn't really count as a tower.

Is the pic bai?
It has to be.

The Tower of Ecthelion though

>movie came out in 2002
>thinking that it's about any other towers than these

Why do you think it was so controversial?

Remember when the Ents Islamists attack Sauron's tower WTC 1

>Non can oppose the union of the two towers. The white wizard of isengard and the dark lord of Mordor.

Why lie?

No, it was in an interview, I remember. J.R.R Tolkien literally said "Sam was the true The Lord of the Rings Trilogy: Extended Edition on Blu-ray June 28th" and the interviewer was like jesus christ tolkien.

Jews

Nailed it

And will we ever know how many towers "he" was talking about.

P. S. Anyone here good enough to driver post in a middle earth style?

>catch 22 and notes are low tier

gr8 b8 m8 i r8 8/8

I never do my best, every day is a bad day. fuck you chinky chan

dont swear at jackie, you are making him sad

>Gatsby

One of those books you read when you are 15 years old and think, holy shit this is good. When you revisit it 10 years later you will just go "Meh".

I only read one good book in highschool (that they made us read) and it was of mice and men

Jackie no sad, just dissapoint.

>It's a Sup Forums or /lit/ argues over metaphorical towers episode

Holy fuck, it's symbolism, not literal.

Catch 22. Tried to read it only because I have the exact same name as the author,no I won't tell you my name, maybe Im jaded but I just didn't enjoy it.