Join 3,557 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


October 26, 2001
10:17 PM   Subscribe

When The Lord of the Rings series rolls around to Xmas 2002, will they have to change the name of the second episode from The Two Towers? Will Hollywood have settled down by then? Maybe it won't be a sensitive problem anymore. But what would be a good alternate title?
posted by crunchburger (37 comments total)

 
Preposterous.
posted by stevis at 10:19 PM on October 26, 2001


No. The name should remain.
posted by grabbingsand at 10:19 PM on October 26, 2001


Yes, they should!
posted by geoff. at 10:20 PM on October 26, 2001


Begin nasal documentary voice:

"Here we have the basic components of the MetaFilter conversation. Only one thing is missing... Wait... Here it comes! Shhhh..."

I think this is kind of irrelevant.

Actually I don't, but I fervently hope that it is/will be.
posted by j.edwards at 10:29 PM on October 26, 2001


No changing nothing. What's next, removing the words "World," "Trade" and "Center" from the English language? Feh.
posted by billder at 10:29 PM on October 26, 2001


Surely I'm not being naive in suggesting that most people would know that 'The Two Towers' doesn't refer to anything in New York?
posted by eoz at 10:31 PM on October 26, 2001


The title should stay, but that scene where Frodo and Gandalf discuss destroying the dark tower of Mordor by flying a plane into it should go.
posted by Doug at 10:41 PM on October 26, 2001


eoz, one can only hope. There seem to be many people who have never read Lord of the Rings.
posted by bjgeiger at 10:49 PM on October 26, 2001


Frankly, I'm hoping that the continuity of the books (but not the content) will be messed with in the movies.

Long sequences without other major characters (the Frodo/Sam vs Merry/Pippin bits) would kill the second film

So, the title could have to change.

Still hope it doesn't though

(speaking as a member of the Tolkein Society back in the eighties I hope I'm not offending anyone)
posted by thatwhichfalls at 11:10 PM on October 26, 2001


I'm deeply offended by that ...
posted by feelinglistless at 11:14 PM on October 26, 2001


(Joke)
posted by feelinglistless at 11:15 PM on October 26, 2001


Hey, what about Bach's?
posted by EngineBeak at 12:06 AM on October 27, 2001


How about these inoffensive alternate titles:

"The Middle Installment"

"The Myth of the Oliphant and Other Tolkenosities"

"Probably Not the Best of Three Stories About a Ring"

"Collateral Damage"
posted by scarabic at 1:23 AM on October 27, 2001


Okay, I heard that they're going to re-title it "The World Trade Center Disaster" Someone's gonna get fired over that one...
posted by j.edwards at 2:04 AM on October 27, 2001


There seem to be many people who have never read Lord of the Rings.

Yes, but surely the context (everything movie-related I've seen looks like rustic countryside) would give some idea away. One would hope so, anyway.

How about:
'That bit in between the actual plot'
'The Two-please-note-this-ISN'T-"twin" Towers'
'The part of the story where everyone seems to get lost'
as alternative titles?
posted by eoz at 2:13 AM on October 27, 2001


Hyper-sensitivity sucks - I give Hollywood 10-20 years tops before they make a Titanic style movie about it which breaks all box office records. Although you fiddle the ending so that at the last minute the hero, having played too much MS Flight Simulator, flies inbetween the two towers while the other plane bumps into one of the spaceships from independence day. Or something.

Pah, I'm still upset about Spiderman..

It'll probably just go out with a leaflet to insult our intelligences - kinda like the one I got before I saw AI..
posted by Mossy at 3:14 AM on October 27, 2001


Heh. Last week, BBC Radio had to precede a repeat of "The Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy" in which the "Guide"'s skyscraper offices are destroyed with the disclaimer that "the programme was recorded in 1978". After the Jo Moore affair, excessive po-facedness is better than appearing to be insensitive.
posted by holgate at 4:56 AM on October 27, 2001


Some people definitely need to toughen up.
posted by rushmc at 6:11 AM on October 27, 2001


I must resist the urge to make an "Attack of the Gollum Clones" crack...
posted by arco at 6:37 AM on October 27, 2001


i think we should tear down any towers that happen to be relatively close to other towers, as it reminds me of the world trade center.
posted by lotsofno at 6:59 AM on October 27, 2001


No changing nothing. What's next, removing the words "World," "Trade" and "Center" from the English language?

Those words are verboten. You have been reported to the authorities.

Heil!
posted by skallas at 7:30 AM on October 27, 2001


"i said blow the horn, BLOW IT. hey anyone know how this oliphant thing works."
posted by clavdivs at 7:33 AM on October 27, 2001


Gee, I actually like the Two Towers and don't see them as just filler.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 7:39 AM on October 27, 2001


Hrm, on further reflection I actually think it was a bad idea and probably a bad business move to change Spiderman. Controversy is good business for films and after a pretty much lame movie season I would be quite impressed if Hollywood dared to release a movie that pisses off some oversensitive weenies.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 8:11 AM on October 27, 2001


Orcs! Orcs! Orcs!
He's Not Dead, Even Though No One Really Thought He Was: The Gandalf Story
The Two Bungalows

posted by D at 9:05 AM on October 27, 2001


Whenever the topic of removing images and other references to unpleasant reminders of reality from films I wonder, what are the makers trying to avoid? Is it something that will destroy the suspension of disbelief needed to enjoy a work of fiction? Or are they just looking to avoid controversy? I think it's the latter, and it's kinda interesting how mega-corporations like Sony can be brow-beaten by bad-PR threats but will trample over copyright laws, etc. where they can. As for the Twin Towers, if people are not able to handle history by that point, then 2003 is going to be a pretty bleak year on the cultural landscape.
posted by holycola at 10:03 AM on October 27, 2001


A friend of mine just suggested Merry & Pippin Get Their Groove Back.
posted by darukaru at 11:29 AM on October 27, 2001


I think it's more than that, holycola. Spiderman is obviously supposed to be a fun, escapist film; the twin towers scene would, given events, undercut that tone. I certainly don't think anyone should go back and erase WTC from things like King Kong -- as on the SNL sketch -- but if I were the creator of an unreleased film that actually featured them in a major scene I'd want to reconsider in a big way.

I don't think they will change the title, and I also don't think they'll bother too many people. There might be a crank or two, but jeez, if the Italian-Americans can't stop The Sopranos ...
posted by dhartung at 12:11 PM on October 27, 2001


I'm curious about Metal Gear Solid 2. We know it featured terrorists loose in NYC with nuclear weapons (well, a nuclear enabled giant robot, but hey). How sensitive are they going to get? Will it be a scavenger hunt for a giant teddy bear, or something as thrillingly inane?

Just reminded of the MGS clone Syphon Filter, which was terrorists releasing a biochemical weapon in Washington DC...

Oh dear, my comments have nothing to do with this thread. Please ignore me. Carry on then...
posted by D at 3:33 PM on October 27, 2001


Gee, I actually like the Two Towers and don't see them as just filler.

How about 'The Not-Filler Bit' then?

(Actually, I really liked The Two Towers, as well. Sure Tolkien could've told the story in a book the length of the Hobbit, but it wouldn't have been the same...)
posted by eoz at 9:25 PM on October 27, 2001


Mossy, you know that scene from the Spiderman trailer was never going to be in the movie anyway, right? It was something hastily thrown together just for early advertising (and it showed).
posted by Potsy at 10:11 AM on October 28, 2001


In an ideal world, cinema would expand our imaginations about the world we live in. All the hyper-sensitivity in Hollywood just goes to show that it is, in fact, programmed to do the opposite.
posted by djacobs at 3:29 PM on October 28, 2001


"Probably Not the Best of Three Stories About a Ring"

Actually, some people think The Two Towers is the best of the three volumes (if you want to divide it up that way--Tolkien himself thought of The Lord of the Rings as one big book).
posted by straight at 12:33 PM on October 29, 2001


Actually, some people think The Two Towers is the best of the three volumes

Yer thinking of "The Empire Strikes Back".

The Two Completely Fictitious Towers
The Fellowship of the Ring II: More Tales of Walkin' and Singin'
I Sauron What You Did Last Summer
Dude, Where's My Ring?
posted by Shadowkeeper at 3:52 PM on October 29, 2001


Ringin' 2: Mordorian Boogaloo
posted by darukaru at 6:58 PM on October 29, 2001


Springtime for Sauron?
posted by kev23f at 7:26 AM on October 30, 2001


Whenever the topic of removing images and other references to unpleasant reminders of reality from films I wonder, what are the makers trying to avoid?

I think there's a legitimate artistic reason to remove images of the World Trade Center from movies that were filmed before September 11 but will be released afterwards. Unless a movie is set in a particular period, people perceive it as being set in the present day. There is no WTC after September 11, so it wouldn't be accurate to show them in the film. Also, unless the movie has something to do with either the WTC or the attacks, it would be distracting to have the towers in the movie.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:11 PM on November 2, 2001


« Older Software as conceptual art...  |  A Novel idea.... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments