The Lord Of The Rings: The Two Tower Meaning And Ending Explaination 

The Two Towers is the second book in J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings trilogy, and it follows the adventures of Frodo Baggins, a hobbit living in Middle-earth, and his quest to destroy the One Ring. The ending of the Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers movie was widely criticized by fans.

Many people were unhappy with the ending and felt it didn’t have a satisfactory explanation. This article attempts to analyze the Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers Ending in detail and relates to what Tolkien intended.

The Meaning of the Title the Lord of the Rings: the Two Towers

The title relates to Barad-dûr and Orthanc, Sauron’s and Saruman’s respective strongholds in Mordor and Isengard. These two towers represent Tolkien’s two conceptions of evil in The Lord of the Rings. However, we also observe corruption and perversion, when evil is an internal force that individuals produce.

Sauron embodies the earlier view of evil as a necessary force in the cosmos. The Dark Lord’s wickedness physically spreads throughout Mordor and subsequently across Middle-earth. Tolkien never indicates that Sauron was originally a nice creature who got perverted—the Dark Lord is by nature wicked.

However, the wizard Saruman embodies the latter notion of evil. He was once a fine man, Gandalf’s commander. Saruman isn’t born wicked; he’s corrupted by conceit and ambition.

The Two Towers in Which These Monsters Live Reflect Their Distinct Wickedness.

Barad-dûr has always been wicked; Sauron constructed it and has used it to observe and corrupt Middle-earth from. But Orthanc existed long before Saruman. The ancient rulers of Gondor built Orthanc; as the narrator says, “long had it been beautiful.”

Orthanc only became corrupted when Saruman “slowly molded it to his changing goals.” Ironically, the narrator informs us that Orthanc was “naught, simply a small replica, a child’s model or a slave’s flattery of Barad-dûr.”

Tolkien indicates that human evil is readily conquered based on delusion and self-deception rather than fundamental or elemental evil. As we can see, defeating Saruman is simple, needing just Gandalf’s reprimand and Wormtongue’s slip. To defeat Sauron, the Ring must be destroyed.

The Meaning Of The Movie’s Main Characters

We can summarize the characters of “The Fellowship” in three terms, heroic individuals and icons, flawed humans who must make sacrifices for others, and immoral figures who do not actively oppose evil but provide a cautionary note.

The main hero of “The Lord of the Rings,” Frodo, is a doomed but strong and heroic person. Like Frodo, the movie’s main Superman (George Clooney) must complete his perilous journey from inaction to action by facing various kinds of trials as he attempts to save Middle Earth from destruction at Sauron’s hands.

The first step in defeating the corrupt “Daemons” is to become independent of them. Robert De Niro symbolizes this when he gives up his luxurious lifestyle in favor of help for the needy. For example, a character like Lord Voldemort (Djimon Hounsou) represents satanic forces that must be destroyed before they can be used to defeat them.

Voldemort possesses the powers of Sauron and Odins and is willing to work with evil talent agents like Wormtongue (Jamie Griffiths) to destroy Gandalf’s Ring mistreated humanity. Harry represents a young Frodo who must do what is right despite his corruption.

The movie’s three “Master Hand” cards can symbolize all kinds of imaginary beings and concepts like good, evil or dark intentions in order to challenge our views about different life experiences.

The most important lesson that can be learned from this movie is how each human being must choose their own path by which to succeed, whether it means a straight line or curve.

The Meaning Of The Movie’s Plot

While most movies in the fantasy genre tend to have a narrow focus on power struggles and violence, “The Lord of the Rings” features many personal stories for both heroes and villains that ultimately give meaning to its central theme.

In particular, events like Gandalf’s (Ian McKellen) self-sacrifice to protect Frodo (Elijah Wood) or Aragorn’s (Viggo Mortensen) trauma after his wife leaves him are crucial defining moments. Morty: Well, nobody knows what the shot is. I just hope we’ve got enough of them and that I’m making the right judgment of what’s important and what isn’t.

The key to this film is fundamental wholesome values rather than action scenes or heroic behavior that Hollywood has been traditionally used for separate movie plots with limited lengths.

For example, since “the Lord of the Rings” does not include exciting battle scenes or graphic depictions of violence, it leaves a valued space for deeper and more complex understanding.

The central message that the audience is taken away from the screen in “the Lord of the Rings,” an ethical implication derived from Gandalf’s words, basically illustrates: The small people like us were meant for the big things in life.

If you feel small and insignificant, look around once or twice and realize that it is certainly not somebody else’s fault that they are still there. In contrast, we have to pick up everything ourselves because our responsibility to others has been made obvious.

And what was The Ring without Frodo? It is simply nothing. And that means in the end, it has to be destroyed, if not by our hand, then certainly by someone else’s.

Where does this message come from, and why does it work so well with audiences, an audience for whom, after all, screenings of movies several times a year are as commonplace as TV and videos? In the “scène concrète” (“short scene”), thousands of viewers make an identification with this message that stays in their minds like an awakening.

Coincidentally, to get from film critic Thomas Elsaesser’s “The Lord of the Rings” is for many people what “2001: A Space Odyssey” was for viewers 40 years ago.

It has been said that “the Lord of the Rings,” based on a more mystical conception, would not be popular in Germany today.

However, this is doubtful: Apart from a few small rings of people that are formally proved to be manipulated and initiated by “Middle-Earth” itself after the destruction of The One Ring – particularly around hobbits, elves and dwarfs – only very distant connections with real-world phenomena.

The Meaning Of The Movie’s Message

The movie is a “clean” example of nostalgia in the Hitler era. Boundaries being loose, we meet individuals who once belonged to another world: elves from beyond the mists (cosmic), Old Men with misty eyes and names like Elrond or Galadriel.

The meaning of the movie’s message can be found in the movie’s ending. Frodo and Sam have gone to Mordor and brought the One Ring to Mount Doom.

They are confronted by Gollum, who tries to get the Ring for himself. However, Frodo fights him and stabs him with a knife. After this, he takes the Ring and throws it into Mount Doom. In this way, he destroys the Ring of Power forever.

“The Lord of the Rings” is about keeping and losing power, between good and evil. The fundamental choice in the story has to do with whether someone keeps their integrity or betrays it.” The last line of the movie is “the Ring was made for” you and me.” The protagonist, Frodo, chooses to throw it into “Mount Doom,” a place that ends an age. Thus the ending echoes the beginning.

After some time has passed, we can see the other Hobbits and Sam walking into Mordor. There, by a trick of fate or perhaps by divine intervention (see, e.g., reading [1], pp 169-170), Frodo has changed himself from Malbeth to Denethor – he is now “Denethor II,” the younger Son of Ecthelion in Gondor.

This might also have been a necessary measure for ending conflicts between members of his own race (the Edain) and their adversaries, the Númenóreans – even if it meant that Denethor II would go to his death.

The change of name and the move to another land had probably been added during production by Saul Zaentz (see [1], p 170, Appendix A) personally ordered because it further isolated Frodo from Sam and jeopardized Sam’s safety as well.

The Significance Of Towers In Lord Of The Rings

The story of Lord of the Rings, the first book in the series, is the story of Frodo Baggins and his quest to destroy the One Ring, a powerful ring that has the power to enslave all those who wear it.

The ring is guarded by Gollum, a creature that Frodo and his companions encounter on their journey. After a great struggle, Frodo succeeds in destroying the ring.

The Two Towers is the second book in the Lord of the Rings series. The story begins when Frodo and Sam arrive at the City of Minas Tirith, where they find Aragorn, heir to Isildur, banished.

The fellowship splits up–Eärnil tries to persuade Gandalf to send them with Merry and Pippin after helping Boromir and Faramir. Gandalf refuses, attempting to persuade Aragorn while claiming that the time has not yet come.

These arguments are different from The Return of the King, where they had a much more definitive address and outcome after the Battle at Helm’s Deep.

The fellowship is then defeated by Orcs, with Frodo and Sam being captured by them. After the Fellowship flies on to Bree earlier that year because of Sméagol’s betrayal, the orcs are hunting for him in order to take The Ring from their possession.

Lord Of The Rings: A Theory About The Eagle ‘Plot Hole.’

In the Lord of the Rings Appendices, author J.R.R. Tolkien refers to a “huge almost invisible eagle from which he sums up all that is visible in this direction – far as it can be seen at times.”

It has been argued by some fans—indeed by the actor who voiced Frodo Baggins—that this “eagle” was just a trick of the author’s, because as Tolkien himself points out in Appendix B: What about an eagle from which he sums up all that is visible or can see him mostly?

‘Hunted back from the mountains,’ Shelob, etc., and is invisible: only at one point its eye quivers, though it does see Frodo; but that may be a kind of optical illusion.)

It has been argued by others even that Tolkien conceived of the eagles’ “eye” as a trick. That is, what would seem to be coming from an eagle at such a distance might not be landing on Frodo?

Nonetheless, the “huge eagle” is more commonly cited as showing some prophetic foresight on Tolkien’s part. Douglas A. Anderson discusses this “possibility” in detail, as does Ian Holm’s characterization of that eagle as a sign from Tolkien himself in the book.

Ending Meaning

While the films do not indicate what happened to the Ring after Frodo inadvertently destroyed it in Mount Doom, it could be said that, as with Aragorn, “Embers” of The One Ring still exist.

Even connecting back to Saruman and Sauro, such a possibility is possible if reexamining such areas that the Fellowship may have failed to hold.

Then again, it could be argued if one does not believe there is a “Saruman” or “Sauron,” then The One Ring’s quest was in vain, and any remaining members are left as nothing of consequence.

But if the War of the Ring defeated Saruman and Sauron, then it would be another example that humans create a lasting grave. However, one decides to take The One Ring’s fate after “The Return of The King,” destruction is not what Tomes knows to be the case.

Whether or not part of The One Ring was lost in the destruction of Mount Doom, or if it still exists as embers remaining to carry on its legacy, is a matter only to be debated and pondered upon.

It could be contended that significant parts of The One Ring probably survived, but any evidence was lost in the fall. But if no embers were left to multiply and grow into more Rings, this may explain why none have re-emerged since Númenor’s destruction some 2200 years ago.

There is also a possibility that the moral message of good prevailing over evil has not been lost in any way, shape or form; and that the One Ring still exists as Embers deep within Middle-earth far beyond anything The Fellowship may have known about at Mount Doom, untouched by volcanic.

Conclusion

Lord of the Rings, The Two Towers Meaning and Ending Explaination. Frodo and Sam are two hobbits who live in Bree with their friend, Mr. Bilbo Baggins. Orcs attack them at the crossroads where they stay one night. When they wake up in the morning, they find that all their friends are missing and only Frodo has survived. He finds his way to Rivendell, where he meets Gandalf, the wizard who helps him destroy the ring of power, which Sauron made as a gift for his dark lord.

FAQs

What Are The Two Towers In Lord Of The Rings?

The Two Towers is the second book in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. It tells the story of Frodo Baggins and his quest to destroy the One Ring, a magical artifact with immense power.

The Two Towers is divided into two parts: The first part, The Quest for Erebor, takes place in the kingdom of Erebor and concerns Frodo’s attempt to gain possession of the legendary dwarf-made treasure Erebor.

What Happens At The End Of Lord Of The Rings Two Towers?

Gandalf leads Frodo back to Rivendell at the end of The Two Towers. There, Sam gives him his ring for safekeeping and assures him that he will never go near Mordor again since Sauron is dead now. “You are a Ring-bearer no longer.”

What Are The Two Towers Based On?

The Two Towers is based on the same name book and was written by J.R.R Tolkien between 1937-1953, published in 1954. Lord Of The Rings: Fellowship of The Ring (2001) Set forth to rescue seven companions from the evil of Mordor, a wizard who claims that one-third of all men ever to live – Elves.

Where Did Gandalf Go In The Two Towers?

In The Two Towers, it is mentioned that Gandalf has left Middle Earth because he had a role to play in the War of the Ring. He did not want anyone else getting hurt. In addition, if Sauron’s ring were destroyed, his army would be wiped out and Mordor.