Rating: 
Summary: Another Amazing Cinematic Experience by Peter Jackson
Review: The Two Towers (TTT) is an absolutely astounding chapter in Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy. In many ways it exceeds its predecessor, the Fellowship of the Ring (FOTR), and in some ways it doesn't succeed as well. In any case, there is no denying that it is another masterpiece of cinema that is setting a new standard for the action/adventure and fantasy genres, as well as setting a new example of quality and dedication for all movies in the future.The story of TTT was already recognized as a work of literary magnificence and incomparable imagination when it was published in book form decades ago, and that story has lost practically none of its potency in Peter Jackson's adaptation. The themes of good versus evil and hope versus despair are as strong as ever, and they shine in this movie. The director's cinematic brilliance really comes to bear when he actually improves upon the book's fairly weak characterization, and his masterful knowledge of storytelling is obvious with many of the things he changed from the book. Instead of bringing down the movie, many of the changes enhance its cinematic power, and Peter Jackson knows this. Unlike FOTR, however, some of the more major changes did seem to degrade the story rather than enhance it. The Arwen/Aragorn relationship is something that needed to be played on more, but the writers went too far and ended up beating it into the ground. The addition of Frodo and company taking a trip to Osgiliath served almost no purpose and visibly threw off the flow of the story. However, even these low points of the movie are handled excellently and are easily forgiven. The acting continued with the same expertise as FOTR. Elijah Wood handles Frodo's continued decent under the Ring's power with expertise, and performs equally well during those brief reprises of the old Frodo of the Shire. Sean Astin's acting is just as good if not better than in the previous movie. Viggo Mortensen continues to shine as Aragorn, Orlando Bloom is finally given some real screen time and manges to show us that he's really good at being an Elf, and John Rhys-Davies is brilliant as the gruff, gentle, warrior-comedian Dwarf Gimli. Miranda Otto (Eowyn) works her magic wonderfully ninety-percent of the time, only giving a slightly manufactured scene once. Her part in the Return of the King (ROTK) will be handled expertly if she showed us anything in this movie. Bernard Hill, much like Miranda, shows his skill wonderfully in this movie, though his grief at his fallen son felt contrived rather than sincere. But, to quote many other viewers, Gollum stole the show. Andy Serkis was set to the task of playing one of the deepest and most tortured characters ever written and he performs it beautifully. If only the Academy could see past the pixels, they might find Best Supporting Actor material. The action in TTT is one aspect of the movie that will undoubtedly set a new standard for cinematic battles in the coming years. Never before has an army looked so awe-inspiring, never has a battle of such immense proportions ever been attempted, and not once has it worked so well in such an epic way. Although FOTR's battles were more enjoyable for their small-scale, personal involvement with the characters, TTT's battles take the gargantuan, impersonal battles of war to a new level that will not disappoint. However, one personal battle in TTT does exceed all others; the battle of Gandalf versus the Balrog might be the most exhilarating battle ever put to film. The only downfall of any of the battles was a very obvious lack of realism during some parts that pulled the audience out of the movie at times, but it does not ruin the movie by any means. Howard Shore's score may not be as powerful as FOTR's all the time, but it definitely equals it in many parts and works extremely well as a second act. The Rohan theme was extremely emotional, and, barring any surprise pieces of brilliance, Gollum's Song deserves the Oscar for Best Song this year. The special effects of TTT are the best of any movie yet. Gollum is, without a doubt, the most believable CG-created character ever, almost matching Andy Serkis's believability. Many reviews have claimed that some of the CG shots of the Ents and Wargs were obviously CG, which is true, but they leave out the fact that the worst CG in TTT is better than most movies accomplish at their best. The computer-generated armies at Helm's Deep will change movie making, which is enough said about that. The biggest disappointment of TTT was the editing. It simply felt rushed in parts, and there were times when the cutting was obvious. The Extended Edition of TTT should fix this, but it was disappointing to see that TTT had to be hacked with a hatchet to fit within the three-hour time limit. The minor faults of TTT cannot compare to the grand vision that is the Lord of the Rings. Peter Jackson has done an excellent job of not only translating the book onto the movie screen, but he has made a movie that even non-Tolkien fans can enjoy supremely. What's even more exciting is the prospect that the whole of these movies will be greater than the sum of its parts. ROTK is going to complete one of the greatest achievements in film history, and it's almost painful to think of the one-year wait we have until we can finally see this great work complete.
Rating: 
Summary: Not Tolkien, Not Good, Behold the Vulcan-Elves
Review: Although the first installment did a good job following the books and capturing their mood, Two Towers does not. It is not a good movie. Specific points: 1. This movie drags, it is boring. Compared to the first, it has the appearance of being done on the cheap. 2. The elves, a major force in the books, are all wrong. The emotionless long-eared beings in this movie are just an army of fightin' robot Star Trek Vulcan elves, not Tolkien's complex creations. Lord of the Rings is well loved and well understood. It is puzzling how they could spend so much money creating these movies and get such an important component so wrong. 3. Where is Enya? Too costly? She made a major contribution toward getting the right feel in the first movie. This score sounds like the movie producers picked it up cheap as a reject from a "Columbo" made-for-t.v. movie. Worse, at the end, when the credits are rolling and everyone is sighing in relief you have to walk out of the theater listening to some kind of sultry torch song that would be much more at home closing a James Bond movie. 4. As the movie ignores Tolkien's plot (to its detriment), it is difficult to follow even if you have read Tolkien. This extra-long movie spends way too much time on one boring siege. 5. The special effects, siege and all, are nothing special. Gollum looks fake, sort of a "Roger Rabbit" cartoon flashback. This being said, the casting is still great and the actors do the best they can with the poor material. All in all one would get much more benefit and pleasure from staying home and reading, or re-reading, the books. Hopefully, watching this lousy adaptation won't sour too many people on Tolkien's great works. This is all kind of sad, if they had kept up the pace of the first movie it could have been a great series.
Rating: 
Summary: In a word...WHOA!
Review: I was expecting great things from this, the second part of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. I had seen the trailer and watched the behind-the-scenes special, but nothing prepared me for what the movie would really be like! I sat in the theater with my mouth agape! Peter Jackson outdid himself in this one!
The story begins with a flashback to Gandalf's epic battle with the demon (Fellowship of the Ring). We find Sam and Frodo continuing their journey to Mordor, pursued by Gollum. Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas are tracking the Orakai that have captured their friends and fellow adventurers, Pippen and Merry. Sauron and Saruman have joined forces and plot the destruction of man. I don't want to spoil the movie for those who have not seen it yet (or read the books), so I won't reveal any spoilers here. As the heroes continue on their journey, we meet and get to know new characters such as Wormtongue, Eowyn, Eomer, and King Theodon of Rohir and Faramir of Gondor. Gollum's role becomes more important as he agrees to lead Frodo and Sam into the land of Mordor.
Readers of the book will be pleased at the movie version of Gollum. This digital character is extremely advanced and believable as the multiple personality creature that craves The One Ring - his Precious. In fact, at times you feel sorry for the creature. At other times, you are actually fearful of him. The battle scenes are above par. Even better than those of the first installment. You'll find yourself on the edge of your seat! The special effects are so believable, that at times, you forget that some of this is actually CGI.
The length of the movie may deter some, but I actually heard some of the people in the theater complaining that they wanted MORE!! Be warned, there are some scenes in this movie that I, a fan of the novels, did not expect to see until the third installment. But I was not disappointed in the least. I can only imagine what wonders Peter Jackson will wow us with in The Return of the King!
Rating:
Summary: MediaGab Review
Review: Lord of the Rings starts out right where it left off. If you didn't see the first movie don't go thinking that you will be able to pick up on what happened. The movie doesn't start with some flashbacks to get you up to speed, or scrolling text like the Star Wars movies are known for. Lord of the Rings The Two Towers is the continuation of the Fellowship of the Rings that came out this same time last year. Two Towers is the second of three movies in the series that is based off of J.R.R. Tolkien's books. The movie has a great story that has developed over the two movies. This is what is driving people to the movie theaters. Since we last saw the fellowship the group had split up into three groups. We watch all three as they battle Sauron and try to destroy the ring before it fell into the wrong hands. The movie relies heavily on visual effects. For a majority of the movie the visual effects were outstanding. The huge battle at Rohan could not of been possible without the superb work of the special effects team. 10,000 troops storming the castle was really well done. Gollum was also a really well done CGI character that provide some humor at watching this character interact with his duel personalities. But the visual effects were also very poor in parts of the movie that made those parts look unreal. The scene in which the people of Rohan are migrating to the castle in which they can defend themselves they are met by a riding army of Org. The battling armies do not look to even be in the scene but rather floating on top of the picture. This scene was obviously an after thought of the visual effects team. I am sure they were totally consumed in the battle at Rohan. The movie ran around three hours so make sure you want to sit for that long. I found this movie to be very entertaining and I love the story line. I definably can't wait till next year to watch the third and final installment in this series.
Rating:
Summary: ALL HAIL THE TWO TOWERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Review: The two towers was definately a good film. It certainly surpassed the first film. The storyline was expertly duplicated from the original tolkien book. Sam and Frodo travel to Mordor in the company of the creature Gollum, which Frodo has apparently "tamed". Meanwhile Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli set out to find and rescue Merry and Pipin who were kidnapped at the end of the last movie. Upon the way they find Gandalf who was thought to have perished in the prequel. The Gandalf that they found was transformed and is no longer the waker Gandalf the Grey but is now the everpowerful Gandalf the white. the four travelers now set upon their quest for Gandalf had already found Merry and Pippin and had entrusted their well keeping to the tree-like creature (an ent) Treebeard. the four travelers set upon their journey to the kingdom of rohan. Their King,Theoden who was some what "possesed" by the dark wizard Saruman was cured by Gandalf. the Forces of Rohan then waged war between their Keep,(Helm's Deep) and saruman's forces. this battle was by far the most exciting part of the movie. the combination on stunning graphics and sword and arrow techniques make it by far the best of all movies since Gladiator. Meanwhile, while battle wages between the two superforces, Merry and Pippin convince thhe Ents to wage war against saruman. The ents succesfully dethrown saruman and seize his kingdom. The movie was a great one. You need not go to the cinema to see it's magnificence for i downloaded it on kazaa. but it you do decide to go to the cinema, be glad that you spent your money wiseley!!! Now go on and see the movie!!!
Try and wait for the return of the king. but read the book first.
Thanks for reading my review, do reccomend me!! thanx
Anarchy00
Rating:
Summary: I mean 4 and a 1/2 stars, but .. won't let me do that.
Review: This movie was so much better than FOTR. At least a whole star's worth! There is more emotion, and more concentration is dedicated to the individual characters. Yes, Peter Jackson changed some things from the book, a lot of things; but, generally speaking, I think he enhanced the movie. Sure, he added Arwen where she shouldn't have been, but being so little of a three-hour movie it's not as bad as it could have been. Besides, did she really affect anything? And, yes, little things along the way, including the Ent's reluctance to fight, were not as good as they could have been. Yet, nothing's perfect [And I wish people would stop calling me nothing! : )] and Jackson did do a good job on the important parts. Cut him some slack, will ya? However, I do agree that Faramir should not have been so like Boromir. That was one of the things I liked about the book -- that Faramir could sit down and be reasonable. That he could learn from his brother's shortcomings. Taking Frodo and Sam hostage -- and all the way into Gondor -- was just too much. Well, too much if you want the book on screen. For a separate story... it wasn't that bad a decision. It did let you see Frodo succumbing more to the ring, anyway. You wouldn't have seen so much a change in Frodo from his possession of the ring if this scene had not been added. So it did have its good parts. I almost forgot Gollum! He was so lifelike! But another mistake, if you can call it that, on Peter Jackson's part, was that he did not let Frodo even attempt to explain to Gollum why he "betrays" him later in the movie. Of course Gollum does not understand! More time should definitely have been devoted to this, or at least a reason why not. All taken into account, I think this movie had a better feel to it than FOTR -- more REAL. I appreciated there not being so many kooky camera angles as in the first movie.
Rating:
Summary: Not quite as good as the first, but more action...
Review: For one, it's nice to only have to wait 1 year for the sequel, unlike Star Wars flicks where we have to wait three years or so. This movie was unusual in that it began with a climax and did not go downhill from there. Admittedly, it has been quite some time (at least 10 years) since I read the novels, so it's a bit difficult to make accurate comparisons between the movie and the book, but I was greatly impressed nonetheless. The war scenes were remarkable, effects believable, and the story intriguing. The most impressive feature in the films so far has been the elves; this is the first time elves have appeared in movies being tall, courageous and showing the full splendor of their cities (those familiar with the "Dragonlance" novels can liken these more to the elves of Qualinesti); normally they are shown as more fairie-like, with odd, high-pitched voices and dwelling in trees.
Anyways, the film was not quite as involving as the first, perhaps due to the fact that the first had to reel the viewers in for the setup. As that's already been established, this film focused more on the battles for the survival in the human race of Middle-Earth. There were a few confusing parts in relating the different cities/kingdoms of humans to one another, but I guess that's due again to the fact that I haven't read the novels for a while. The tree-herders were very well done (their scene in the final sequence of the film was off the hook), and it would have been nice to see Gandalf call down some lightning or something more explosive in the last battle.. I assume there were a few characters missing, but Pete Jackson managed to stuff all he could into three hours and it turned out pretty well. My biggest complaint would be the same as that for the first film, as there's more fruity hobbit interaction at the end of the film. You kinda have to wonder about Frodo and Sam's relationship after their exchanged comments and endearing stares into one anothers' eyes- kinda makes you cringe. Granted, the hobbits are a friendly folk, but the scenes take it a bit far.
...
Rating:
Summary: I love all the lord of the rings movies
Review: This was the best movie I ever saw!!!!! This and ofcource the first lord of the rings movie. It has so much going on at the same moment it is never boring. It is very scary but still in some parts you want to cry. The ending is so annoying because you always want more. That is really smart so ofcource i just cant wait for the 3 lord of the rings. So as you can see I recommend this movie to EVERYBODY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rating: 
Summary: Dwarf-tastic, arse-numbing, 3 hour string of B-grade cliches
Review: Far too many people have prattled on about how this film (and its predecessor) are among the greatest in Cinema history. Utter, utter bunk. This is a great rainy Saturday afternoon matinee, and if all that was being claimed for it were that, I'd give it four or five stars. But no, there is a hard core of mediaeval battle revivalists (which, to my surprise, seems to comprise a large part of the film-going population) who say that with this series Peter Jackson has redefined cinema, and to them (well, you, I guess) I say he has done nothing of the kind, unless you call the cinematic equivalent of "I Love 1983" a re-definition of cinema. Which is my first beef: far from being a "triumph of the imagination", this has to be one of the least original films I've ever seen. Every scene is saturated in cliché. What perhaps ought to be respectful cap-doffing to celluloidal elders comes off as plain derivative - derivative, what's more, of B-Grade films: Gandalf is Ben Kenobi; the battle of Helm's Deep is the final scene of The Alamo; the ogres turning the treadmill to open the gates of Mordor ape Schwarzenegger's opening scene in Conan the Destroyer; the troll-like horsey things streaming across the uplands are straight out of Jurassic Park, the apocalyptic riders on their dinosaur-winged pterodactyls from that frightful Sinbad movie; the walking trees (walking trees? WALKING TREES?? Give me a break!) right out of Labryrinth. There is even a straight-faced impersonation of Alan Rickman's Sheriff of Nottingham from Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves, and one of those ugly bad dudes was so closely modelled on Nosferatu I'm not convinced it wasn't Max Schreck playing the part. There was nothing new, no agenda set, no trail blazed at all: What you have is Willow, Excalibur, Labyrinth, Krull, Highlander, Clash of the Titans, Conan the Barbarian, the pilot for Robin of Sherwood and the serious bits (!) from Monty Python and the Holy Grail rolled into one big bag, and given a CGI budget that would make third world nations weep. All of this with nothing more is still, of course, a pretty cool movie experience. It's grand, it's epic - they haven't made films with this sort of sweep for fifty years, so it's great to see - but Jackson's such a gifted director, and he's got a track record of making such perceptive, witty, moving pieces of cinema (see for example Heavenly Creatures and Forgotten Silver), that I think we're entitled to expect a little more. But that's all you get. Part of the problem, I think, is over-reverence. THIS MOVIE IS SO PO-FACED IT IS UNBELIEVABLE. Like it or not, the idea of walking tree-shepherds is patently potty. So Tolkein thought of it: fine, if you can't bring yourself to do some judicial editing, put it in. But do you need to keep a straight face about it? A film in this genre desperately needs the off-the-ball wit and timing of a Jim Henson - or a Peter Jackson, for that matter - it really needs comic relief. But Jackson dares not commit that sacrilege. The nearest he gets is a dwarf with a Brian Blessed fixation and a schizophrenic goblin thing with a ring complex, which you'll be glad to hear looks exactly like it sounds: i.e. a naked David Bowie. You CANNOT expect (well - should not be able to, at any rate) an audience to sit through three hours of pre-Raphaelite mush featuring elfin dialogue (helpfully subtitled!), possessed kings, wizards on white chargers, immortal fairies and earthy maidens, legions of ugly monsters (ten thousand strong, sirrah) and leading characters who have nary a finger laid on any of them in three hours of non-stop close-quarters battle, in which the enemy body count can be measured in thousands, without at least a knowing wink. But, even from Jackson, a knowing winker par excellence, there is none. All this effort, all this budget, all this talent, and what you get is a film which rests content on its surface thrills. The characters don't develop - the actors inject no personality or interpretation into their acting: the dialogue tells us that Frodo is becoming increasingly corrupted by the ring, but nothing in his actual performance does. Aragorn is the dullest hero-figure since Kevin Costner. And he never shaves, but his three day growth never grows. Christopher Lee is reduced to his stock in trade as a hammy evil-dude bit-part. Finally, at the end of this buttock-torturing instalment, we are no closer at all to the quest than we were at the beginning. There's a working definition of gratuitous, if ever there was one. Look, it's good, no doubt about that. Compared to Lara Croft, Tomb Raider or Battlefield Earth, it might seem like a work of genius. But in any context wider than that, it's just another sword and sorcery epic. And really, what is with those walking trees?
Rating:
Summary: TOLKIEN HAS PROBABLY TURNED OVER IN HIS GRAVE.....
Review: Peter Jackson has done some wonderful things with his making of "Fellowship of the Ring" amd some disgraceful things with the
"Two Towers". I understand not being able to have everything in the movie that is in the books. BUT, I feel rewriting parts of a masterpiece is
unforgivable. The escape to and from The Prancing Pony should not
have been touched, the ride to Rivendale should have been as in the book. (The
Extended Version is much better.) In the Two Towers it was unforgiveable for Jackson to have re-written the Chapters 4,5, and 6 of Book 4. He presents Faramir
falsely and destroys what Tolkien was trying to relate-that there
were some honorable men who would help Frodo and not try and steal the Ring. The movie would have been so much better if Jackson had just followed the books. Jackson's creation of Gollum and Treebeard was magnificent and he
he did a wonderful job with them. The movie is worth haveing all the same..
| 
