Rating: 
Summary: Absolutely Wonderful
Review: First of all, I am very disappointed in coming to this site, to find the majority of the reviewers reviewing the movie before it was even released...However, I am not disappointed in the latest Lord of the Rings movie! Instead of a dialogue by Galadriel, as in the first movie, the movie picks right up where the first one left off, like you went out to go to the bathroom or something, and came back in. I will not give spoilers out, but if you are a reader of the books, like me, the movie is still true to the book. However, be warned - not 100% to the book, but it is fine anyway. The Battle of Helm's Deep is phenomenal, and the scenery is perfect, but what stunned me the most was Gollum, without a doubt. At first, I assumed this character would be some computerized figure, like it is. However, he is so REAL! Andy Serkis and Peter Jackson did a fantastic job making Gollum as lifelike as possible. My advice to you is, go see the movie - it is even better than the first, with a better story line, even better scenery, and some much needed laughs, provided by Gimli. Go see this movie as soon as possible!
Rating: 
Summary: Uninitiated Moviegoers Rejoice, Tolkien Fans Beware
Review: The second installment of the LOTR Trilogy, "The Two Towers", is a visual epic, a glorified realization of Tolkien's Middle Earth. The film is bathed in breathtakingly beautiful locales and sets, and Peter Jackson has created a perfect marriage of models and computer animation- visually, "TT" is a perfect representation of Tolkien's in-depth descriptions. "TT" is the one of the most visually impressive movies ever made, easily putting to shame the last two Star Wars films, with its highly original production and extensive use of models. The wow-factor of the film certainly transcends the first film by bounds and leaps, but what the movie lacks in comparison to "Fellowship" is the most important thing: heart. It's tough to criticize this film without being drowned out by the choirs of praise, but readers of the book should not be afraid to draw comparisons. When a film is based on a book, the most important thing the film needs is the spirit of the book, even if the director has taken liberties with the story. "The Two Towers" picks up where "Fellowship" left off: the group is broken, Frodo and Sam are on their way to Mordor, Merry and Pippin are kidnapped by the Uruk-Hai and are being taken westward to Isengard, and Legolas, Gimli, and Aragorn are going to track those Uruk-Hai. The most significant locale in "TT" is the plains of Rohan, a sort of rustic lowlands sprinkled with golden grass, and a backdrop of huge mountains, wherein the sort of Viking/Norse culture comes under impending doom from Saruman's massive army of orcs. Viewers will see Frodo and Sam venture through The Dead Marshes, parts of Ithilien, and ending outside the Mountains of Shadow (fans of the book will be dissappointed to find out that they will have to wait until next December to see what Shelob looks like). There is Merry and Pippin escaping into the custody of Treebeard the Ent, in the forest of Fangorn. Gandalf the Grey returns as Gandalf the White, with greater power and purpose. One of the highlights of the film is the character Gollum, the most convincing computer-generated character I've ever seen. Andy Serkis performed a lot of Gollum's parts on the set, and they simply animated Gollum over Andy's performance. Gollum is fairly accurate to the story, particularly in a preternaturally eerie sequence where we see the schizophrenic Gollum talking to himself in the middle of the night; repetitive camera angles emphasize the duality of the situation and it almost seems as if there are two Gollums defying each other. It is a fine example of Jackson's skill with the camera. "The Fellowship of the Ring", particularly the extended edition, was a straightforward movie which clearly centered around developed, likeable characters, and Jackson was able to maintain a respectable air of the true spirit of the books. Unfortunately, the adventurous aspect of "The Two Towers" is reduced to the conventions of a modern action movie; the characters are no longer the central focus of the narrative but, rather, a bombastic display of visual effects. Of course, the visual impact of the film is undeniable- you won't be able to close your mouth until the movie is over. But compared to the extended edition of "Fellowship", the characters in "The Two Towers" are mostly stripped of engaging dialogue and forced to endure a more dry, utilitarian script, to make way for the biggest heroes of the film, which are the visual effects and the hack n' slash. The fighting is exaggerated, which probably consumes half of the three-hour film; the characters Legolas, Gimli, and Aragorn, for example, are no longer portrayed as valiant, skilled fighters defending the hobbits on Amon Hen, but instead as merely suicidal barbarians revelling in the fight itself. Legolas riding on a shield down a staircase, Aragorn tossing Gimli into a throng of orcs, Gandalf repeatedly stabbing the Balrog with his sword during their plummet... the gung-ho antics are downright annoying, and they detract from what is otherwise one of the greatest battle scenes ever created on film. It's too bad that Peter Jackson didn't have more faith in the audience, occasionally resorting to jokes and ridiculous stunts that would have startled the gentle medievalist Tolkien. Helm's Deep is one of the darkest hours of the book, and need not be overly laden with half-wit attempts to get a rise out of an already entertained audience. At the center of any great movie is that primally appealling human story, facilitated by great characters who inspire affection, and ultimately the viewer identifies with them- the characters should be involving. When the director walks the dangerous line of sacrificing those things simply for "pacing" reasons, the movie risks losing its soul and its enduring value. "The Two Towers" is a fantastic movie, but I am certain that two years down the road the extended edition of "Fellowship of the Ring" will be regarded as the superior film, particularly by fans of the books. I anxiously wait to see what Jackson has planned for the extended edition of "The Two Towers", because the extended "Fellowship" worked wonders for the movie in ways that I didn't anticipate. Either way, "The Two Towers" will probably turn out to be more popular than the first film, more of an audience-pleaser, but hasn't Peter Jackson strayed a little too far from the original purpose of the story? If Tolkien wanted to write about a race of supermen, he would have written a Middle-Earth version of "Conan the Barbarian". The biggest heroes in the trilogy are the hobbits- modest little people whom are able to muster the strength needed to save Middle-Earth. People may argue "what works in the book may not work on film" or "Jackson did it better than most directors could", but it's not our job to be defeatists and simply find a reason to accept what we're given on screen. The LOTR is an enchanting and highly unique work of literature, and it didn't earn its renown simply because of sword-play and explosions.
Rating:
Summary: this year's must see!!!!!!!!!!
Review: this is by far the goodest movie i seen in a long time. i loved it so much cause the acting was good and the action scenes were terrific. it is a wonderful follow up to the masterpiece the fellowship of the rings. i was blown away by the 2 towers because sequels are usually not as good as the first movie, but this one really was. I loved the 2 towers. it was good.
Rating:
Summary: "Grand, Sweeping, Middle Earthshaking Action!"
Review: Gollum steals the movie. That said, here's the least you need to know. The Two Towers is more sweeping in cinematography, and darker in plot than was Fellowship of the Ring. But we knew that going in. Is it as good as the first film? Yes. Did I enjoy it more? No. Perhaps Fellowship provided more the joy of discovery. Towers provides overt, uncompromising, Middle Earthshaking action. Orlando Bloom (Legolas) will once again steal the hearts of teenage girls, however the finest performance (other than Gollum) comes from Brad Dourif as Grima Wormtongue. Though not a large part, his portrayal is superb nonetheless. Gimli the dwarf is much more entertaining in this second installment, and the humor of John Rhys-Davies ("...toss me!") is more elaborated. Elijah Wood continues to do a quality job as Frodo, the Shireling hobbit beginning to feel the weight of the One Ring's corrupting influence. One silly inclusion in the film is Legolas' skateboarding down the Helm's Deep ramp while shooting Orcs. Most of the special effects in Two Towers however, are nothing short of spectacular. Gollum is as real as computer graphics can create, although the Wargs were somewhat disappointing. The Oliphants-though featured only briefly, are quite good, and the Ents are even better. Their hurling of the great stones in the spectacular flood destruction conclusion is a highlight, though watching them lumber across Fanghorn Forest brought flashbacks of Jurassic Park. The Battle of Helm's Deep is as good as advertised, however I somehow thought it would take up a bigger part of the film. No complaints though-it is Middle Earthshaking to say the least. Especially welcome are the numerous foreboding glimpses of Mount Doom where the story concludes in the final chapter, and the eerie futuristic death of Aragorn is captivating. Tolkien's passion for religious themes pervade the story, and knowledgeable Bible students will easily spot them. The two natures of everyman (Gollum), as described in Romans 7, and the deceit of unwise council (Wormtongue) are primary examples. The arrival of the resurrected Gandalf (with a 'new name') from the east, riding a white horse followed by a great host, is an overt parallel to the return of Christ at Armageddon. So good is the concluding battle in fact, that Helm's Deep seems to be Armageddon, only by another name. In addition to the obvious resurrection theme, the story exemplifies for us the importance of valuing good for the sake of good (as Sam tells Frodo), and makes us recognize that every creature of God (even Gollum) has some redemptive merit. "I have to help him, Sam, because I have to believe he can come back", says Frodo of the most pathetic and pitiful creature ever to grace a silver screen. (Parents, be advised that Gollum may unnerve small children.) The limits of tolerance (evil must be seen for what it is and destroyed) become immediately relevant to America's fight against terrorism. Environmental awareness is also portrayed as Treebeard references Saruman's "mind of metal". "The old world will burn in the fires of industry. The forests will fall", gloats the evil sorcerer. Finally, the theme of self-sacrifice is not to be overlooked in Two Towers. Tolkien's world is full of characters who give up something precious. Frodo gives up his chance to possess the ring; Arwen--her immortality, for Aragorn, and Sam risks his life Frodo. Yes, computer-generated graphics they may be, but along with the grand and sweeping cinematography across the beautiful landscapes of New Zealand, special effects make The Two Towers a bona fide new-style epic. Pity we must wait a year to watch good ultimately triumph over the shadows of darkness, best articulated by Sam when he tells Frodo, "In the end, it's only a passing thing, this darkness. ... There's some good in this world, and it's worth fighting for." A conclusion worth waiting for, and just as importantly-we will finally see the Shelob!
Rating:
Summary: An impressing installment of the saga
Review: The Two Towers is the second instalment in the LOTR trilogy of the Tolkien classic. The story continues with the quest in the first movie, but it just gets darker. The first movie we saw the light and the dark in a very discreet manner, but in Two Towers, everyone is in the state of internal struggling. Gollum, the CG character acted by a real actor has more coverage in this second movie and the description of its struggling between the good and the evil is very vivid and heart throbbing. Peter Jackson surely has put in a lot of effort to bring Gollum to life. Frodo is now struggling with the ring that he bears. His mission is to destroy the ring in the fires of Mordor, but at the same time the ring is fighting its will to survive by trying to get control of the ring bearer and seduce him to the dark side. Elijah Wood gave a promising performance as Frodo, though Aragon and Legolas might still be stealing the show a bit. Aragon is now facing the dilemmas of yielding himself to the fate or grip hold to his heart?s resistance. He still chose to fight, but try to avoid the fate as the heir to the incomplete mission of destroying the evil. Legolas tasted the death of his elvish allies and fought with pain in the battle. Viggo Mortensen and Orlando Bloom once again brought these two characters into real life. We can feel the existence of these roles through them. Liv Tyler, Cate Blanchette and Hugo Weaving all have short appearances in this second movie, in which they were not originally in the book. Their parts are mainly to finish off the unfunished plot in the first movie, so that the two movies would be weaved together in a tighter manner. Miranda Otto?s did well as Eowyn the human princess. Her hidden emotions for Aragon were well expressed. Despite she knows that Aragon?s heart is with Arwen, she still tried to do her best to care for Aragon, without the expectation of getting anything in return. She is a well done character but could be sterner and strong, for this was one of the major differences between Arwen and Ewoyn that made Aragon feels something for Eowyn. David Wenham as Faramir did not really receive a lot of attention in the movie, but he is a well known Australian actor, so he could probably receive more attention in Australia with his good performance as Faramir. Without doubt, Ian McKellen gave a spectacular performance as Gandalf the White and it is just an icon of the whole saga. People would expect and enjoy his company throughout the movie. Christopher Lee as Sauraman did not have as much part as the first movie, but it is a good break and wash away form his similar and confusing role as Count Dukoo in Episode II of the Star Wars saga. One thing to be mentioned is that the story of the second movie has quite a bit of change in the plot. Die hard Tolkien fans might find this a bit offended. Basically the whole story is still there, the plot is the same plot, but in some of the details, things were swapped around to produce a more dramatic effect on the movie screen. The whole movie was really well done, and it seems it is more breathtaking than the first movie. However, if people are looking for a real original reproduction on the screen, that could be disappointing for them. The special effects are great and the sceneries are spectacular. No wonder why in my friend?s recent trip to New Zealand, they actually brought them to the location of the movie. This is definitely a good choice for all movie goers, no matter you have read the book or not.
Rating:
Summary: Two Towers Outdoes my expectations
Review: My husband has been waiting all year for this movie. After seeing the making-of dvd's, I got hooked. I actually watch Fellowship without him now. So when Two Towers came out, of course I wanted to go. I just didn't realize how powerful the movie would be. It is better than the first, tremendous, and I was on the edge of my seat for the whole 3 hours. I honestly was not ready for it to end.
The battle is breathtaking, especially because of all the emotions involoved with all the different characters. I was overwhelmed by these men who clung to a glimmer of hope, and kept going and going, even when swamped in a hopeless situation.
And of course the comeraderie of Aragorn, Gimli, and all the rest is what keeps it real and makes this one special movie worth watching. I want to see it again!
Rating:
Summary: An epic that lives up to its advance press
Review: I've seen The Two Towers twice since its arrival in the theaters, and believe it to be better than part 1. Part 1, excellent as it was, is an introduction of characters and milieu, the terrain rising toward the story that lay ahead. This second installment ascends to the plateau and delivers a Romantic vision of epic proportions. It equals in sweep, gravity and visual and emotional impact any epic tale that has ever been put on film. For once, something hyped and oversold lives up to all the claims made for it by waiting fans and the films makers. Please understand, I am not a Tolkienite. I have no vested interest in selling this series. But take the word of an unbiased viewer: it IS an awe-inspiring, frightening, sad, stirring, funny film. It's about hope, faith, love and obsession. It is a film that makes you CARE. For that alone, it's a treasure.
Rating:
Summary: "At the turn of the tide."
Review: "The Two Towers" is the second J.R.R. Tolkien novel in the trilogy "Lord of the Rings," and this is the second film in the film series by director Peter Jackson. The film picks up exactly where the first film "The Fellowship of the Ring" ended and follows three groups which formed from the original splintered Fellowship. Perry Took and Merry Brandybuck have been captured by Orcs who are under strict orders to return the Hobbits--alive to Saruman, the evil wizard who imagines he can ally himself with the Dark Lord and who is also responsible for the propagation of the Orcs.
Legolas, Gimli, and Aragorn are searching for their Hobbit friends, Perry and Merry. Their quest leads them to the Rohan lands where further adventures await them as they meet their destiny in the history of Middle-Earth. And the last two travellers from the original fellowship are Frodo Baggins, the Ring Bearer, and Samwise Gamgee, Frodo's sidekick whose unflinching loyalty is put to the test as they approach the Lands of Mordor. Director Peter Jackson's early horror film experience is evident once again. The Orcs are at once horrific and an aberration in creation. The battle of Helm's Gate has to be one of the most incredible battle sequences in film that I have ever seen. The battle--which made me think of the storming of a medieval castle--was stirring, dreadful, and magnificent. Viggio Mortensen as Aragorn is the perfect heroic leader who quietly takes the helm from Theoden, the weak King of Rohan. Before seeing the film, I wondered just how the Ents would appear, and they too were perfect. However, my greatest praise in this spectacular film is reserved for the creation of Gollum. His hideous metamorphosis from what we can imagine was once Smeagol, and is now Gollum--is suffused with pity--pity that Frodo shares and which Sam cannot understand, and so the bond between Frodo and Gollum grows. Gollum's physical repugnance is blended with the insane and conflicted conversations he holds with himself. These scenes with Gollum were, for me, anyway, some of the best in the film. I would highly recommend that you read the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy and see the first film before going to see this film. I heard many disappointed film attendees asking "what was that all about?" as they left the cinema. Others even left halfway through the film, and that's a shame.
Rating:
Summary: "The Two Towers" minus the book's two conclusions
Review: I cannot help but be disappointed in "The Two Towers," although I recognize the problem is that J.R.R. Tolkien's middle volume of "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy has an inherent flaw. Tolkien deal with the journey of Frodo and Sam with the Ring in Book Four, while Book Three dealt with the other former members of the Fellowship (ironically, I remember being unhappy with this arrangement when I read the book, wondering when we were getting back to Frodo). But a major motion picture cannot divide the story into separate halves like this. Instead, the focus is on four groups comprising the former Fellowship of th Ring, which requires the film to jump back and forth between (a) Frodo and Sam trying to make they way to Mordor, now in the company of Gollum; (b) Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli helping with the defense of Helm's Deep in the land of Rohan; (c) Merry and Pippin in the company of Treebeard the Ent; and (d) Gandalf the White working behind the scenes. That last one is a minor aspect of the film and Ian McKellan will not receive a second nomination for playing Gandalf next year because he has precious little to do in this film. He is not alone in this regard as Saruman, Elrond, Arwen, and Galadriel have even less screen time in the second film, mainly because we now have the new characters of Théoden, Éowyn, Éomer, Gríma Wormtongue, Faramir, and Gollum to work into the narrative. The centerpiece of the film is the battle at Helm's Deep, but the narrative structure of the film requires Jackson to cut away time and time again to the other major plot threads, which works to the disadvantage of all three storylines. One of the strengths of the film is Gollum. In reading Tolkien's works and seeing some of the animated versions of these stories, I have never felt any sympathy for Gollum. However, that certainly was not the case in this film. Andy Serkis' physical performance has been replaced by computer technology, but his voice conveys the duality of Gollum/Smeagol, who argues with himself over what to do about his Master and his precious ring. The computer-generated character is markedly better than Jar Jar Binks and Dobby, but it is Serkis vocal work that maintains the illusion of reality more than anything else. My favorite scene in the Trilogy involves Éowyn during the battle of the Pellennor Fields, and I liked how that was set up with Miranda Otto's character in this film, although for the second half she is reduced to looking at Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) with wide eyes while he pines for Arwen (Liv Tyler). Merry and Pippin no longer work as the film's comic relief, although they spend most of the film riding around on Treebeard, which also sets up the stage for what will happen in "The Return of the King." Now it is Gimli the dwarf that provides almost all of the film's comic relief, but at least John Rhys-Davies gets more action this time around as well. Bernard Hill as Théoden, King of Rohan, makes the best impression of the new members to the cast of characters. However, Frodo (Elisha Wood) is now reduced to looking worried and haggard, and he is supposed to be the heart of the storm. If anyone, it is Samwise (Sean Austin) who exhibits growth as a character, setting him up as well for what is to come to pass. That is probably the best way of describing this film: setting up what is to happen in the third and final film. This middle film actually covers less of the Trilogy seeing as how it begins a couple of chapters into Tolkien's novel and ends stops a few chapters short of the end (of both books), which will probably surprise and disappoint many fans (certainly Tolkien's ending would make for a better ending). The title is meant to suggest the efforts of Isengard and Minas Morgul to destroy the world of men, but the efforts of Saruman's minions are more prominent than those of Sauron. Yet with all the cutting back and forth this idea is probably lost on the uninitiated, especially since it stops short of the confrontation between Gandalf and Saruman that ends Book Three. I think few if any fans of "The Lord of the Rings" will find reasonable grounds to consider "The Two Towers" to be superior to "The Fellowship of the Ring," but I do not think any sense of disappointment will ultimately prove enough to stop anyone from seeing "The Return of the King."
Rating:
Summary: A New Standard In Filmmaking Excellence
Review: It's hard to know where to begin in articulating a coherent summary of so spectacular an epic as Peter Jackson's rendering of Tolkein's masterpiece. Perhaps the most incisive comment I can make is that, having been a fan of "The Lord of the Rings" since I first read the trilogy nearly 35 years ago, I'm impressed by Jackson's fidelity to the spirit of the original literary work. "The Two Towers" is a very different kind of film than its predecessor. Don't expect the intimacy of "The Fellowship of the Ring"; the evolution of the story precludes it. The dissolution of the Fellowship scattered the principal characters of the first film into three distinct sub-plots: Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd), whose capture by the Uruk-Hai takes them into Fangorn Forest and their ultimate influence on the fate of Saruman (Christopher Lee); Legolas (Orlando Bloom), Gimli (John Rhys-Davies), and Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), who re-unite with a resurrected Gandalf (Ian McKellan) in the climactic battle of Helm's Deep; and Frodo (Elijah Wood) & Sam (Sean Astin), who continue their quest to destroy the Ring at Orodruin (ably played by Mount Doom) in Mordor. That's a lot of threads to weave into the overall tapestry of the story, and it necessarily calls for some fairly abrupt and rapid scene changes. The action is so fast-paced that you will barely have time to catch your breath. One of the most personally meaningful aspects of the film -- and so far, it has been true of both "The Fellowship of the Ring" and "The Two Towers" -- is Jackson's uncompromising adherence to Tolkein's vision of the timelessness of the story itself. The author was determined NOT to write a story that served as an allegory for any of the current events of his time, but rather hoped to address much broader issues that are rooted in the fundamentals of human nature. In so doing, the trilogy has remained relevant to the human condition in a way that transcends nationalities, ethnicities, and the various idiosyncratic cultural zeitgeists of any of the historical periods it has spanned. I find real personal relevance in Aragorn's struggle with his own destiny. It's not a predetermined kind of destiny, as in "fate", but rather the self-determined destiny of one who follows his heart and his own integrity. Ditto for Eowyn (Miranda Otto), whose struggle to fulfill her desire for valor in the service of good is established in "The Two Towers", and will culminate in the final installment, "The Return of the King". But Jackson's triumph runs much deeper than his artistry in character development; many great films share that characteristic. It is his mastery in the use of surpassing technological innovation as an aid in the storytelling rather than as an end in itself that raises the bar for all subsequent films. His combination of digital, fabricated, and natural scenery in creating the world of Middle Earth is simply breathtaking. The battle scenes are terrifying without being overwhelming in their reliance on gratuitous violence or gruesome bloodshed. [I will allow my daughters (8 and 12 years of age) to watch the films, and I am probably more protective of their sensibilities than most parents I know.] And Jackson's creation of the creature Gollum (Andy Serkis) is without equal or precedent in filmmaking history. Gollum is more than simply "believable"; he is real. His role in the story is pivotal, and it was Jackson's test of fire to create an all-digital character whose range of expression and movement could carry such an important part in the story. It is a masterpiece of moviemaking art. It will seem incomprehensible to the uninitiated that my only lament about the three-hour film is that it is too short. That's hardly a criticism, for Jackson has included everything that is relevant to the story line in setting the stage for the trilogy's climax in the third film. As a matter of practicality, the film can't exceed three hours for simple economic reasons. A longer film would mean fewer showings -- not good for the profitability of movie theatres -- or a higher price of admission, which would not be popular with moviegoers. So, the filmmaker has had to accommodate those constraints, and I believe it's a job well done. Still, it's inevitable that one who has read the book will find discrepancies or omissions in the film, but that's not the basis of my wish that the film were longer. Rather, it's more a matter of being sorry that it was over at the end. "The Two Towers" is so captivating, so utterly engrossing a film-watching experience, that I found myself wanting more. What better statement could one make about the success of the filmmaker who wants his customers to come back for the third and final part of this epic trilogy? The consolation to those who want more will undoubtedly be in the release of the special edition DVD, which -- like its counterpart for "The Fellowship..." -- will add significant additional footage to the theatrical version. Finally, for all the unparalleled technological excellence of the film, the most compelling reason of all to see it is the story itself. If you love great movies crafted by professionals with vision who tell a remarkable story exceedingly well, you simply must see "The Lord of the Rings". It's clear that the trilogy has found a special place in moviegoers' hearts. I saw "The Two Towers" at Edwards Cinema in Brea, California at a matinee showing on December 23, 2002, in a full-house audience of people of all ages. When the initial title "The Lord of the Rings" appeared on the screen, the audience spontaneously burst into applause. I have never seen that happen at any movie I have ever attended, and for good reason - there has never been a movie like this before.
|
