Rating: 
Summary: defenitely not a bullseye...
Review: (...)now bact to the movie, because, mabeye, if someone is whining, wow what a concept, it might mean somthing.
what i have to sat about the trilogy to date is that it one of the most visually stunning pieces of cinema in a long time. period. the producers of these movies must have read my mind, because they have been on the same track that my minds eye was when i first read the books. no matter what else is said about the series, i commend the producers on that momentous feat. congrats.
now personally, i will be watching this very intensely, why? because if the directors and editors dont clean things up in the two towers like they did the fellowship of the ring, i am going to boycott the release of the 3rd installment, mabeye even protest it, see u on the news!! they have been stadily going downhill since the release of the first movie in regards to the accuracy to the books, and i do understand some, if not most of the changes made, but they have, with the release of this second film, actually made changes contrawise to what the brilliant mind tolkein put on paper over half a century ago. (...)
now I can totally understand having to make changes to convert the book, with tolkeins gift for imagery and dialouge, to a visual format like a movie, i see where u can and need to make changes, but elrond even encouraged the union of aragorn and arwen, to paraphrase, 'just as long as you win!', no joke, JUST READ. but to make (...), er elrond, sorry, actually opposed to their union is just one of the many problems that i personally had with this movie, just one example of many, that has actually angered, mildly, this fan of tolkein.
bottom line, if you like good movies with cool effects, go for it, enjoy the cg animation, and dont forget the popcorn because they ARE good movies that are well done for the most part. And besides, it may just spark your interest enough to go read these wonderful books, which is never bad. IF you like the books for what they are, and for story, unless they get their act together on this one, i will have totally lost interest in the series, and will refuse to back this effort to commercialize somthing that should be shared with everyone, but never stepped on. I may be alone on this in todays world, but i would rather read the book anyway, even if the movie was brilliantly perfect, and i can never spread that word enough, because the brain is the most amazing thing we know about, and using it is such a wonderful thing...
Rating: 
Summary: I had a chance to view the extended edition ahead of time.
Review: I'm not gonna go into a whole review here because I don't wanna be long winded. I loved the theatrical version and knowing how amazing the fellowship of the ring EE was I eagerly awaited this version knowing it would be just as wonderful as fellowship. One year later and I am not dissapointed. There are SO MANY great additional scenes that add alot of more weight to existing scenes. We learn the origin of the horse that saves aragorn. We learn why faramir's first reaction to the hobbits is not as pleasant as in the book series. We learn why he says "a chance for faramir to show his quality." It gave me goose bumps. This is the true vision of this film, and as I eagerly await return of the king, I know sadly there is a better version awaiting our eyes next november. Excellent job. Another great film turned into a timeless masterpiece. With the additional 40 minutes the film has time to breathe adding more depth, more laughs, and more heart.
Rating: 
Summary: I still don't understand the series' spectacular reaction...
Review: There is the rare occasion when a sequel is as good as its predecessor. "The Godfather Part II," "Toy Story 2," "Terminator 2: Judgment Day." I tried to put different genres into that, and if I can squeeze in fantasy, it would be "Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers."Based on the famous/classic work by J.R.R. Tolkien, this is the second "Lord of the Rings" film to grace the screen, or, as its fans refer to it, "LotR." In the previous film we saw Middlearth (one word?), home of the human-like species of Hobbits, brought to life by director Peter Jackson. It was bright, cheery, happy...but "LotR: TTT" is much darker than its predecessor. No cheery shots of grassy plains here; it's dark, broody, and evil. In the first film, we found out that long ago a creature/figure known as Sauron created a mystical ring deep in the craters of Mount Doom, located conveniently in the evilest place in the whole wide world, Mordor. (Just listen to Hugo Weaving say "Mordor"--it sounds creepy.) To get to the chase, Sauron was temporarily destroyed, and the ring, through one way or another, came to the creature Gollum, who then lost it to a Hobbit named Bilbo (who, in Tolkien's novel "The Hobbit," found it on a quest with Gandalf--a story not ventured into much in "The Lord of the Rings"). Years passed, and Sauron grew stronger (even though he's sorta dead), and he sent out baddies to try and hunt down the Ring, so that he may use its power (only he can wield the ring) for evil. Bilbo had since left the ring to Frodo, his kin, who then fled Middlearth with three others (four if you count Gandalf). Soon a few more joined their quest, and these men, Hobbits, and what not, formed a Fellowship. Their quest is to venture into Mordor and destroy the ring where it was created. At the end of the first film the Fellowship of the Ring had been seperated. Here's what has happened so far in the second film: Frodo (Elijah Wood) and Sam (Sean Astin) found Gollum, who becomes their tour guide to Mordor. Aragorn, Legolas and co. made their way to a castle somewhere, that is about to be attacked by a band of Orcs led by Saruman (Christopher Lee). They prepare for the battle by readying troops. Pippin and Merry escaped from the band of Orcs that kidnapped them at the end of "The Fellowship of the Ring," where they came upon talking, walking trees, one of which took them to the much-alive Gandalf, who says that he died and returned to earth as "Gandalf the White" (versus Gandalf the Grey) to help out the Fellowship. That's the main plot, but the film (ranking it at just about three hours) has so many characters that is constantly either a) forgets about some (not much of Frodo and Sam in this film), or b) tries to remember them by abruptly cutting to them. One of the film's only flaws is its inability to focus on all the characters equally; a feat "X-Men 2" accomplished quite nicely. The new character Gollum is a scene-stealer. Easily the best character in the film. One of the most impressive visual effects I have ever seen, which I suppose is because he was formed from images of a real man running around, and then was just overlapped with graphics and such. "The Two Towers" is fun to watch, and though some scenes could definitely have been dropped on the cutting room floor, the film more than makes up for the overlong scenes. I especially liked a battle between Aragorn and his troops, and Orcs on top of creatures that look like a mix between hyenas, dogs, and pigs. The dog-creatures move extremely fast and viciously (but of course the good guys still win ;). And the last half hour or so is one gigantic battle against Orcs, and the special effects are truly enthralling. You liked the first film? You're going to really enjoy this one. You didn't like the first film? You're still going to enjoy this one. I thought the original film was a tad overrated. Okay, a lot overrated. Seeing that on IMDb it suddenly beat out every single movie ever made and ranked in at the no. 1 film of all time, you can say I was fumin' a bit. It was good, and I especially liked the shooting locations in New Zealand, but you can say I wasn't exactly a huge fan. If I had to choose a favorite so far, I may very well say "The Two Towers." It's hard, because the first had some great scenery. This one loses the brightness of the first film, and I must say I liked the cheeriness of the original. (Of course, it is supposed to lost the brightness, just like the book did, because they are venturing closer to Mordor.) I expect "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" to excite all the "LotR" geeks out there, and thrill the regular audiences. I just wish the fans would stop getting thirty usernames on IMDb and voting "10" millions of times.
Rating:
Summary: Don't be deceived by foolish reviews
Review: I'm truly sorry for those people who did not like peter jackson's interpretation of Tolkien's masterpiece(I don't mean this in a sarcastic kind of way). Me being the person who watched LOTR movies without thinking about the details, found the movies to be extremely good. Although I did read the books before the idea came of making these movies, I was just a child so can't remember the details but I remember the basic story and how much I enjoyed it. I think you will enjoy this movie if you have or haven't read Tolkien's books. I personally enjoyed every minute of the movie, and so I enjoy the special extended edition even more. There is not a scene i would take out nor things I would add (except make the prequel). If you don't enjoy the LOTR movies then I don't know of any recent movies that you could enjoy. If you like battle sequences look no farther, these movies have it all. If you want a love story these movies are full of love. These movies invented the word adventure...
Rating:
Summary: Excellent!
Review: This movie is excellent! The Extended version will be even better than the origional version, though. I am going to buy it!
Rating:
Summary: Please! Quit whining about what's left out!!!
Review: First! The new Tolkein cult is assuredly more pious and zealous about their hero and his fantastic literary achievement. Please answer this: Is it more entertaining to over analyze, pick apart and find fault than it is to allow yourself to be swept up in and enthralling epic fantasy? I'll tell you this: There was NO LOTR/Tolkein cult until the re-realease of the Hobbit in the 60's. "Hey Maan!" "Have you dug this book yet?" "Mind BLOWING!" are but a little of what I heard as a young reader in the 60's and into the 70's when the "FAD" lost steam. We were Tolkein worshipers, my brother and I devised calligraphic and symbol derived signatures to be more like Gandalf and we were not silly kids then. If ones view of reality was skewed by chemicals (as many were) it didn't necessarily make the stories better. One could float away on a fantastic voyage (hey wasn't that a movie??) and I never heard anyone complain about the wide variety and individuality of opinions on what made these stories ring magical for them. We ORIGINAL "Culties" of TLOTR and the Hobbit, were however almost unanimous in our scathing condemnation of the cartoon versions of the film. Not so much for lost content, though that was troubling, as for the fact that cartoon characters couldn't catch the darkness, or the suspension of belief necessary to be carried off into another time and place. You see cartoons are inherently unbelievable and that is acceptable to us as we suspend belief for a while. However, in so much as the LOTR is already beyond our perception of reality, it is still a story rife with Judeo-Christian, Celtic and Scandinavian mythology and symbolism. And, cute little colorful and cherubic animated people don't make it easy to believe. And so LOTR on this deeper level is very approachable as literature. The written word gives you time to digest, reread, contemplate and discover and perceive in your own time and your own way. Through the written word one instills characters with one's own perceptions, and enters into these characters as ones self with ones own set of experiences. Cartoons already divorced from reality don't readily allow this in the moving image business. We need human characters to convey us into the fantasy. We need to identify with them.
Second, this new Tolkein cult: Sorry Peter but it is a cult conceived, created and marketed by commercialism and studio execs to garner profits. However Mr. Jackson let me not seem to diminish the accomplishment. This new cult drives itself and the "culties" are naturally more zealous than we were in our day, for the simple reason that they need to be perceived as the genuine article. To be seen as true followers of the WORD of Tolkein so to speak. Hey people just enjoy the books, and enjoy the film. I've waited nearly half my expected life for these films to be made and they are MAGNIFICENT to say the least. 25 years ago I mentioned to a friend in film school that I thought some day computers and CG effects may make it possible to make these films. I was almost right. It took blood, sweat and tears (dating myself again) and good filmmaking and human actors committed to the task and a man with a vision. CG just helped him tell a story. In the end, to address the reviewer from Garland Texas: Hey take a pill, relax and allow the epic to sweep you away. You will always have the books to retreat to when you're feeling vulnerable. When poorly conceived films tell a story already well told in print they often fall short. BUT, these are bad films and poorly told stories in and of themselves. One doesn't need to criticize to make ones self feel better about their opinion however, and I'm not criticizing you now, just pointing out that film is a literary art, but it isn't literature. Key point here: film is a medium with which one tells a story and therefore literary. It can be an art when done well and can even be extraordinary. Thank you Mr. Jackson you tell a good story Maann!
Rating:
Summary: Hi
Review: THIS MOVIE IS AWSOME! I HAVEN'T SEEN IT! BUT IT LOOKS GOOD! I LIKE THE COVER! IT LOOKS LIKE WOOD! VERY PREETY! OOHHHHH! PREETY! BUY BUY BUY BUY! INFO: HAVENT SEEN FIRST MOVIE MEANS DONT gEt It hAhAHAHAHAHAHAH! ME JAR-JAR-BINKS! COVER PRETY!IF U'VE SEEN THE FIRST U'LL ENJOY THE SECOND IT HAS MORE SCENES THAN FIRST ONE. STORY MORE INTERESTING! HELMS DEEP RULES! HI ME BOB!
Rating:
Summary: Better Than "Harry Potter"
Review: The "Harry Potter" movies are immature and only children like to watch them. But not "The Lord of the Rings" movie trilogy. "The Fellowship of the Ring" is a wonderful movie in the trilogy. "The Two Towers", its sequel, is spectacular and I should say better than "The Fellowship of the Ring". It has a lot of action, adventure, and suspense to offer. The stunning special effects, music (score), and acting in "The Two Towers" are fascinating! I can't wait to see how good "The Return of the King" is! "The Lord of the Rings" movie trilogy just keeps getting better. The Extended Cut DVDs are the versions I want to own of each movie in the trilogy. They are much better than the origional versions. "The Fellowship of the Ring" Special Extended DVD Edition, which I own, is a phenomenon! And "The Two Towers" and the "The Return of the King" Extended Cut DVDs will also be a phenomenon! "The Lord of the Rings" movie trilogy is awsome and is 10,000 times better than the "Harry Potter" movies.
Rating:
Summary: Arwen's love story was close to Tolkien's heart
Review: I give LOTR The Two Towers five stars. It is among the best movies ever made. And those Tolkien purists who complain about the differences between the books and the movies don't understand that the love story of Arwen and Aragorn was really close to Tolkien's heart. The love story of Arwen and Aragorn is not found in the LOTR story itself, although it is found in an Appendix in Vol 3 ROTK, and is also found in Tolkien's Silmarillion. And so we know that the story is based on the love story of Beren (mortal man) and Luthien (immortal elf-maiden). In the movie FOTR (extended version), Aragorn as much as tells us this himself, when he sings the song about Beren and Luthien while he leads the hobbits in the wilderness on their way to Weathertop. The love story of Beren and Luthien was important to Tolkien. After the Hobbit was a smashing success in 1937, the publisher asked Tolkien if he had any more material to be published. Tolkien gave him the story of Beren and Luthien, as part of the Silmarillion. The publisher declined to publish this story, preferring instead to print a sequel to the Hobbit. As we all know, this sequel is LOTR... And here's the reason why the story of Beren and Luthien was so important to Tolkien. Beren is Tolkien himself, and Luthien is Edith Mary, the sweetheart of Tolkien's youth, whom he married in 1916, and faithfully adored until her death in 1971, two years before Tolkien himself died. You can see the inscription on their tombstone in the Wolvercote Cemetery in the northern suburbs of Oxford, UK (http://www.lordotrings.com/misc/grave.asp). When Tolkien wrote that Luthien was the fairest elf that ever lived, he was writing about his wife. And when Peter Jackson decided that his movies should showcase the themes that Tolkien really cared about, he knew what he was doing when he included the love story of Arwen and Aragorn.
Rating:
Summary: LOTR: TTT Special Extended DVD Edition
Review: The Lord of the Rings movie trilogy has been great so far. FOTR is a wonderful movie while its sequel, TTT, is even better. ROTK will most likely be the best movie in the trilogy. However, I must say that the first two movies do deviate from the book trilogy at some points. But that is why the Extended Cut DVDs were made. The Special Extended DVD Edition of FOTR was wonderful and went by the book trilogy very well. I am sure TTT Extended Cut DVD will go by the book trilogy very well also. I cannot wait to own it! I await November 18nth with great anticipation.
|
