Rating: 
Summary: great movie
Review: I really enjoyed the Fellowship of the Ring, and found the Two Towers to be even more enjoyable. I have read and love the books, and was mildly irritated (very at times) by some of the differences between the books and the movies. I was particularly annoyed by the way the character of Faramir was portrayed in the movie. I can't imagine how they plan to carry the Faramir they created in the movie over to the Return of the King while staying at all true to Tolkein's story. That being said, I think what all fans of the books need to keep in mind when watching the movies is that it is not possible to stick to the story exactly - the movies would be both incredibly long and boring. As much as I loved the books, there were parts of them that were slow moving. This is acceptable for a book, even necessary, but not for a movie. Everything needs to be more dramatic on screen. In addition, Jackson has the unenviable task of appealing to both die-hard Tolkein devotees, of which there are many, and the general public at the same time. I think we all need to cut the guy some slack. So far, the movies are for the most part well-done, and I for one plan to see Return of the King on opening weekend!
Rating:
Summary: WoW
Review: The Lord of the Rings: Two towers is one more legendary movie to go into the hollywood Hall of Fame. This movie is another fantastic sage that takes you into battles in a mystical world where the quest to destroy the ring continues. The special effects in this movie are spectacular and certainly is a never seen before way to show the battles and the cool conflicts. The last battle when the evil is trying to invade the castle is incredible.
Rating:
Summary: The best capture of Tolkien on film
Review: I've read the LOTR trilogy several times, and although the last time was many years ago, I can still remember most details of the storyline and the overall spirit of the books. I've purposely put off reading the trilogy again until after ROTK debuts in December, to avoid being distracted by minor changes in the storyline. The major departures from the storyline in TTT are noticeable but minimal. Most importantly, none of the changes violate the essence of Tolkien's world, or the spirit of the characters, or the heart of the conflict that rages in Middle-earth at the end of the Third Age. So what if there are Elves at Helm's Deep (other than Legolas) in the movie? So what if the trees of Fangorn never make it to the Deep to take care of the fleeing host of Isengard? So what if Faramir takes Frodo to Osgiliath before letting him go? None of these changes wreck the story or make the movie any less enjoyable. I suspect that these major changes were all driven by cinemagraphic factors. I look forward to the Extended Version to see what comments Peter Jackson makes on these changes. I thought his reasons for changes in the FOTR storyline were satisfactory. The amazing thing about Jackson's work on LOTR is that he manages to keep Tolkien's overall epic AND his development of all the main characters in a format that only allows him to use a fraction of the LOTR text. And the movie itself is awesome in its own right. I saw FOTR twice at the theatre; TTT brought me to the big screen three times. The special effects and panoramic views are without equal. Howard Shore's score is phenomenal. I don't understand why anyone (including the LOTR purists) wouldn't at least appreciate this film. If you love Tolkien and can't stand any deviation from his original work, then I suppose you shouldn't consider buying this. But if you love good movies, you should be able to enjoy The Two Towers whether you've read the books or not.
Rating: 
Summary: Hemming and Hawing - writ large
Review: I really enjoyed The Fellowship of the Ring - moreso on DVD than in the theater. But The Two Towers - snoresville. There was about a half-hour worth of plot, and then two hours of filler. The subplot with the walking trees was excruciating. So many critics fell all over themselves to rave about this movie - but it left me totally and utterly bored. I wish it had been as good as the first, but it wasn't. The characters hemmed and hawed and talked and chatted and wheezed and voiced pretentious, pointless dialogue for way too long. As a fan who liked the first moviejust fine and doesn't want to bash the series, let's hope Return of the King is a rousing finish to the trilogy.
Rating:
Summary: ENOUGH ALREADY
Review: Story - PREFECT Acting - Superb BUT ENOUGH WITH THE SCENIC VIEWS, IF YOU CUT OUT THE PANORAMIC VIEWS OF MIDDLE EARTH, THE EXTENDED MOMENTS OF SILENCE SCANNING THE COUNTRY SIDE YOU COULD PROBABLY SHAVE A HOUR OFF THE RUNNING TIME
Rating:
Summary: Better Than The First
Review: This film has been compared to The Empire Strikes Back in that is the dark chapter of the trilogy. But far more goes on in this film than in Empire (probably because this was a massive book before being a film). The Fellowship has ended but there is much to be done. Aragorn and company race to find Merry and Pippin, their missing Hobbit companions. Frodo and Sam continue to make their way towards Mordor and Mt. Doom. They are joined and led by Gollum. Sauruman is increasing his power but making powerful enemies as well. The lands of Rohan and Gondor are brought into war thus bringing most of Middle Earth into the growing conflict as Sauron gains power and looks for the Ring. This is not the same story as the book, but it is close. One major improvement was that the class difference between Sam and Frodo was far more obvious. The special effects were quite good but many will complain about the major changes in plot (far larger than those in the first movie), but it works as a film as everything ties up at the same time and sets the stage for the final push in the third film.
Rating:
Summary: wonderful second installment in the Ring Trilogy
Review: Have heard a few grumbles about this and that flaws of TT...well, let them grumble. I have seen this movie several times and wow...it continues the marvelous quality of the first one. Can hardly wait for the final movie out this Winter. Yes, there were some changes made from the book - but, hey, show many ANY BOOK made into a movie that does not not have changes? None! It's the nature of the game. You cannot put a book - any book in it entirety on film, so stop the grumbling about how the movies is different from the book. Judge the movie on the movie. Period. The actors continue with their high quality of acting. The script is to fast pace I never notice how long the movie is. There is less the gentleness of the first one, because simply they have moved passed the innocence of the shire and everyone awakening to the growing dangers. The danger is now reached full power and Middle Earth must now battle to survive. The movie is darker - as battle scenes should be - but the production value of the battle is floorings. The extended version had over 45 more minutes of footages for those who cannot get enough. Again, not for children. This movie is even darker in tone that the first and the complexity of the story is just a bit much for children to understand and grasp the fasts violence. Only, grumble I have is the Tree mutters too much!! Poor sound editing there.
Rating: 
Summary: Convincing?
Review: There seems to be a lot of convincing going on in "The Two Towers"... Master Samwise convincing Faramir to let him & Frodo go... Merry & Pippin convincing Treebeard to attack Isengard... The "angel" music convincing the audience to FEEL SAD NOW... The "theme" music convincing the audience to FEEL VICTORIOUS NOW... Peter Jackson convincing everyone how true he has remained to the spirit of the books... From all that I have read, 98% of viewers adore TTT... and sadly I have ended up in the 2% that did not I loved FOTR, but where that film simply veered off the road of the text, TTT plummets off the side of the road, down a ravine, takes some untraveled dirt back roads before taking some contrived short cut back to the original text in the film's forced last 1/2 hour This latest installment has lost the magic & sheer wonder of FOTR... None of the storytelling elements that made the first film so special are used in TTT... I make no claims to being a "purist" or expert... like I said changes in adaptations are necessary, but man, I half expected stormtroopers to be riding on the wolves of Isengard Can anyone understand what Treebeard is saying? Is this movie a CGI showcase to sell new programs to perspective movie makers? Thematic nuances of Tolkien's writing are sacrificed in favor of cinematic cliches to please a mass modern audience What's with these sudden cockney accents from the orcs - Oim a-gonna ate yo (Meestah Scroooge-Fawvah Krees-mas...oops wrong movie) Ok - enough, it's done, I said it, it's out in the cosmos I'm holding vigil for ROTK For the other 98% of you -- please disregard this, you've already been convinced.
Rating:
Summary: How exciting that a film like this is doing so well!
Review: How exciting that a film like this is doing so well! An utterly fabulous story, brilliant cinematography and special effects, exceptionally good acting - and a film that can be seen with equal enjoyment by children as well as by teenagers and by parents. It is also a thoroughly morally uplifting tale, the triumph of good over evil - just the kind of thing that we in the USA and Britain need to see at this moment in our history. Buy it, enjoy it and give it to all your friends for Christmas! Christopher Catherwood (from 2 of Tolkien's old Universities), and author of CHRISTIANS MUSLIMS AND ISLAMIC RAGE (Zondervan, 2003)
Rating: 
Summary: LONG LONG LONG
Review: Good thing i rented the movie because i was able to pause and go to the kitchen, bathroom, etc, then back. It was an obnoxiously slow movie. Yeah it had some good moments and of course Sir Ian McKellan put in a great performance, but good lord, how painfull must have been to see this in the theatre.
| 
