Rating: 
Summary: "I COME TO YOU NOW, AT THE TURN OF THE TIDE!"
Review: "The Two Towers" is much better than "The Fellowship of the Ring." This one is full of mind-blowing action, awesome visual effects, and riveting storytelling. Fans won't want to miss it! Grade: A+
Rating:
Summary: GREAT!!!
Review: This movie was the best! I saw it a day after it came out. The battle was really cool. There were also a lot of funny parts (Gimli and Gollum/Smeagol were extremely funny). Don't miss this movie (or the 3rd movie on December 17th)...
Rating:
Summary: WoW!
Review: Beautifully shot and wonderfully written! A nonstop thrill ride with plenty of heart! I can't wait for the next one!
Rating: 
Summary: Well...
Review: I'm finding it a bit difficult to assess this movie overall after just one viewing, as it felt so distinct from the book. Whereas _Fellowship_ corresponded in a linear manner with the events portrayed in the book, and so felt at once familiar as well as visually new and bracing, the disparate nature of the plot lines in _The Two Towers_ seemed to give the filmmakers a lot of jostling room to monkey with the source material. And while that at times worked during the course of the film, it didn't always feel comfortable to me. I'm pretty sure I'll like it better the second time through, as that was the case with _Fellowship_. Unfortunately, that probably means that given the opportunity of repeated absorbings, the immediacy of the film increasingly supplants the book version that was fresh in my mind (I'm wondering how _Fellowship_ the book will seem once I've gone back and read it; I haven't since the movie came out last year). I haven't figured how that dichotomy is going to resolve itself over time, or even if it is. Anyway, back to the movie, and some random thoughts about it. As with _Fellowship_, there were numerous instances of attention to detail that I really liked and appreciated, such as Eomer's Rohirrim surrounding the Three Hunters in perfect formation, Southrons marching into the Black Gate, Theoden and the simbelmynë flowers on the burial mounds, Herbs and Stewed Rabbit, Oliphaunts, "Forth Eorlingas!", and many lines of dialogue lifted right from the pages of Tolkien, even Faramir's initial confrontation with Frodo and Sam (although their interaction diverges from the book radically after that). The Arwen/Elrond flashbacks and interludes I thought worked fine, and I didn't mind the whole Warg attack episode either (we didn't get to see the one in _Fellowship_, after all). I heard several weeks in advance about the Elves' participation in Helm's Deep, and thought "that's messed up," but now I don't mind it so much. It makes sense to me now. Unfortunately, the brief scenes with Treebeard and the Ents did not conjure up a scintilla of the sense of enchantment and wonder which the book does for me, but at least they're there. A few of Treebeard's lines are pretty good, though ("hooommm, that doesn't make much sense to me' but you *are* very *small*"), and I did enjoy seeing Isengard getting WORKED! Hah! One tendency I notice in these movies is for certain details or hints in the book to get picked up and made into a *spectacle*, like the wizard-duel in _Fellowship_, and the transformation of Theoden in _The Two Towers_, in which a vague metaphor in the book is played out like nothing so much as an *exorcism* on screen (complete with a view of Saruman's control being physically wrested away). Seemed weird, and perhaps a little excessive. Probably one of those book-to-film things where important subtleties get made really obvious. Oh, well. That's why we have books. I must confess I was a bit underwhelmed with Helm's Deep. One of the many things that really grabbed me about _Fellowship_ was the incredibly *kinetic* way the battle scenes were filmed, of which I had never seen the likes before, and I was expecting to see that same sort of thing on a much larger scale at Helm's Deep (all the more because advance reports used all manner of hyperbole like "mind-blowing" to describe it). And a lot of the hand-to-hand stuff just seemed dizzying and a bit incoherent, although some cool stuff shows up when the camera backs up a bit from the action, like all the Uruk-Hai's war machines, and the physical setting of Helm's Deep itself, which is certainly impressive. And where Legolas's single-screen-shot one-two-three move in _Fellowship_ dropped my jaw to the floor, his little shield-surfing bit here only drew a "yeah-sure" smirk from me. And now to Gollum. The rendering of his character by Andy Serkis is as finely nuanced as the CGI on the screen is. Jackson and co., to their credit, fully realized how important it was to make Gollum *work*. The truth is, he's not much more fun to be around on screen than he would be in person, and I think the reason for that is that he *does* come across like he's supposed to: a tortured junkie in withdrawal, consumed with insatiable want and loathing. The only potential problem, maybe, was the unintentional(?) laughs Gollum generated in the audience in some key scenes. Wood and Astin's performances of Frodo and Sam are adequate, as they were in the first film. Sadly, the perceptive, intuitive, but strong-willed Faramir of the books has been all but replaced, and the guy in the movie trying to pass himself off as Faramir is none too compelling even in the capacity he serves there. I heard that either Philippa Boyens or Fran Walsh said that the Faramir of the books was rather static and wouldn't translate well filmically, and that's as may be, but what they did do with Faramir didn't work so well for me. How will they make him likeable enough in _Return of the King_ that Eowyn will take him? The whole Osgiliath thing where Frodo almost gives the Ring up to the Nazgul, and Faramir is somehow able to discourage it with a single arrow, I didn't buy it. As people have already pointed out, wouldn't Sauron have bent all his resources to capturing the Ring once one of the Nazgul located it? Doesn't make sense to me. In summary, I certainly admire the scope of the effort, the obvious reverence of the filmmakers for the source material, and all the little loving details that do work like they're supposed to. I think that's all I have to say about it until a second viewing
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful, even better than the first!
Review: The Two Towers begins with an amazing fight scene, which, not to give too much away, involves two enemies battling in free fall! Wow! After that eye-popping experience, the movie just gets better. In terms of energy and excitement, this is the best one yet. I can't wait to see it again, and I can't wait for December 2003!!
Rating:
Summary: A Great Film!!
Review: This is "storytelling" and "storyseeing" of the highest order. We were all blown away by Part I and left the theater asking how Parts II and III could measure up. Would there be a let down? Was all the budget used up on Part I? (They had to know we would all go see Part II anyway.) Well, Part II answers those questions. If anything, this movie is more satisfying, more detailed and more expensive than the first and the perfect set up for the final part of the Trilogy. The action is intense and unrelenting, making room for digital effects to be a part of almost every scene, but nothing gets in the way of the tale. The care and detail show up everywhere. When the digital effects start flowing in the battles, focus now and then on the corners of the screen. There are even small subplots of action there. You literally could not have made this movie five years ago--unless you would have settled for a Gollum puppet or some man in a Gollum costume. The poor creature is done just about perfectly and actually looks the best in the close up shots. Here, what I saw on the screen matched the vision that I had as I read the book. Some slight liberties were taken with the storyline, but its not a bad thing in the context of what they faced in making a movie out of such a long book. I do recommend that you again read or watch "Fellowship" before you go so you can more easily jump into the full storyline and remember all of characters. Be warned that Part II starts with no summary review of the events we saw in last year's film--it just continues. As a small negative, some of the dialog (like that of Treebeard) seemed overly distorted and a little hard to follow. Thus, I missed a few of the jokes. (Yes, parts are funny, even in the midst of battle.) Maybe it was due to where I sat in the theater, maybe it was due to my failing old "rock concert" ears --but maybe that's just the way Ents talk! Go and enjoy a really great film!
Rating:
Summary: Expect to be impressed- excellent movie
Review: Im a huge LOTR fan, having read the books several times for about 20 years now, I had already wondered why noone had made the movie... till Peter Jackson came around with this impressive representation. I will not spoil the movie in case you havent read the book, so feel free to read on... First of all, watch the fellowship before the two towers. (yes, reading the book helps, but if you want to experience the two towers at the most, see the fellowship). The film picks up right where "fellowship" left off, and carries on much in the way the books do- back and forth the three storylines. Even though it lasts three hours (im sorry-- 2:59), you wont notice the time (unless you have to go to the bathroom) and by the end, ushers will have to carry you out because you want more... you will hope the lights are on and people are leaving because its an intermission... but no luck. The film has spectacular visual effects, beautiful landscapes and impressive "massive" battle sequences. Jackson manages to either make you forget you are watching a movie or make you think he spent 3 billion on each film due to the realism of each creature, beit the Ents, orcs, wargs or Gollum (which im sure will get an award for realism)... they all look real and move like they were real individual actors. And the real actors each deserve awards for their work, expect to laugh with Gimli's remarks and be shocked by every actor! What can I tell you... a masterpiece that will be remembered for ages, I thank P.J. for making the movie now that technology is so advanced, and for dedicating so much time and effort to it. He has an enormous responsability towars the fans and readers of the second best selling book in all time (after the bible) and has delivered once more with "The Two Towers". Unfortunately the movie ends and you are left not hungry... you are left STARVING for more! Im a huge fan of LOTR and P.J., so this is what I feel... Im not sure how youll feel, but im sure you'll love it. I cant wait for the DVD to come out! Congratulations, P.J.!
Rating:
Summary: Lives up to Expectations
Review: The second part of the The Lord of the Rings trilogy tells what happens to the members of the Fellowship of the Ring after the breaking of their Fellowship. As the film opens, Sam and Frodo are journeying to Mordor to destroy the ring of power, while Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas search for Mary and Pippin last seen captured by the Uruk-Hai warriors. I'm happy to say that the Two Towers lives up to expectations and is as good, and in some ways better, than the first. The Two Towers takes on a darker tone as Middle Earth heads towards war at the hands of Saruman. Middle Earth literally becomes a battlefield with the epic battle taking place at Helms Deep. It was reported that it took some three months to film the Helms Deep scenes. The results are quite spectacular. Gollum plays a much larger role in this film. The CGI characterization is fantastic. An actor played all of Gollums scenes and was later replaced by the CGI character. The meticulous work here is apparent. We are also introduced to several new beasts including Wargs, Oliphaunts, and Fell beasts, dragon like creatures that serve as the Nazgul's new form of transportation. Also making a debut is a living, talking tree named Treebeard. This effect came of great as well, much better then I expected. Other elements of the film have Aragorn showing his leadership abilities and Frodo feeling the "weight" of the ring. The stage is set for next year's Return of the King. Some of the scenes are a bit "scary" for young children, thus the PG-13 rating (It's rumored that next years extended edition DVD release will include cut scenes that will require an R rating). This film is worthy of multiple viewings and is highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Absolutely Positively AMAZING
Review: It is the best movie of the year and I do believe it will out-gross the first film seeing as how people who were fans before and new fans of the story will likely want to see the saga continue. Brilliantly done and wonderful to watch. At a three-hour long ride, I still continued to grip the seat handles until the very end and didn't dare wonder off to go to the bathroom. One word of advice, don't drink before you enter or risk holding it for three hours. I would probably have sat through the thrid one as well - for a grand total of six hours, but then that one doesn't come out for another year. All I can say is, I can't wait for the DVD release of the Two Towers and next years theatrical release of the Return of the King.
Rating:
Summary: Superior to the first (theatrical) LOTR film.
Review: After a year of anticipation, increasingly intense with each day of waiting, each spoiler revealed, and each rave early review read, the second part of LOTR has finally arrived. As a wary filmgoer who seldom wastes money on current cineplex junk, I was naturally concerned whether this colossal undertaking will live up to my expectations, let alone its equally collossal hype. Perhaps, The Two Towers is an easier book to adapt cinematically, because it is more action-based, and its main events occur during a more condensed time period - weeks as opposed to months or years. On the other hand, it creates greater challenges in terms of intercutting between three separate storylines. Peter Jackson does a near-flawless job facing up to these challenges, and largely succeeds. The flaws are still there, but they are less jarring. The "gloom and doom" yet hopeful spirit of Tolkien's second book is present in spades, and again - painstalking detail is lavished on all visual aspects of Middle Earth. Now, the usual discussion of strengths and weaknesses - and the latter are definitely fewer this time around. WARNING - POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD!!!!
----------------------------------------------- THE GOOD: 1) My favorite character in the entire book was always Gollum, and Jackson's team along with Andy Serkis absolutely nail him. He is best acted and most complex of all, a feat for a CGI creature. As another reviewer said, "Jar-Jar is not fit to lick Gollum's ***", a view which I wholeheartedly agree with. When Gollum/Serkis remembers his past as Smeagol, the moment alone is worth the price of admission. Personalit(ies) indeed go a long way. Nearly every scene in the book that featured Gollum is reproduced here, with great accuracy, even the "rabbit stew" scene! The final scene of the film is extremely effective, possibly one of the finest. 2) Gimli - yes, he is largely relegated to necessary comic relief, but he is funny, not laughable. His character is actually well realized, because a Dwarf would truly feel like a fish out of water in such foreign surroundings. He also gets to save the day more than a few times. I have a feeling he'll have even more to say and do in the Extended DVD. 3) Merry and Pippin display passion and wit, taking their development further. 4)The movie is historically/geographically minded, and handles various new places and concepts well. The fans even get references to the Bombadil Story omitted from FOTR - the Old Forest and the Barrow-Whigths (Gollum sings their song). All of the landscapes are gorgeous, and 100% Alan Lee. 5) Of course, the epic feel is tremendous and the action spectacular. It is unneeded to even mention. At times it seemed like I was watching something out of the Iliad. THE NOT-SO-BAD: 1) Arwen and Aragorn came off well, at least non-distracting. The sequence of Arwen mourning and wandering the woods alone was starltingly beautiful. 2) Faramir I never cared much about, so his motivation changes did not bother me. The actor playing him was not very strong however, and didn't impress me. Good thing he had little screen time. 3) Treebeard was decent, not quite as I would have liked but in the context of the film, the ents worked. I know that they will get additional scenes in the DVD from Jackson's interview. Their scenes appeared choppy. The Destruction of Isengard, though, was magnificent - goosebump-worthy. 4) The music was still excessive, but better. The Rohan theme was more pleasing to the ear than any pseudo-Titanic pap. THE NOT-SO-GOOD: 1) The Rohan "women and children" storyline. Used purely for dramatic purposes, cheesy and worn-out. Could have done without it. 2) Sam's long speech about heroic endurance at the end needed some editing. Jackson is not a director known for subtelty. 3) Haldir's real death and Aragorn's fake one were overdone (slow-motion bathos syndrome) , but that is a fairly minor complaint. 4) CGI was spotty in places (the wargs and oliphaunts come to mind), but not enough to ruin the scenes. In fact, none the action scenes falter much. ------------------------------------------------------------ In closing, I am pleased that TTT not only lived up to the hype/expectations, but managed to exceed them on almost all accounts. A gleeful smile has hardly left my face in all 3 hours, and my expression changed to an annoyed cringe only once or twice - far less than during Fellowship. I have to say that this film was the one (in the Sci-Fi/Fantasy genre) that I enjoyed the most ever since the good old days of the original Star Wars Trilogy, and I do not say that lightly.
| 
