Rating: 
Summary: Great day for movies....
Review: For those of you who have never read LOTR, then I promise you will enjoy this movie --- depending on your attention span, that is. It is rather long. However, the special effects do not take away from the great acting, especially from Ellijah Wood and Sean Astin. For those of you who have read LOTR and have not seen the movie, prepare to be disappointed. Jackson's treatment of Farimir and Theoden left much to be desired since their characters were completely changed --- what happened to Farimir in the movie might make you cry. Expect other changes you will find surprising since they came from "lovers" of Tolkien's masterpiece (i.e. Peter Jackson, Christopher Lee [who reads the story every year] and others).
Rating: 
Summary: As good as the first film
Review: Even if you're going to buy the extended version, this DVD is worth the price. You get to see how Peter Jackson (and crew) squished a big story into a relatively short period of time. He takes a few different plot threads, running parallel, and lets them intersect. You never get confused. In fact, the whole story seems to take place in about four spots, in the same general area. (Looking at the Middle Earth map, that's more or less true.) It's all in the editing. Watch as the movie progresses and it switches from one group of characters from another. At first, they get big, 20-minute chunks of time before the switch. By the end, you get a 1-minute update on Frodo and Sam, and then you switch back to Helm's Deep. The tension builds in three locations simultaneously, giving you three climaxes. In The Fellowship, the plot was all about Frodo and the Ring. Each location --- from the Shire to Bree to Moria --- was in the story because Frodo was there. This time, the story is about the Fellowship working apart, all trying to achieve the goal of destroying the Ring, but from different locations. Frodo gets help from his friends even when they are many miles away. The script adds a lot more humor than the previous movie, and battle scenes that are not in the book. But it works. For the second installment of the series, Peter Jackson was reaching out to the audiences who don't normally see sword & sorcery movies. I'd give this five stars if the extras were better. The preview of Return of the King is very good. The rest isn't so interesting. I know they're not going to put the big 'making of' documentaries on this DVD, but they could have done more than throw in a few promo spots in which the actors talk about their love for each other.
Rating: 
Summary: I'm sorry - Did someone tell me this was an epic?
Review: With films such as the Fellowship of the Ring, the Two Towers, Matrix Reloaded and Attack of the Clones, one can't help but feel that the only reason these films are touted as 'epics' is for their length. For all of these boxoffice bonanzas, the marketing was there, but unfortunately the content wasn't. So what makes filmmakers think they can waste three hours of our life capturing the so called 'epic' events that take place in middle-earth? Apparently if you execute 20 or so panning shots of the New Zealand landscape, throw in some large scale live-action/CGI battles, add some two-dimensional characters that tend to talk more to themselves in profound long-winded statements rather than to each other, audiences won't mind - wrong. Boring is the only way to define the effort that is Two Towers. Fellowship managed to effectively put the feeling at bay mainly because of the anticipation surrounding the film. But if Jackson felt he'd gotten over the character development of the first film only to bash as many swords and shields together for this installment, he sorely missed the point of producing an engrossing and entertaining film. Divergent narratives are horribly mashed together, drawn out and consequently brain-numbingly boring. Who cares about what happens to Frodo - the only question I was asking was 'WHEN WILL IT END?' The romance between Aragorn and whatever her name was, fell completely flat, as did the reduction of Gimli's role from an entertaining dwarf in the first film to a victim of slapstick and cornball one-liners in this installment. (ala Jar Jar). Sure he could hold his own with his axe, but why did a pathetic attempt at humour have to accompany almost every strike with his weapon. If you laughed at his jokes btw, shame on you, and may the midget community swear vengeance upon your soul. There's no denying that Jackson and his crew have put an aweful lot of work into this film, as seen in the extras included with the DVD - but appreciating a film is a lot different to enjoying a film, let alone enduring it.
Rating: 
Summary: A Spectacular Film! Better Than Its Wonderful Prequel
Review: This is an awsome movie! I loved it when the Rohirrim and the wargs faught against each other. The battle for Helms Deep was triumphant! And when the ents stormed Isengard: VERY ANTICIPATING!!! With a lot of intense action, adventure, drama, wonderful acting, stunning special effects, and great music (score) "Lord of the Rings: Two Towers" is a must see movie sequel. I can't wait to see "Lord of the Rings: Return of the King"!
Rating:
Summary: *really good
Review: i love the books, and i thought that these movies really stood up to them well. i like how they didnt over do the special effects. that was nice. there have been too many movies that are all about the effects, and nothing about the story. for example, the new star wars movies. dont get me wrong, im a huge fan of the older ones, but these new ones are too commercialized, without as many good themes and a good story. the character developement in this movie is also the best ive ever seen. you really feel for these characters, especially frodo and sam as they enter mordor, and as they are led into the trap by gollum. moral of this story: have a great story, tell it well, dont over do it with special effects, and have one of the greatest movies of all time. this movie is sure to become a classic. now if you'll excuse me, i think im going to go watch it right now.
Rating:
Summary: Better than the first!
Review: I am not a Lord of the rings fanatic, by any means. Nor am I much into fantasy novels, though I have read a few I liked. Yet I do enjoy movies like Willow or say Legend. So take into account that mine is the oppinion of an average person, and not someone who grew up with the books. I found the first lord of the rings to be much less than I expected. Less action, less drama, and more time. It was long drawn out, and lacking in several areas. Now with the second movie from the trilogy, what we get is everything the first should have had and some more. I have heard some oppinions that the two towers wasnt as good as the first, and had less action. Im no expert, but I found the exact opposite to be true. To me it seemed the first Lord of the Rings was merely setting the stage for the rest of the trilogy. Now with the second installment we are treated to much deeper character development and a much more involved plot. I also felt there was a lot more action too, as well as a much more epic scope and feel. The entire last hour of the movie is combat and action, as the Human and elvish forces attempt to hold out against a castle siege against grim odds (an army of 10,000 orcs!). The battle scenes are awesome and spectacular with lots of special effects and a massive feel. These will often leave you on the edge of your seat and were really well done. In addition there is a much more dramatic, almost biblical feel to the movie. The characters such as Gollem (sp?) give outstanding perfomances and a few emotional and interesting moments that give the movie multiple dimensions and much more depth. The plot too will continue to thicken and because we are already somewhat familiar with the characters and world of middle earth - there is more room for develpoment here. While the Two Towers is even longer than the first Lord of the Rings, it doesn't feel as long because of the wider use of action, and a much more robust use of drama. Even the diologue feels much deeper and epic (for lack of a better word). The visuals in the movie too, are completely off the hook. Breath taking scenery is omnipresent, and adds not only a wide girth of asthetic appeal, but also serves to bolster the more epic scope. The gorgeous special effects are also typically well done, and there is much more to be seen here than in the first. I may not be able to compare the series to the books, but from my perspective the two towers was a much more enjoyable and a much deeper experience than the first. The best fantasy adventure movie since Willow.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent
Review: This movie is one of those where you don't really have to say, "But that's not how it was in the book!" Why? Because Tolkien's Lord of the Rings works for literature perfectly. But when it comes to film, a few adjustments must be made. And that's what Peter Jackson did, and rather well in my opinion. Still, the essence of Tolkien's epic, the despair of Theoden, the valor of Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli, the shrewdness of Wormtongue, are all portrayed in the film. And that's what counts. The action was again good, but it doesn't get great until the end with the battle at Helm's Deep. It also mixes in a little humor, even though the movie in general is very dark and depressing.
Another thing I might point out was the excellent scene where Gollum debates with himself, and using different camera angles, it actually seems as if there are two Gollums yelling at each other. What I liked was that you feel such sympathy for the poor wretched creature.
But the best part was definitely the finaly 45 or so minutes. Where 10,000 orcs besiege Helm's Deep, and all seems lost, and the Ents march on bravely to destroy Isengard, and Frodo is an inch away from losing the ring to dark forces, they are all victorious. And in a speech where Sam pretty much sums up the theme of the movie and there are scenes shown of the good guys coming out victorious despite all the odds against them, you feel so inspired that you want to get up and do something since "there is good in the world, and it's worth fighting for." I'm definitely seeing Return of the King.
Rating:
Summary: Creditable moviecraft with something for everyone
Review: Considering the millions of people who've read (often at impressionable ages) the unique and genre-defining story, and the ambitiousness of trying to do it justice on screen, I've found much basis for credit in this production. It shows skilled moviecraft in writing, production, and acting, and deals imaginatively and entertainingly with a challenging story. (Many of those millions of Tolkein readers have written comments on the film, some of them asserting eloquent unawareness of the differences between a book and its movie adaptation.) Yes, this (second) episode of the trilogy is realized with swordplay and Darth Vader helmets. The episode entails the gathering and unleashing of a medieval world war. On the other hand it connects skillfully with bits of history and drama that will touch many viewers uninterested in fantasy games (irrespective of Tolkein): the besieged outnumbered refugees in a mountain redoubt (Masada in AD 73, among other examples); British-looking crowds in underground tunnels (London, 1940); hints of the Shakespeare that many of the actors apprenticed on. Most starkly and explicitly, Ian McKellen's voice at the end after a tactical victory: "The battle for Helm's Deep is over. The battle for Middle Earth is about to begin." This is word-for-word and in exact cadence the famous BBC quote of Churchill after the Dunkirk miracle: "... The battle of France is over. The battle of Britain is about to begin." (This coined the phrase, and appeared in the 1969 film called, "The Battle of Britain." McKellen himself certainly heard it, and might even have narrated it on occasion.) Few British-commonwealth viewers will miss this reference, and many viewers around the world will spot tips-of-the-hat to movie genres as well as a respected face or two. There's something for everyone, in other words. Skateboarders included -- that's no crime. (The only gross incongruity I saw was the command to archers to "fire." It may be a small point to generations seeing lasers and phasers and Tasers, but any archer, including me, will tell you with dignity that no fire is involved, thanks. Fire came into use in much later, chemical-propellant weapons which, for centuries, the operator shot by literally applying fire to, or "firing," them.)
Rating:
Summary: Very good ride, despite a few minor derailments
Review: Like many other viewers of the film with a background in Tolkien, I was at first shocked by many of the changes made to the story to present it in film form. However, I have finally come to terms with the "changes" in the movie. I know that many folks were particularly horrified at the depiction of Faramir, stating that he was not as honorable as in the book - and didn't seem to be better than Boromir. In some ways this argument is true. However, if one consideres his character in the book, they will see that the film actually creates a very unique protrayal of Faramir. Essentially, Faramir, portrayed as being very human rather than the quintessence of morality seen in the book, is brought to the point of making a decision about the ring, just as Boromir was. Yet where Boromir failed through his greed and weakness, Faramir succeeded, and thus did prove to be the greater of the two. My only problem with the film concerned the character of Aragorn after he fell off of the cliff and was rescued by Arwen via a horse named "Brego". Who the hell is Brego and what is he doing in this film? If you read the LOR companions you find that Brego was the second king of Rohan - he was never a horse. Arwen does send a horse for Aragorn in The Return of the King. His name is Roheryn, not Brego. I did like the Ents, and I loved what Jackson did at the end of the film when Gandalf appears on the cliffs above Helms Deep. In the book Gandalf arrives with troops that are on foot, but in the film he returns with the riders of Rohan - very dramatic, even if it was a departure from the book.
Rating:
Summary: I only gave it four stars because......
Review: I gave this movie four stars for a certain reason. I would give it five stars--I mean come on, they did an incredible job on it, just as they did in FOTR--but the changes they made were just a little too much. In an interview on lordoftherings.net that happened before the second movie came out, Jackson says, "Oh yes, we changed the Faramir sequence a little..." A LITTLE? Ha! In the book Faramir just kind of chats with Frodo and Sam, find out they have the Ring, and jst sort of lets them go. In the "little" change in the movie, he takes them to Osgiliath and they're attacked by a Nazgul, for Pete's sake! (no pun intended) Little change, my front tooth.
Elves coming to Helm's Deep neeeveerrr haaaapeneeddd. That change didn't bother me as much, but just to let people who haven't read the books know. And the Wargs on the way to Helm's Deep? Aragorn falling off the cliff? Come ON! In the theater, my sister kept muttering, "That never happened!!!!" They beefed Helm's Deep up quite a bit, too. And Jackson's Gandalf the White was......boring. The granfatherly, old-man-with-a-walking-stick Gandalf is gone. Instead of encouraging people and acting as Frodo's grandpa, he's now speaking nothing but depressing words and acting as a war general. The only part in the movie that I like him is when he's charging down the ridge with Eomer. (And by the way, Eomer's hardly in the movie at all!)
Gollum they did a SUPERB job on. He sounds EXACTLY as I imagined him to sound!!! The Ents actually were pretty well done, I think. They did a good job with the slllloooowwww Enntttissshhh sppeeeccchh (burrarruummm).
But the acting is still good, and the music still rocks (again, no pun intended). I especially like the March of the Ents music, and my sister LOVES the mournful Edoras music.
even with all my negative comments, this DVD is still definitely worth buying!
|
