Rating: 
Summary: Oh, it's good!
Review: First thing, that movie is pretty good and enjoyable. Few scene are charm as it show the sense of humor. I laugh easy.However, the important thing... I discovery there have all subtitle available in special features. It's very excellent information that hearing impaired would feel more satisfactory!
Rating: 
Summary: Pasha Bomar's Story
Review: Pasha-
this DVD is awesome! One of the best ones. So realistic, so much action, so much violence, so much of the storyline, so much of everything!!!
All I'll say is, buy this DVD, it worth you're money:)
I enjoyed it- so will you!
Better than the first one ;)!!!
Pasha,12
Rating: 
Summary: Wonderful Translation
Review: By the way, other reviewers, the Two Towers refers to Saruman's Tower and Sauron's Tower, not Gondor's towers. Saw that in another review. It is nearly impossible to capture everything a book is to the readers for two reasons: poetic license and differing memories. It's important to watch this movie as an incredible, epic attempt to recreate the book, and enjoy it. No, it doesn't always follow the book that close and takes some liberties, but it does expose many more people to the genre, which is great! The world is very well done, the acting is great. For a three hour movie about a twelve hour book, I loved it. The main elements of the story are kept intact and the movie keeps a pace and doesn't drag us down in any long, slow distractions. I highly recommend this movie. Please also check out Fate Rides Wicked in the book section!
Rating:
Summary: Too much of Arwen!!!
Review: i happen to think the film is cool... everything is pefect and exciting, but i don't understand why they have to show so much of arwen when, as everyone's been saying, her role wasn't that much of a big deal in the books anyway!!!
Rating:
Summary: still sour from the disappointment...
Review: I read some of the great reviews here and was tempted to give my own $0.02 on this movie. To those who have not read the book, this is a great movie. But to those of us who have experienced the Lord of the Rings at its best... the written words of Tolkien, this movies fars short. I'm still waiting on the extended version in hopes that somehow, someway, it will be better. I don't think I have very high expectations though, after seeing the theatrical version. I know what people say about the second part of any trilogy... I disagree when it comes to the Two Towers. It is by far my favorite book of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. There was so much more left out of the movie and so many unnecessary scenes and events that were added. Throughout the entire time I was watching, I kept saying to myself, "this isn't how it happened..." "what happened to the part where..." and "now I KNOW that was not in the book" Needless to say, I was very disappointed in the treatment of some of the events and characters. Faramir, like Kelly Moore had mentioned, really got screwed. (He's my favorite male character in the books, strange as it may be.) Kelly said it already so I'll refer you to her review. Eomer also got a completely different treatment in the movie. Whatever happened to his loyalty and standing by his King, no matter the consequences? He got banished? Just so he can come riding down the hill with his small band of warriers behind Gandolf? And the whole part with the Ents and Merry and Pippin was REALLY downplayed. Those were also some of the best parts in the book. I'm still hoping that some of those things will eventually get picked up in the third movie. (Pippin's huge mistake that leads to the separation of Pippin and Merry.) Both Merry and Pippin are so much more than the silly hobbits for comic relief they are portrayed in the movies. They have vital roles in all of it. Yet we don't really see that. Those parts are replaced with Arwen and Aragorn contemplating whether they should be together or not (which, incidentally, was not that big a part in the actual story of the Ring, more in the appendix.) The reason the book was called the Two Towers was because there were two battle fronts. We really only got one. I suppose we see a little bit of Gondor when Faramir kidnaps Frodo and Sam (that's one of the "now I KNOW that was not in the book" scenes), but it's just not in keeping with the spirit of the book. And I still don't understand why Shelob had to be in the third movie instead of the second one like Tolkien had intended. It seems lots of good things were cut from the second movie to make room for the unnecessary scenes (such as more relationship time for Aragorn and Arwen... [did they think the movie won't sell if there was no overt love story in it?])
I have to say, the Fellowship was a better movie when it came to staying true to the books. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE let the Return of the King be true to what Tolkien had so perfectly envisioned all those years ago. Now I have to go read the Two Towers a million times to try and recapture the magic.
Rating:
Summary: Amazing And Wonderful Flick
Review: The release of The Two Towers followed the Fellowship in about a yeat later. The cast for the most part is the same with Elijah Wood as Frodo, Ian McKellen as Gandalf, and Liv Tyler as Arwen and etc. In the first movie, Frodo Baggins a Hobbit is met by Gandalf who urges Frodo on the quest to destroy the one Ring that has fallen in his possesion. His quest is aided by a Fellowship with his gardener Sam, other fellow Hobbits Merry and Pippin, Gandalf the Grey, Aragorn, Legolas (played by Orlando Bloom who seems popular among the ladies), and Glimli the dwarf. Towards the end of their quest Saruman's troops of Urak-Hai warriors kidnap Merry and Pippin. The fellowship splits as Sam and Frodo continue the quest to Mount Doom as Aragorn, Legolas, and Glimli continue to rescue Merry and Pippin. The movie is pretty much split in two parts: one on the quest of Frodo, and one about Glimli, Aragorn, Legolas, and Gandalf. The second quest begins with Aragorn, Legolas, and Glimli following the Urak-Hai to rescue Merry and Pippin. They find the Urak-Hai killed by humans and Merry and Pippin escape into forbidden woods. The three follow inside, and the trees promise to take care of the two hobbits. Meanwhile Aragorn, Glimli, and Legolas find Gandalf alive and well (now called Gandalf the White) as he supposedly died in the first movie. The four evacuate the town of Rohan and move to the refuge in Helm's Deep where they must defend from the huge army of 10,000 Urak Hai, Saruman's troops, which seem impossible. Meanwhile Frodo's quest is going astray as they utilize the help of Gollumn, a strange being, who is very mysterious. They are captured by an army of humans and only after Boromir's brother sees what a burden the ring is, does he release Frodo, Sam, and Gollumn. The ring seems to be slowly controlling Frodo, and his will is slowly slipping away. These troubles begin to mount as the fate of Middle Earth is truly shaky. The movie is long, but has exciting action sequences especially the climax, the Battle Of Helm's Deep. The acting is decent, though the battles take a long chunk of the movie. Watching it is fun, as you get sucked into the world of Middle Earth and the quests of the heroes. Peter Jackson is a supberb director and The Two Towers is an awesome movie. The effects and sounds are amazing, and the detail is meticulous. A great movie altogether and a fitting sequal.
Rating:
Summary: Part Two of a Full Epic
Review: This movie was just plain sweet. Everything was done in perfect detail. The effects were awesome. And the battle sequence was stunning. A lot of [people complain that there is too much fighting in this movie. But the war is the main focus on this part of the Lord of the Rings. Plus some people complain that they left things out that were in the book. Well, we should all know by now that movies are more often than not, different from the book. The movie was already 3 and a half hours (minus the extra long version on DVD), they could probably have made each part 5 hours if they wanted to. Plus i heard some of the stuff not in it would appear in Return of the King. That's fine. It's all about what is going on. It makes more sense to me to do it that way. Anyways...The Lord of the Rings was written as one book, not three. And since this is just one movie serialized into three parts (cant have people in the theatre for 10 hours!) it doesn't matter. I am awaiting the Return of the King with much excitment.
Rating:
Summary: Close, but no cigar--Jackson shoots wide of the mark
Review: I am an avid fan of the Lord of The Rings trilogy, and have waited for years for someone to do it right. I give Peter Jackson five stars for successfully capturing the look of Middle Earth. The scenery, the epic battle scenes, the special effects are all first-rate. For the most part, I like the cast also (I'm sorry, but Liv Tyler, although beautiful, simply hasn't the depth to play Arwen). The reason I give the overall movie only three stars is because of the blatant disregard Jackson has for the character of Faramir, the brother of Boromir. As anyone who has read the book knows, Faramir had wisdom and a sense of honor second only to Aragorn. In the book, once Faramir became aware of Frodo's plight, he did everything he could to aid Frodo in his quest--he would never have forcibly taken Frodo and Sam to Gondor. I have to agree with Sam Cable and some of the others who were disappointed in this movie: There is no need to "improve" on Tolkien; and while I understand that some things have to be condensed or even cut to fit the story into three hours, I see little point in leaving out scenes that did occur in the book to make room for scenes that never happened in the book. I almost wish I hadn't read the books before seeing the movies; I think I could enjoy the movies more then. But this is still the best treatment of LOTR I've yet seen.
Rating:
Summary: An Epic Translation
Review: J.R.R. Tolkein wrote one of the masterpieces of human civilization when he crafted the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Peter Jackson's three films have taken that masterwork and translated it to a medium. The critics who scoff at the changes made to the books simply do not understand the nature of modern film. I'm just going to touch on 2 examples:
1. Arwen. The Arwen/Aragorn love story is completely Tolkein. In fact, much of the dialogue for the scenes in the Two Towers was taken WORD FOR WORD from the appendix of the trilogy. Why did Tolkein not include these elements in the main novel? Some would say that they would have interrupted the flow of the novel, others claim that Tolkein didn't feel confident about writing love scenes. Whichever it was, this tale was clearly part of the story Tolkein wanted to tell. By including it, Jackson has enriched the story, unified elements from Tolkein's writings, and made the film more accesible to younger female audiences. Why does everyone think that this is such a bad thing??? 2. Faramir. Yes, I agree that it would have been nice to see Faramir play his role exactly as written in the books. However, had he done so, the sequence would have contained absolutely no dramatic tension and brought the plot to a complete standstill. You can do that in a novel, but it is one of the golden rules of film to avoid doing so. You can pause for 50 pages to develop a character in an interesting way in a book. In film, the tension has to increase exponentially all the way to the climax. Brief respites are ok, but those respites should primarily serve as contrasts to the tension, not breaks in it. Anyway, Peter Jackson has crafted an amazing piece of work. Very few films in history could claim to rival it.
Rating:
Summary: WOOOOW!
Review: The Lord of the RIngs are probably the best movies ever made. I am a real fan of the books and the movies are just as awesome. Whatever Peter Jackson changes in the story does not take away from the plot but cleverly alters it slightly to fit the movie and keeps the same idea told in the book. Most movies made on books I`ve liked have usualy dissapointed me but not this one. It took two geniuses to create this film and it is truly a bigger hit than even starwars. I love the story the music the visual effects and the awesome battles in Two Towers. When a film trilogy is made the middle film is usualy not as exciting as the first or the last. The first film begins the story the last one ends it and the middle one sort of just hangs in there to make it longer. But the Two Towers is deffinately an exception to the rule: middle movie is not as thrilling. Be sure to see the ultimate in filmaking!!!!
| 
