Rating: 
Summary: Masterpiece of Modern Cinema
Review: I personally thought the first film was more successful but The Two Towers is a great film in its own right and anyone who understands the language of cinema or works in the industry is not going to dispute that.Its sad and almost embarrassing the way people don't understand the difference media can make to a story. Yes, changes have been made, but they've been made for a reason - story pacing, film structure, tension etc... Anyone who's a fan of cinema is going to enjoy this film. If you're a fan of tolkein who perhaps doesn't really understand film or are visually illiterate (my 5 year old could produce a piece of modern art), don't bother seeing this.
Rating: 
Summary: Rebuttal of rebuttal of "devout purist"
Review: Grantefd you don;t have to put every minor detail, or stick to any minor detail at all, but in a movie adaptation you cannot expect people who've read a book to like the movie if you change absolutely EVERY major decision made, these weren't subtle changes they masacres of characters thay changed people who are amazingly humble and kind hearted (for a reason) to be sado-heartless idiots. Please don't make judgemens like "you can't expect everything down to the minute detail to be the same" if you donlt know that they changed everything. Still it was better than the first one, just.
Rating:
Summary: Give it up.
Review: Right, I understand that making a bigshot hollywood movie out of something as amazing as The Lord of the Rings but come on changing a few things here and there for flow and all is fine but did they have to change absolutely everything. Is nothing sacred. The turned Faramir into a sadist b*stard and the ents don;t want to help them? what is going on here. The reason i bumped it up to 3 from 1 was because of Golum, he is the most amazing actor i have seen for a long time, absolutely brilliant performance.
Rating:
Summary: Nothing wrong
Review: There is absolutely nothing wrong with this dvd. It's just like the 1st one. I liked the special features like Sean Astin short movie was great and gollum's song was cool too. The making of the video game was great also. What I liked the most was the return of the king preview I can't wait to see that movie. I am also waiting for the special edition of the two towers i am sure that that dvd will be great.
Rating:
Summary: A Rose by any other name?
Review: First let me say that those involved in bringing these books to the screen have a monumental task, and are doing a fairly good job in representation. I know poetic license is often taken in such aspects, and as for missing some of the story, that just happens. How in the world do you put a full novel on the screen. That being said, there is one aspect to TTT that really got my goat. WHY CHANGE THE COMPLETE PORTRAYAL OF AN IMPORTANT CHARACTER! I of course refer to the screen version of Faramir. In the book, you are given a glimpse of what the Fellowship of the ring would have been if the "right" son had been set to the task, rather than the "rightful" son. Faramir of the book was pure in spirit, where Boromir was flawed. There was no quest for glory, no kidnapping, no sudden epiphany. Faramir knew, as soon as he realized who Frodo was, what needed to be done. Purest? You have to draw the line somewhere. Other things also bothered me a bit in the sense that there is so much material from the books to use, why create new scenes.
Rating:
Summary: 2 down, 1 to go! Incredible!
Review: I loved the Two Towers. Of course there were changes, but there has to be in a cinematic version! I don't understand the people that say it was changed completely from the books. I've read them numerous times and I thought all in all, Peter Jackson did an incredible job! But, those others are entitled to their opinions. I personally can NOT wait for the extended version! 43 minutes of extra footage, it will be an incredible offering of 'eye candy' for the huge Tolkien fan!
Two Towers was great!
Rating: 
Summary: Still Hunting for those "Rabid" Purists...
Review: After reading the first hundred reviews on this site, I must admit I am still hunting for those rabid purists I have heard so much about... The negative reviews which I have read, have for the most part admitted and appreciated the difficulty of translating Tolkien's masterpiece to the screen while disagreeing with the changes Peter Jackson chose to incorporate into TTT. Am I missing something here? Since when does wishing a movie would be *more* true to its namesake make one a fanatic who should shut up, get a life, and not bother those who know how to "truly enjoy" a good movie? What makes a compendium of reviews valuable is the rich difference of opinions. Certainly, for those who loved the movie, say so! Tell us about what you enjoyed. But give those who differ from you the same privilege and allow them their "negative" opinion. That being said, I join the ranks of those who were very disappointed in TTT. I enjoyed FOTR and own the extended edition, which, while it differs from the book at points, is true to the spirit of the book. 3 cheers for Peter Jackson! If he had not done so well with movie #1, I wouldn't have been at the theater with such high expectations for movie #2. I would have enjoyed TTT as a stand-alone movie titled differently. However, I went to the theater to see Tolkien's work, not some other hybrid plot that happened to bear the same name--with enough points in common to show that it was, indeed, trying to recreate the same story, but so many MAJOR things completely different... So let me be disappointed. No, my world isn't ending, nor will I be picketing in front of the theater come December. That doesn't mean you can't like the movie. And if that makes me a "rabid purist"--well, then so be it.
Rating:
Summary: This was awesome!
Review: I absolutely enjoyed this one even better then the first one,the action was better. Trees walking and talking, too cool. Of course, I have to say that Smell made the movie though.Lord Argon is just fantastic!
Rating:
Summary: My preciousss
Review: We loved this movie, yes Preciousss. Our favorite character finally in it *gollum gollum*. When we first saw the movie, we were disappointed at first that Gollum's face was so human, but after the first scene, preciousss, we loves it! Andy Serkis deserved a "Best Supporting Actor" oscar. Yes yes! But it wasn't exaclty like the book, but who cares? Not us! All the important items left out will surely be included in the next movie, so quit worrying, preciouss! Yes. Poor poor Sméagol. Nice fish.
Rating:
Summary: The Debacle of the Two Towers
Review: I'm actually rather loth to give this two stars, since it was such a rotten movie. This should not have been called the Two Towers; call it something else, because it did not accurately portray the book at all. Tolkien would be rolling in his grave. Since when did Faramir become worse than Boromir? Why would a Wringwraith be scared away from taking the One Ring (that is being handed to him) by a measily little arrow? Why is Frodo seen as being very weak? Why do the Ents decide not to attack Isengard? Why does Aragorn needlessly fall over the cliff? In referance to that, why is he still alive when he does? Why does Arwen show up so much when she's hardly seen in the books? Why is Eown not stunningly beautiful like Tolkien says in the book? Why is every orc enormous? Even the Urak-hi were not supposed to be man high. And why in the name of all that is good and beautiful, why does the movie skip the last half of the book entirely?
People may say that it's a good movie if you don't think of it as being 'The Two Towers.' I beg to differ. It has no plot and the acting clashes with itself. What a waste in millions of dollars. Even more sad is the delusion of millions of people that they think that they know all about the Lord of the Rings.
| 
