Thoughts on Two Towers

Lord of the Rings goes part II:
Two Towers is really Gollums film at least for the first part of the film. He really is amazing and very well done. If he doesn't get a oscar nomination for best supporting actor I'm disappointed.[:)]

Besides Gollum we get the big battle at Helms Deep which is very well done with big wide shoots of literally thousands of Orcs, men, elves and what have we fighting for the survival of men. It is grand and works very well.

Two Towers is a very heavy CGI film compared to part 1 and some of the effects are not good enough for my taste but they are not so present that it ruins the experience. Some have criticized the living trees but I actually think they work very well.

Of course, you already added The Two Towers to our database even though the DVD hasn't been announced. [:)]

Henning, I am sorry to say that LOTR 2 was a BIG let-down. I wanted LOTR 1 to be longer, but this one could have been much shorter. It did not feel long, but a lot of the stuff with the Ents was repetitive. I mean, if the trees were going to attack Isengard anyway, why spend so much screen time dealing with them debating the issue? Also, I did not like the way that the filmmakers cut between so many battles at the worst possible times. Just as I was getting into the Helms Deep situation, the editors cut to a battle somewhere else. The mood was very much ruined. I give the movie a 7 out of 10. And yes, for 2 years running, I am rating the Harry Potter movies higher than I rate the LOTR adaptations. :-P

Not all countries are as eager to go to war as the USA and the UK (no I don't want to debate politics) are today. Even the US did not want to be part of World War II before they where attacked themselves. This is the conflicts the movie tries to portray with the Ents. I recon the longer version of the film will cover this more.

It is a part II and not a sequel because of this the film feels a bit odd with no start and no end. New characters not giving meaning in this one but playing a big part in Return of the King. I rate it a 9 and still believes we are witnessing the best trilogy ever made and the Extended versions being the once that truly holds as classics.

You must remember that this is the middle part of the trilogy and as expected it will be the weakest of all 3. It is a build-up to the finale next year.

i do not think that being the middle movie excuses LOTR 2 from its lack of accomplishment. if anything, being the middle movie makes the movie MORE of a disappointment because it did not build on what was achieved by the first entry. also, if you want to look at all 3 films as one big movie instead of 3 separate entities, then you have a LOTR that has a very soft mid-section that hurts the entire epic as a whole.

henning, i agree that the US did not feel like fighting until it was directly attacked. however, the US was wrong to avoid entering WWI and WWII so late in the game. how many more people could have been saved had we fought along the sides of our allies??? that is why we must be vigilant and use a stronger hand than the evils do. re: LOTR 2, the ents were as wrong as the US for delaying joining the war.

You mean to say it is actually better than American Ninja 2?!

Personally, I think TT is on par with Fellowship. What did it for me was Gollom, which was just amazing work by Andy Serkus and the CG team. Much better work than Yoda in Episode 2 (but I think my hatred for CG Yoda stems from the recent Who's the man? Yoda man. commercials.) Also, I think the Helm's Deep battle didn't live up to the hype. And for some reason during the film it really annoyed me that Treebeard was voiced by John Rhys-Davies who also plays Gimblee. Despite these things, on my scale i give it a 9/10.

I agree, but your point is also what the the ents scenes try to show. [:)]

Tim, you mention the build-up to something great...and I thought that the ending was anti-climactic. The filmmakers kept on cutting away from the action just as it was building to a peak. I can't forgive the movie for bad editing.

Well my thoughts are a BIG 10 all the way! I've had a couple of days to think it over and it is everything I expected and more. I feel we are truely watching a legend unfold before our very eyes and feel blessed to see that a great epic is still possible in Hollywood. Its certainly the best film I've seen this year, if not one of the greatest films I've seen in the last ten to twenty years. The look and feel of the film is everything I imagined J.R.R. Tolkens legendary story to be. Gollum alone has to be the best CGI character I've seen, and yes there were a few flaws in some spots, but still far better then that Jar Jar crap Lucas tried to pull on us! And on that note, the TT makes the last two Star Wars episodes look as childish as Ren & Stimpys - Space Madness.

I had no problem with the rather slow pacing, and in fact, I love a film that slowly works its way to a big-bang ending. The visuals alone were even more astonishing then FOTR, and not to mention far more epic then the last. I rather enjoyed, also, that this film brought us closer to the other characters of the film rather then staying too focused on the Hobbits. It was even darker then the last which is something I felt FOTR lacked a little of, but only in a small way.

I thought very hard about this film and tried not to base my opinion on the excitement of the moment. The more I thought about it, the more I'd find elements that were truely stunning; to say the least. It's a very bold, epic, and outstanding piece of work, and an absolute slap-in-the-face to Spielberg & Lucas! (way to go Peter Jackson!) The way I see it, no matter how much you disect this picture you're still going to look back in twenty years form now and say, they just don't make them like that anymore.

Tim, a very happy lazy critic!

10+/10 [:)]

well, Eddie, I guess we just see things differently; nothing wrong with that. [:)]

It really didn't bother me that the story jumped from one place to the other in the end, after all we were given attention to three different storys happening in this episode. I don't think it really bothered the audience that much either. In fact I heard more cheering and clapping then I've heard in a theatre in years. It certainly had higher audience response compared to the opening night of Attack of the Clones. I wish I could help you see it in a different way, but we all have our differences, and actually I like that, it makes life interesting. Maybe you should try a few drinks next time! LOL!!![:)]

I needed a few drinks before AND after Resident Evil, man. [:)]

As for clapping and cheering...as fun as it is to have audience participation, crowd-pleasing elements don't automatically make a movie great. I have a lot of fun watching the Bond movies, but I don't rate them as '10s' just because I had a good time. On the other hand, I hate Kubrick's 2001, but I would rate that movie a '10'. Personal likes/dis-likes have little to do with the value of a film's contribution to the language of cinema. LOTR 2 might be fun, but it doesn't offer anything that we haven't seen elsewhere.

Well, Eddie, I'd have to agree that the audience participation would not affect my point of view of whether the film should get a 10. You are right, I had fun at Attack of the Clones, along with the crowd, but the movie was far from a 10. Kubricks, 2001, though, I can only imagine an audience fast asleep! LOL!!!

True that LOTR:TT had elements we've seen in films before, however, they were done far better then those previous films of the past. Regardless of audience, or former theme elements, I still find TT to be one of the best films I've seen in 2002. Of course, if it had Naomi Watts I would give it an 11. [:)]

mra
8)
Most of this movie was really well done. The Ents, everything about Rohan, Helm's Deep, Gollum, and the build-up to Helm's Deep.
It was the editing during the last hour which disappointed. Putting most of the Ent scenes before Helm's Deep, and having more battle after Gandalf arrived at Helm's Deep, and making the Ents storming Isengard longer would have made it much better.

I don't know if it's good for us (the audience) as well as the movie makers that we've become so critical of movies or not. On the one hand maybe it will push the industry to keep improving. However on the other hand it seems that we might be so overly concerned with explosions, CG characters, or which big name actor(s) are in the movie that we've become cynical, and remiss in recognizing the elements that actually make up a good movie. Such as storyline, character building, composition, acting style, and many other things that in culmination literally incorporate us into the movie. It seems that a lot of people today are quick to give a movie a bad rating and look at all of the minor flaws, vs. the movie as a whole. Sorry to wax philisophical.