Last year, when I wrote my review for "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring," most of what I wrote was a half-apology for not liking it as much as I should have, despite thinking that the movie was a masterpiece. I still feel that way, the movie is a masterpiece, but "The Lord of the Rings" isn't my kinda story. I still have tremendous respect for "The Fellowship of the Ring," despite not really liking it, and I even bought the DVD (the extended 4-disc set, no less). Not only that, I went and saw the sequel, "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers," and yes, when it's released next year, I'll be seeing the third and final part of the trilogy, "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King." Naturally, I'll be buying all of the DVDs, too. But one thing at a time, yesterday I saw the second part in the trilogy, "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers." It still isn't my kinda story, but I ended up liking this one more than the first one. No, I haven't suddenly turned into a J.R.R. Tolkien fanatic, but despite the slow scenes, and not being a huge fan of the story, I was pretty entertained by this movie, and if I was "pretty entertained," I would imagine that the many diehard fans of Tolkien will absolutely love it.
Even though I was bored through most of "The Fellowship of the Ring," I was looking forward to seeing this sequel. The trailer was amazing, and it did a fantastic job of getting me interested in seeing it. What especially worked for me was the music in the second half of the trailer, which didn't even use Howard Shore's music from the movie. It actually took the music from "Requiem for a Dream" (I own the soundtrack, which is awesome... the music was composed by Clint Mansell, and performed by the Kronos Quartet), but the music in that movie is very simple, a couple of strings. For the trailer to "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers," Clint Mansell's music from "Requiem for a Dream" was re-orchestrated to sound bigger, much more grand, and the result was featured in the trailer to "The Two Towers," and it was magnificent. Whoever thought of doing that really came up with something awesome. And the images in the trailer were pretty damn good, too.
But anyway, yeah, I like "The Two Towers" better than "The Fellowship of the Ring." Perhaps the reason is because in this movie, the action begins immediately. Actually, it begins with a flashback from the first movie, but it's a flashback of one of the big action scenes in that first film. After that, the second movie begins, and it's off and running. The first movie did a lot of explaining and setting up, but with this one, the movie starts, and the action begins. It assumes that the viewer has seen the first film, and rightfully so.
Most of the actors and actresses from the first film are in the second, as well as a few new ones. The acting was great in the first one, and it's just as good in the second. Rather than give a role call of who was in it, I'll just assume that you read my review of "The Fellowship of the Ring." Besides, I'm lazy. I WILL say that once again, Viggo Mortensen as "Aragorn" and Orlando Bloom as "Legolas Greenleaf" really stand out, and I'm sure they'll be in heavy demand for acting roles once the trilogy is complete.
I should also mention the character of "Gollum." This character is completely computer-generated (think "Jar-Jar" from "Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace," but MUCH less annoying), and it's probably the biggest achievement of the film. In a movie filled with amazing visuals, special effects, and all that stuff, I gotta say that the computer-animated character "Gollum" is the thing the filmmakers should be most proud of. George Lucas did it with "Jar-Jar" and in "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets," we saw it with "Dobby," but "Gollum" is definitely the most impressive one to date, by far.
"The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" is an awesome looking movie, and once again, Peter Jackson proves that he's an incredible filmmaker, despite the fact that before this trilogy, his movies were small productions, not nearly as big or ambitious. It'll be interesting to see what kinda movies he'll be directing once he's done with these huge spectacles. He's a director who obviously loves the material he's working from, and he's done a masterful job with it. As for the writing, it's the same team as "The Fellowship of the Ring," but in addition to Fran Walsh & Philippa Boyens & Peter Jackson, there's Stephen Sinclair, who wasn't part of the writing team of "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring." I don't know if it was the addition of Sinclair, or if it's simply a better story, but like I said, I like "The Two Towers" better than "The Fellowship of the Ring."
Fans of Tolkien will love this movie, though they may nitpick about how faithful the movie is to the book. Those like me, who aren't fans of Tolkien, will still be amazed by what's on the screen, and will happily sit through the slow parts to get to the good stuff. Sure, this isn't my kinda movie, but it's something that needs to be seen. I'm really looking forward to "The Return of the King."
Scale of 1-10: 7