MemeStreams | MemeStreams Discussion

Create an Account

This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: Review: The Two Towers. You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.

Review: The Two Towers
by Dolemite at 9:21 am EST, Dec 18, 2002

I thought I'd include this link to a review along with my own thoughts about The Two Towers. I decided to check out the midnight performance this morning and I am certainly glad that I did.

First, it's hard to say that there are any plot spoilers in a review of The Two Towers since it's based upon one of the most read books this century. However, there are several changes/additions to the movie which made some fanboys bitch at the end of the movie. I was not one of them as I think Peter Jackson has done a fantastic job of pulling together multiple sources (Silmarillion, appendixes) and presenting them in a cohesive story.

Hands down, the performance that brought a character to life more than any other was Andy Serkis' rendering of Smeagol/Gollum. While the visuals are CGI imposed, Andy was in a blue suit with plot points that tracked his movement, plus he provided the voice. It is amazing how well he pulls off the schizophrenic nature of Smeagol/Gollum, allowing the audience to pity the creature in much the same way that Frodo does.

The film doesn't follow the beginning and ending of The Two Towers as Tolkein wrote it. After all, Fellowship of the Ring breached the line by providing some of the story from The Two Towers at the end of it. I can tell you this without any ruining of the plot - the movie sets up the beginning of Return of the King to contain major sections of the print version of The Two Towers. Perhaps this is best since half of Return of the King in print form ended up being appendixes. It's also better as it gives a closer "Hollywood Ending" with the battles of Helm's Deep and Isengard wrapping up this volume. In any case, that was one of the things I overheard fanboys bitching about.

One final remark - I saw Fellowship of the Ring a total of 9 times in the theater, I will probably see The Two Towers at least that many. As one who studied theatre and film in college and who has had a lifelong love for the magic created in those venues, I feel that we now have two thirds of the greatest epic ever created.

Dolemite

RE: Review: The Two Towers
by Elonka at 7:51 pm EST, Dec 18, 2002

Dolemite wrote:
]
] Hands down, the performance that brought a character to life
] more than any other was Andy Serkis' rendering of
] Smeagol/Gollum.

I agree about the Gollum character. The effects were breathtaking, and the character (and its foibles) really "came to life" on the screen for me. I'd forget it was CGI, and just enjoy the story.

As for the movie itself, I thought that "The Two Towers" was great, though not as great as last year's movie. It's still excellent, and I'll definitely see it again in theaters, which says quite a bit though. Until "Fellowship" last year, I rarely watched any movie more than once. There were perhaps three movies over the last decade that I'd gone to see twice (I saw "Matrix" three times). Then "Fellowship" came along, and I went to see it *eight* times while it was still in theaters. For "Two Towers" though, I'll probably only go see it one more time, when my cousin wants to go see it.

I think one of the reasons that I didn't quite like this one as much, was because of the much higher focus on action sequences over character interaction. Especially with combat scenes, even if well done, I personally tend to lose interest after a period of time, and think to myself, "Okay okay, it's a fight scene, we get the point, let's move on with the story." I'm well aware though that that's a personal bias, as some of the people I went to see TTT with said that they *loved* the fight scenes.

So, overall, on a scale of 1-10, I give "Fellowship" an 11, and "Towers" a 9.

Elonka :)