It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anyone seen the 2 Towers?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2002 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Two Towers gets mixed reviews
09 December 2002

The latest instalment of Wellington director Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings film trilogy has been met with mixed reviews since it opened in New York last week.



Variety Magazine's lead film reviewer Todd McCarthy and American website www.rottentomatoes.com
reviewer Owen Gleiberman had different views on the 179-minute Two Towers film, the second film in the trilogy.

McCarthy said the film was in some ways more impressive than the first - The Fellowship of the Ring.

It had a sharper narrative focus and a "livelier sense" of forward movement than the trilogy's first instalment.

"Marked by non-stop conflict and a gargantuan climactic battle that (Japanese film director) Akira Kurosawa would have envied...

"As before, the exceptional New Zealand locations seem to have been created to order for the trilogy...

"Tolkien's descriptions have been physically realised in the sets, costumes, make-up, hairstyles, special effects, and the cast is indisputably impressive," McCarthy said.

The film was an "...amply satisfying second serving of fantastical adventure".

Both McCarthy and Gleiberman rated the film's battle at Helm's Deep and digitally created character Gollum as standouts.

"To describe the battle of Helm's Deep, the spectacular deathly cataclysm that's the climactic sequence of the Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers as 'big' would be an understatement," Gleiberman said.

"It's biblical."

"It's not every day that a special effect turns in a splendid performance (ET comes to mind), but Gollum... has a crackling, maniacal, yet weirdly forlorn charisma."

Gleiberman did criticise the battle of good and evil characterised in the films based on the books by JRR Tolkien.

"...the heroes are so clear-souled and upright that they're effectively purged of internal struggle; their battle is exclusively with forces outside of themselves.

"That was never the case in, say, Star Wars or, indeed, in any counterworld adventure movie that I can honestly say I'm stirred by," Gleiberman said.

In labelling the film B-grade, he said: "...what it comes down to is superbly staged battle scenes and moral alliances forged in earnest yet purged of the wit and dynamic, bristly ego that define true on- screen personality".

Other reviewers endorsed the film, which opened on Friday.

"Much like the second book's opening, director Peter Jackson does not spend too much time reacquainting audiences with characters and the prequel's plot," reviewer Christopher Cobb said on the website u-wire.com.

Jackson had done a "fantastic job" in filming what some had labelled an "unfilmable" series.

"Women will once again swoon over macho Viggo Mortensen's Aragorn and too-cute Orlando Bloom's Legolas as they impale countless Orcs while defending Helm's Deep in a battle sequence that rivals Star Wars: Attack of the Clones in technical splendour," Cobb said.




posted on Dec, 8 2002 @ 08:38 PM
link   
I have not yet seen the movie.(SOON DAMNIT) Anyway if it has more action than the first it will rival starwars episode 2.(Quicky)lol



posted on Dec, 8 2002 @ 10:23 PM
link   
This is where it lacks in the books as well, it has VAST character background, but their interactions through out the book I think are a bit flat. So it is expected to be the same in the movie.

However, the trilogy is still better than the original Starwars trilogy, and you can forget standing in line for "episode 3"


Lord of the Rings means more, is more, is larger, and has a better path for its characters, and consequently a better end than Starwars


And when you view it the way I do (I've heard from many that LotR isn't supposed to mean anything, that he was just making a book for a new language, which IS more or less true), but I think it is also quite emotional.

I'm probably stating the obvious but when you think of the west as Death (makes sense no?) and the passing of the elves as the end of the world known to everyone in Middle Earth, and Sauron and the ONE ring as the catalyst for that "end", the series becomes much more emotional.

Like, they save the world from slavery at the price of the end of their world. All that they save is the memory, and memory is a sad thing, when it is all you have, as the people of middle earth have only memory. Their only future was to destroy the one ring, when that was accomplished their world would end, the elves would "pass away" the people's of middle earth die in the fullness of time, and the future was someone elses, without the ancient traditions and heritages of the 3rd age.

Sincerely,
no signature



posted on Dec, 9 2002 @ 12:13 AM
link   
The only thing I don't like about Tolkien is that his characters are too morally-aware/centered. (In the case of the good guys)



posted on Dec, 9 2002 @ 07:02 AM
link   
I saw a review on Pitchforkmedia.com that said the battle of Helm's Deep made the Star Wars' Ep. 2 battle scene look like it was done in a barn with handpuppets. I can't wait!!



posted on Dec, 9 2002 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Soon I will see it and love it as the first. I fanything beats Yoda fighting then it has to pretty damn good.




top topics
 
0

log in

join