"Where Movie Critics Get A Taste Of Their Own Medicine"

Does "Two Towers" rise above
"Fellowship of the Ring?"
by Herb Kane

January 14, 2003


out of 4 stars

CRITIC DOCTOR EXAMINES: Alex Sandell (juicycerebellum.com), Dustin Putman (themovieboy.com), Sean O'Connell (eclipsemagazine.com), Paul Salfen (supercalafragalistic.com), Moria Macdonald (Seattle Times), Roger Moore (Orlando Sentinel.com), Claudia Puig (USA Today), David Poland (TheHotButton.com), Elvis Mitchell (New York Times), Chuck Russel (filmthreat.com), Berge Garabedian (joblo.com), Owen Gleiberman (Entertainment Weekly), Mervius (mervius.com), Roger Ebert (Chicago Sun-Times), Mark Ramsey (moviejuice.com)

Wow. "Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" was simply amazing! While the "Fellowship of the Ring" practically put me to sleep like some elaborate lullaby, "The Two Towers" transformed this saga into a real Hollywood masterpiece.

I never thought I would be so thrilled to watch the two Hobbits Frodo (Elijah Wood, who is also from my hometown Cedar Rapids, IA) and Sam (Sean Astin) on their way to destroy the evil ring; or Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) and others on a mission to rescue the abducted hobbits Pippin and Merry. Gandalf (Ian McKellen) makes his triumphant return as the great wizard to help in the turmoil against the united towers of Saruman and Sauron. There are some critics who were not as thrilled as myself.

Alex Sandell (juicycerebellum) said, "The character development is exceedingly poor…the film is wearying, muddled, poorly-paced and hard to get through. Never did I think Jackson would make an LOTR film that was actually WORSE than the last. This time, he most definitely did."

For the love of God, Alex! The first movie was muddled, poorly-paced and EASY to sleep through. Maybe that's because it was all about character development and not dishing out the full course meal. You're statement is mind-boggling because "The Two Towers" brought this saga to life. I think you need some juice in your cerebellum!

Dustin Putman (themovieboy.com) complains, "He hops back and forth between subplots and characters and, while the visuals are still amazing, there is no joy, little energy..."

Dustin, this movie requires hopping around because we have different stories being told in one movie. No joy? What about Gimili's humor throughout? No energy? What about those awesome battle scenes? Most critics got it right::

• "Unlike its predecessor, which suffered a meandering narrative, 'Towers' possesses a strong central story and works independently as well as part of a bigger picture." Sean O'Connell (eclipsemagazine.com)
  
  
• "So is it as good as the first one? Absolutely...The battle sequences are more intense, the characters are more defined, and it's easier to take in as a whole due to the fact that not everything has to be explained or introduced this time around." Paul Salfen (supercalafragalistic.com)
  
  
• "Peter Jackson, in the second installment of his 'Lord of the Rings' trilogy, has confounded expectations and crafted a film that's both livelier and darker than the first one." Moria Macdonald (Seattle Times)
  
  
• The first film was good. 'The Two Towers' is much better…It's more of everything that's good in a fantasy film -- more majestic, more heroic, more passionate, more poetic, more comic, more thrilling, more menacing." Roger Moore (Orlando Sentinel.com)

"'The Two Towers' proves that the 'Lord of the Rings' series
will probably stand as the greatest fantasy film trilogy of all time."
David Poland (TheHotTicket.com)

Following a year-long intermission, director Peter Jackson didn't waste any time - he just throws you right back into the story and that's actually good! Claudia Puig (USA Today) said, "Not a sequel in the purest sense but a second act in the 'Lord of the Rings' trilogy, 'Towers' literally takes up where 'Fellowship' left off, with no 'Star Wars'-style scroll or catch-up narration. Presumably when the three films are watched back-to-back, they will look like one masterwork."

A masterwork, indeed! David Poland (TheHotButton.com) said, "'The Two Towers' proves that the 'Lord of the Rings' series will probably stand as the greatest fantasy film trilogy of all time. It's got all the making-kids-read benefits of 'Harry Potter,' the strong characters of 'Star Wars' and the visual singularity of 'The Matrix' series that's going to play out next year. It has it all."

To my surprise, the big star in this movie is a character by the name of Gollum (also called Smeagal), an amazing CGI character that is as real as any character in the movie. Elvis Mitchell (New York Times) describes this character perfectly: "Gollum is divided within himself; he is an infantilized wreck who wants to please and befriend the hobbits. But he is also a hissing, bitter child-man whose paranoia keeps him breathing, and plotting. Gollum is a computer-generated creation and as fully realized a character as can be found in 'Towers' - perhaps the most fully realized."

"Gollum is a CGI triumph."
Sean O'Connell (eclipsemagazine.com)

Gollum refers to the ring as "my precious" in a scratchy whisper. It's hilarious and creepy at the same time. I found myself imitating this when I left the theater and drove my wife nuts! Gollum is so real and this isn't just because of his CGI make-up, but his over-all character development, and his interaction with Frodo, Sam - and even himself! This creature is one big mind game and literally he blew me away along with every critic I read:

• "Freakin' amazing. The best, absolute BEST CG character ever created. He emotes in such a soulful way that it is heartbreaking. I kid you not; Gollum literally has an Oscar clip." Chuck Russel (filmthreat.com)
  
  
• "Gollum is a CGI triumph. With a Strom Thurmond physique and saucer-wide eyes, he's a rounded character, not a hollow effect." Sean O'Connell (eclipsemagazine.com)
  
  
• Gollum is the one who ultimately steals the show…no matter how many times he was shown, I was quite convinced of his performance and appearance among the other players." Berge Garabedian (joblo.com)
  
  
• "He's the one character in the picture whose course of action doesn't feel as if it's been plotted out on a flowchart." Owen Gleiberman (Entertainment Weekly)
  
  
• "I'm not sure which element of the movie is the more powerful reason to see 'The Two Towers' -- the stunning opening segment or Gollum's every scene." Mervius (mervius.com)

The film's battle scenes are violent and exciting while Gimli the Dwarf (John Rhys-Davies) gives us the needed comic relief. Gandalf the wizard appears only a few times in the movie - a smart move by the filmmakers who prove less is more as each appearance has significant value. Tree-Beard, a huge tree that walks and talks, is another unique creature and I agree with Roger Ebert (Chicago Sun-Times) who said, "There is a certain majesty in this mossy old creature."

Will the third sequel be as good as this one? Mark Ramsey (moviejuice.com) ponders, "Maybe the trilogy is like an Oreo cookie: The middle might be the best part." Let's hope not, Mark.

Paul Salfen (supercalafragalistic.com) summed the movie up best: "Enchanting from beginning to end, this film is truly a cinematic masterpiece that will undoubtedly be remembered (along with the other two parts) as a milestone in movie history."

Fantasy stories don't appeal to me, but this movie finally broke that barrier! I now have renewed hope in this J.R.R. Tolkien saga. While another year-long intermission ensues, I will be eager to see the final chapter unfold in 2003.

"The Two Towers" dwarfed "Fellowship of the Ring" - PERIOD.

-- CRITIC DOCTOR

Copyright © 2002 Herb Kane
All rights reserved.
Critic Doctor.com

FILM CREDITS

Buy This Poster!	Frodo: Elijah Wood Gandalf: Ian McKellen Aragorn: Viggo Mortensen Sam Gamgee: Sean Astin Pippin Took: Billy Boyd Arwen Undomiel: Liv Tyler Saruman: Christopher Lee Grima Wormtongue: Brad Dourif Galadriel: Cate Blanchett
Director: Peter Jackson Screenplay: Frances Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Stephen Sinclair and Peter Jackson. Based on the novel by J.R.R. Tolkien Running Time: 2 hr, 59 min. Release Date: 12.18.2002. MPAA Rating: PG-13 (Violence, mature themes) OFFICIAL SITE