User Score
9.0

Universal acclaim- based on 1217 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 22, 2012
    10
    This movie is my pick for the best of the series. The acting is better, the action is awesome, and once again it does a great job at creating middle earth and drawing you into the story.
  2. Feb 2, 2014
    9
    Still fresh, The Lord of the Rings series' second installment is almost as good as the first, with slight imperfections that are easily overlooked. Overall, the movie is still a great epic.
  3. Aug 24, 2014
    10
    With just as much thrill and wonder as the Fellowship of the Ring, we find ourselves a bit farther on this remarkable journey. The relentlessly beautiful visuals are perhaps some of the finest cinematography of all-time. Another modern classic.
  4. Mar 26, 2012
    10
    The Two Towers is equally as good as the first but with bigger and better battle sequences. It has even more adeventure and even mixes in some comedy in that makes the movie flow perfectly. The best picture of the year.
  5. Jan 3, 2013
    8
    Thickening upon everything that made its predecessor great, Peter Jackson's second installment of his "Lord Of The Rings" trilogy makes for a wholly immersive and breathtaking narrative piece with continuously developing characters and an always-sensational bundle of set pieces.
  6. Sep 23, 2011
    8
    "The Two Towers" isn't much epic as its powerful prequel, but its still amazes me that Peter Jackson can release such a wonderful movie within a year.
  7. Nov 14, 2012
    8
    While the plot tends to meander, Two Towers is still alive and breathtaking in the moment. Jackson has proved himself to be a master craftsman of the so called 'epic movie.'
  8. Mar 27, 2012
    10
    If you don't love this movie you should go to the doctor because you clearly have something inside of you that prevents you from recognizing the epitome of what is a perfect film.
  9. Jul 9, 2014
    9
    Just marvelous. It is hard for me to separate this one and the first film as it is just as magical and entrancing as its predecessors and while it does struggle from being a middle film, it never shows that struggle. As with the first film, the acting is beyond impressive, the script is great, the cinematography is great, and the action beautifully done. However, first and foremost worthyJust marvelous. It is hard for me to separate this one and the first film as it is just as magical and entrancing as its predecessors and while it does struggle from being a middle film, it never shows that struggle. As with the first film, the acting is beyond impressive, the script is great, the cinematography is great, and the action beautifully done. However, first and foremost worthy of praise is the special effects. How they do what they do is mesmerizing to me. In addition, the characters are completely engrossing and brilliant to watch as they transverse this immaculately designed and imagined world they live in. As with the first film, this film is the definition of an epic and is a stunningly great sequel to what was a great first film. I did not believe the first film could be improved upon (I do think this one is ever so slightly better), but dammit, it was. This one leaves you drooling waiting for the third film and the conclusion to this storyline. Expand
  10. May 20, 2014
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It is extremely difficult to review one of your long-time favorites. This is the movie I've seen most times in a movie theater (a total of 6 times I believe), and no matter what I write in this review, it won't be enough to explain my love for this film.

    The story is split into two directions, one following Frodo and Sam's journey towards Mordor and their less than shaky relationship with Gollum/Sméagol, whom they manage to get as their guide to Mordor.

    Personally, in the books or in the movies, I've never really cared for Frodo's journey; my heart always lay with the Three Hunters (Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli). Nonetheless, as we follow Frodo's desperate struggle to take the One Ring to its doom - while avoiding it falling to the hands of its true Master - we get to meet Faramir, son of Denethor and the brother of Boromir. The first glimpse at Gondor's demise leaves little hope that when the final attack comes, they would survive (but more of that in the next movie...).

    Sam's outbursts kind of annoyed me in this film; sure, I get the hate and distrust he feels towards Gollum, whom Frodo is pitying and trying to help. It puts a strain on the relationship between all of them, which in the darkness of Mordor will twist itself into something far worse...

    Quite well balanced with the Frodo/Sam scenes we have the primary focus of this film: Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli are pursuing the Uruk-hai who took Merry and Pippin in the end of "The Fellowship of the Ring".

    As Saruman's deceit deepens, and he prepares to attack Rohan, Merry and Pippin have an important part to play - in their own way - while the Three Hunters are unexpectedly joined by an old friend and move onto Rohan to release its king from Saruman's grasp.

    Besides David Wenham as Faramir, we get to see new, wonderful characters: Karl Urban as Éomer, Miranda Otto as Éowyn, Bernard Hill as Théoden... I could go on...

    The epic battle of Helm's Deep is grim, dark and it is clear from the beginning that their hopes of winning are not very high. Not even with the addition of Galadhrim to join them (Craig Parker as Haldir returns, and I'm glad to see him, although heartbroken to see him go as well...).

    The battle scenes are brutal and thrilling. Legolas and Gimli's contest puts some lightness into it, although it is a grim race.

    "The Two Towers" is more action packed than "The Fellowship of the Ring". Perhaps that is why I like it so much better than the first movie.

    If one has to complain about something, it is the rather random scenes with Arwen. Sure, we should not forget her, and they sort of fit in, but also disrupt the balance of certain scenes. Not to mention the scene with Galadriel and Elrond; by that time the union of the two towers had been gone over at least twice by several others, and it felt like a stale repeat of what is going on - only with a slight twist. It is unlikely anyone watching the movie and paying attention would have forgotten who exactly is working with whom.

    This is an epic movie, though. Beautiful scenery, amazing score, incredible details... It all creates a world much like our own, and at the same time, nothing like ours.

    And again, if you can get your hands on the extended version - hold onto that.
    Expand
  11. Oct 30, 2010
    10
    the best in the trilogy and the awesomeness in the franchise.
  12. May 26, 2012
    10
    With mind-blowing performances from the whole entire cast, along with skilled dialogue. Featuring its amazing visual effects, breathtaking action, and being even more emotionally resonant than the first. I give this movie 98%.
  13. Oct 2, 2013
    10
    The battle for Middle Earth continues in this epic and vastly rich in detail sequel to the Fellowship of the Ring, the Two Towers is often regarded as the best of the three, its name deriving from the tower in Mordor where the flaming eye of Sauron sits, and the tower of Isengard, where the corrupted Saruman build his army. It introduces new characters while still maintaining heavy focusThe battle for Middle Earth continues in this epic and vastly rich in detail sequel to the Fellowship of the Ring, the Two Towers is often regarded as the best of the three, its name deriving from the tower in Mordor where the flaming eye of Sauron sits, and the tower of Isengard, where the corrupted Saruman build his army. It introduces new characters while still maintaining heavy focus on the ones we grew to admire from the first part, the stories intertwine yet happen worlds apart, Frodo (Elijah Wood) and Sam (Sean Astin) have gone it alone to the fires of Mount Doom in the hope of destroying the ring of power, but they are my no means alone, as the shady creature known as Gollum (Andy Serkis) is on their every move, but he may soon prove his worth as the two hobbits seem to be going round in circles. Frodo is beginning to show signs of the ring overpowering him by now, he's grouchy, angry and taking it out on Sam. But another battle continues to rage as the evil Saruman (Christopher Lee) continues to raise an unbeatable army in the name of Sauron and the ring, an army that seeks domination of the lands, Rohan being the centre of it, Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and Gimli (John Rys-Davies) are in search of Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd) who have been taken by the dangerous breed of Uruk-hai believing them to be Frodo.
    But there is more to it all that just needs to be watched, we have a reborn Gandalf (Ian McKellan) who helps steer the masses in the right direction, as each city must stand up and rise against the armies. We make way for one of the most memorable battle sequences in cinema history, the battle of Helms Deep, thousands of soldiers and even more orcs line the land to fight, it's raining, it's wonderful to watch and it's action packed, to the fullest. Wonderful to watch couldn't be used enough in this review, because the Two Towers is exciting from start to finish, whether its the epic battles, talking trees, continuing character-driven stories or vast landscapes of beauty, it takes everything from the first and doubles it, Aragorn seems to take centre stage in the film, as the Hobbits take a back seat for a while, the two hobbits on the way to Mordor are really just walking for most of the film, but Wood and Astin excellently play beaten travellers as we begin to realise the sway such a small object can hold, but Aragorn is the heir to the white city of Gondor, he therefore must salvage all the remaining hope in men, and deal with the many obstacles that stand in his path, but not without a few secrets to be revealed first, although he longs after Arwen (Liv Tyler), another woman, Eowyn (Miranda Otto) takes an interest in his peculiar being. Like before, it's the phenomenal acting and intriguing characters these actors portray that really bring the film to life, it's visually impressive as ever, yet these larger than life heroes are likeable, easy to root for and give a sense of happiness and despair rolled into one, we have love, loss, hatred and frightening elements of the supernatural to enjoy. McKellan's Gandalf speaks heavily in riddle, and the more I watch this trilogy the more I think he knew along what was going to happen, the reason for his participation was a bored pensioner with not long left until retirement. The element that drives Lord of the Rings head and shoulders above others is its own time and its own original world, everything about it breathes magic and fantasy, the Two Towers capitalises on success but doesn't settle to be just as good, it aims higher and opens up to a host of new characters and story lines that set up a massive and historic final chapter.
    Expand
  14. Jan 5, 2013
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Overall Two Towers is a great film. The characters are more developed and likeable. The presence of the awesome character Gollum adds even more interest. Frodo is still a weak character though. Plus, the movie is still gritty but there is some comedy to lighten things up. The story is more complex a little too much at times but it feels necessary. The film does drag at parts but it sets up some amazing battle scenes. The scenes that Jackson gets right he really gets right. There is some great moments in this film like the last one. While Two Towers still has some of the same problems as Fellowship, the characters and story are much better and the stuff that is good is really good creating a movie that is stronger than its predecessor and makes me excited for Return of the King, which some consider to be the best in the series. Expand
  15. Dec 6, 2013
    10
    "LOTR: The Two Towers" is absolutely magnificent. It's more action-packed than the first and they're some of the greatest battle scenes ever. It's emotionally powerful and the story is brilliantly paced and even tops the first one. The extended edition's runtime, at 235 minutes, is absolutely tremendously exciting.
  16. Mar 11, 2015
    10
    I wish every movie were like this. Epic storytelling operating on the level of mythology with the spectacle and tone of a Wagnerian opera. If only I could erase my memory of these films and watch them for the first time with every viewing, I would probably stop watching all other movies!
  17. Dec 5, 2011
    8
    It was ok. While the CGI parts are pretty terrible and painfully obvious, The action more then makes up for it and the epic battle at the end delivers an amazing climax to the film. I agree with another reviewer that said you know its a good trilogy when the worst film in it still gets a high score.
  18. Apr 23, 2015
    8
    Of the three pieces of the Middle Earth puzzle, The Two Towers is the one with the biggest handicap. It is afflicted with the "middle chapter syndrome" - an inherent obstacle for the second episode of any trilogy. The Two Towers has no real beginning or end. (This is as true of the book as it is of the movie.) It takes situations and characters introduced in The Fellowship of the Ring andOf the three pieces of the Middle Earth puzzle, The Two Towers is the one with the biggest handicap. It is afflicted with the "middle chapter syndrome" - an inherent obstacle for the second episode of any trilogy. The Two Towers has no real beginning or end. (This is as true of the book as it is of the movie.) It takes situations and characters introduced in The Fellowship of the Ring and prepares them for The Return of the King. The trick is to immerse audiences "in the moment" and keep them from looking ahead - a daunting task, to be sure, but one that Jackson is up to.

    In nearly every way that counts, The Two Towers is The Fellowship of the Ring's equal. In terms of tone, pacing, character development, plot advancement, and visual splendor, there is no drop-off. More importantly, the continuity is seamless (one advantage of filming the trilogy as a single project), allowing a viewer familiar with the first movie to flow effortlessly into the second. Of course, therein lies a drawback, as well. The Two Towers cannot stand on its own. Familiarity with The Fellowship of the Ring is not just advisable, it is mandatory. Anyone attempting to watch The Two Towers without having seen (or read) the first installment is headed for confusion and disillusionment.

    Stodgy Tolkien purists who disliked some of the changes Jackson made to The Fellowship of the Ring may be outraged by what he and his screenwriters have done here. The Two Towers differs much more from its written inspiration than the first movie. Yet, in tone and spirit, this remains very much Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, although altered in a manner that makes it more of a living, breathing cinematic endeavor rather than a point-by-point regurgitation (like the Harry Potter films). The movie version of The Two Towers also ends before the book does. Certain events that occur late in the novel will be incorporated into the beginning of the film adaptation of The Return of the King.

    The stunning climax of The Two Towers is the battle of Helm's Deep - a 30-minute spectacle that features the siege of a seemingly impregnable stone fortress by an army of 10,000 creatures of Sauruman (Christopher Lee). Inside that fortress is a small force of several hundred humans and elves, led by Aragorn, Theoden, Legolas, and Gimli. Although the attack occupies only a dozen pages of Tolkien's novel, Jackson has transformed it into the centerpiece of the film - an amazing, heart-stopping battle against impossible odds. And, while a huge special effects contribution is needed to make the battle such an awesome feast for the eyes, Jackson never lets the CGI work overwhelm the human element of what's going on, and there are plenty of scenes in which costumes, set design, and makeup enflame our imaginations, not computer work.

    Jackson has added dashes of mirth and romance to the film - two elements in short supply in the novel. Most of the humor, which is decidedly low-key, involves Gimli, who occasionally seems to be around as much for comic relief as anything else. For example, in the middle of the battle of Helm's Deep, he is infuriated that his number of kills can't keep pace with Legolas'. On the romantic front, Aragorn, who is promised to the elven princess Arwen (Liv Tyler), finds himself the object of attention for Theoden's niece, Eowyn (Miranda Otto). This sets up a triangle.

    The Two Towers starts out a little slowly, but the rousing second half, which gathers momentum like a boulder racing downhill, will leave audiences craving more when the end credits roll. Combined, The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers represent one of the most engrossing and engaging six-hour segments of cinema I have ever enjoyed. If the final third of the puzzle is the equal of the first two, this will go down as one of the crowning achievements of cinema. Like its predecessor, The Two Towers is a great motion picture, and not to be missed by anyone who appreciates fantasy adventure.
    Expand
  19. Mar 29, 2011
    8
    When compared to the previous movie, it was same old, same old for some stuff. Enjoyable, but too long. Plot became a bit more complicated, but battle scenes became much more awsome.
  20. Jul 30, 2014
    9
    Most times, second films struggle with reaching their predecessor's magnitude, and most times fail. "The Two Towers", however, feels like a natural continuation of "The Fellowship of the Ring", matching its storytelling strength and its visual excellence. The only thing missing from Jackson's triumph is the fact that its most characters are not as well developed as its sky-high film-makingMost times, second films struggle with reaching their predecessor's magnitude, and most times fail. "The Two Towers", however, feels like a natural continuation of "The Fellowship of the Ring", matching its storytelling strength and its visual excellence. The only thing missing from Jackson's triumph is the fact that its most characters are not as well developed as its sky-high film-making standards demand. Expand
  21. Dec 4, 2013
    10
    This is where the story gets interesting. While Frodo and Sam continue on their separate journey to destroy the ring, Aragorn and the rest are caught in the battle to defend Rohan against Saruman's orcs. They choose to stay and help them. In other places we are introduced to talking trees called Ents.

    The first two hours has more travelling as the characters struggle to reach places
    This is where the story gets interesting. While Frodo and Sam continue on their separate journey to destroy the ring, Aragorn and the rest are caught in the battle to defend Rohan against Saruman's orcs. They choose to stay and help them. In other places we are introduced to talking trees called Ents.

    The first two hours has more travelling as the characters struggle to reach places they need to be, often confronted by orcs or other men, and even the land itself. The people and culture of Rohan are introduced. Some new characters are introduced, the most interesting among them Eowyn, her brother Eomer, and Faramir. They are woven into the main story seamlessly. In fact I would have loved to watch Eowyn given a bigger role, seeing that there are no female major characters in the story.

    This is also the instalment where we get the full dosage of the creature called Gollum. As interesting as he is when interacting with other characters in his queer manner, he is more intriguing in his monologues where he converses with himself, in a split-personality, between his two identities of his former somewhat sane self Smeagol and the villain Gollum. Andy Serkis is one hell of an actor. All his movements and expressions bring to life a character unprecedented in the history of cinema. The CGI used to create him does an incredible job in making him seem like a real creature roaming around the human-like characters, and it makes for a fun yet a piteous sight.

    Gandalf comes back stronger than ever. He was my favourite character from the first movie, but is outshined this time around by Aragorn, against whom everyone is a minion in stage presence. The latter becomes quite a legend in the extended version when a bit of his past is discussed.

    The main battle sequences are much more satisfying as Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli take a leading part in the fighting. Rohan defends itself by sheltering inside their fortress, Helm's Deep, while the orcs lay siege and charge repeatedly. All the rest shall have to be seen to evoke the full emotional impact. In the tradition of most epic films, Saruman the second-in-command is the main villain for this instalment. Sauron is the one behind pulling the strings.

    People who may have had problems with Fellowship regarding the character development of characters such as Legolas and Gimli need not worry, because while they only come onscreen after an hour and a half in Fellowship (there was a lot of other stuff going on with the Hobbits, Gandalf, Aragorn and the Ringwraithes for us to even begin to think about anything else), they were there from the start in The Two Towers. They have larger roles and kill more orcs.

    Despite everything, this movie felt as a continuation of an on-going tale and set up the next instalment when it ended. I would have held it against it if Peter Jackson hadn't done such a wonderful job bringing such magic to his version of Middle Earth. I believe that with minor tweaks, if it hadn't been the requirement of the story and this movie had been separate from the trilogy, it would be hailed as among the finest pieces of cinema in the genre of fantasy. But when discussing the greatest movies, I believe a film should qualify on its own merits. I must hold it in comparison against a great film from another franchise, The Empire Strikes Back (though it cost The Return of the Jedi in story), and come to the conclusion that it just missed the mark of greatness. Having said that, there were some sequences that were more memorable that any in the other instalments. One of course is the defence of Helm's Deep, for its ingenuity in the field of battle and tactics in general; the other are the scenes with the Gollum, who had a longer screen time than he had in The Return of the King.

    It was well acted all around. The cinematography was up to the highest standards held by Jackson. The special effects as always couldn't have been better without ruining the effect and look. The score sounded better than ever.

    This had to be the lesser of the three films, because as most trilogies go, the middle instalment is more often than not a chance to develop the characters and introduce new conflicts, and cannot function independently as the first instalment can, which is why the latter are often more liked than the sequels. In one regard in which it did a better job than the first movie, is it gave the orcs some semblance of dialogue, so while the illusion of their just being war-mongering brutes is not shattered completely, it still presented them as beings capable of thought and some reason.

    I had a lower regard for The Two Towers, which was a disappointment to a certain degree, until I watched the extended edition which includes some light hearted moments and develops some secondary characters like Eowyn and Faramir significantly. This, among other things, turned my score from a generous 9 into a well-deserved 10; and tilted my preference in favour of The Two Towers over The Return.
    Expand
  22. Sep 24, 2012
    9
    Having recently read the book I did find that this departed from J.R.R.Tolkien
  23. Dec 9, 2014
    9
    This is a spectacular film.

    Just as The Fellowship of the Ring: the opening scene is just as cool and deep as it is stunning. It's also an exiting and very well made film, and combined with awesome music from Howard Shore, couldn’t the film be better. The action in this movie is incredible to watch, and the story is spectacular! There are nothing negative with this movie except the
    This is a spectacular film.

    Just as The Fellowship of the Ring: the opening scene is just as cool and deep as it is stunning. It's also an exiting and very well made film, and combined with awesome music from Howard Shore, couldn’t the film be better. The action in this movie is incredible to watch, and the story is spectacular! There are nothing negative with this movie except the vague CGI, but the reason why I didn’t give this film a 10 is that I want more, especially action!

    This is both a stunning, massive and deep movie.

    The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers gets a 9/10.
    Expand
  24. Apr 14, 2013
    7
    I really did like this movie and the 3 hour runtime wasn't a big problem in this one because it kept you entertained the whole time. The absolute best part about The Two Towers is the special effects and the combat sequences. I was obsessed with this series for quite a while because it naturally draws people to it that like movies that are about adventures and trust me, it's quite an adventure.
  25. Dec 8, 2013
    7
    Great follow up. Like most people are saying this one is more action packed. But that makes it slightly worse than the first one, which had more heart and introduced us to this magical world. Battles get too long at times. Overall it´s very good. We get to really discover Gollum (one of the biggest stars of the show obviously) and Frodo and Sam´s scenes keep being great and heart warming.Great follow up. Like most people are saying this one is more action packed. But that makes it slightly worse than the first one, which had more heart and introduced us to this magical world. Battles get too long at times. Overall it´s very good. We get to really discover Gollum (one of the biggest stars of the show obviously) and Frodo and Sam´s scenes keep being great and heart warming. One of the battle scenes is truly epic and beautiful. Still, the last chapter is the best. Expand
  26. Dec 10, 2012
    5
    This somehow did not work for me. If this was supposed to be serious, it was verging on the ridiculous. I could excuse the first one for a little low-brow humour considering it didn
  27. Jul 22, 2013
    9
    de la charla salio la accion demostrando ademas los excelentes paisajes y originalidad medieval de algo que se aprovecho al maximo, gracios al gran trabajo de estas personas en este film.
  28. Dec 9, 2011
    10
    "The Two Towers" continues following all the greatness provided by the first film. Gollum's animation character and the Battle of Helm's Deep will not only be remembered for years but will be remembered through the ages.
  29. Oct 18, 2014
    10
    In the second chapter in J.R.R Tolkien's epic trilogy, the Fellowship faces unimaginable armies and deception while also witnessing ancient wonders and the untapped strength of their people.
  30. Aug 31, 2013
    9
    The second chapter of the trilogy is better than the first one but worse than the third one. The action is more this time and it's not as boring as the first chapter.
  31. Jul 12, 2012
    10
    In my opinion, the best of the Lord of the Rings films, and that's saying a lot. Not only does it duplicate everything that the franchise's first installment did right, it adds more of its own, such as the brilliantly made Battle of Helms Deep.
  32. Dec 8, 2012
    10
    The second chapter in the epic LotR trilogy. The Fellowship is disbanded, Frodo & Sam are venturing towards Mordor, Aragorn Legolas and Gimli fight for Gondor and prepare for the battle at Helms Deep and Merry & Pippin are travelling with the Ent's. Sauron is growing ever stronger and Golum finds the ring bearer. Peter Jackson is on top form yet again with The Two Towers and its the worstThe second chapter in the epic LotR trilogy. The Fellowship is disbanded, Frodo & Sam are venturing towards Mordor, Aragorn Legolas and Gimli fight for Gondor and prepare for the battle at Helms Deep and Merry & Pippin are travelling with the Ent's. Sauron is growing ever stronger and Golum finds the ring bearer. Peter Jackson is on top form yet again with The Two Towers and its the worst film in the trilogy. Expand
  33. Jul 14, 2013
    9
    Not as good as the first film, this film may feel long in some parts but it still boasts of what the first film contained: great action, adventure, fantasy, good acting, great music and stunning cinematography. I think this is the worst of the trilogy, but it still is a great film nonetheless.
  34. Oct 27, 2013
    8
    between the three movies of the series this is the worst(the less great),but still is another epical movie that deserves great scores,this is just the middle of the story.
  35. Nov 29, 2013
    9
    This movie is a perfect sequel to Fellowship of the Ring. It doesn't have the absolute perfect thing, but it's almost flawless. The acting is overall just as good as the first one,, with a bit better graphics.
  36. Dec 4, 2012
    10
    This movie was true to the books. Everything in the movie looked the way I imagined it looking when I read the book long ago when I was a boy. Although, I usually don't like CGI, the CGI in this trilogy is absolutely great. As are the costumes and sets. Gollum is the first CGI character from a serious film that I have liked. It is probably because he was basically a virtual puppet that anThis movie was true to the books. Everything in the movie looked the way I imagined it looking when I read the book long ago when I was a boy. Although, I usually don't like CGI, the CGI in this trilogy is absolutely great. As are the costumes and sets. Gollum is the first CGI character from a serious film that I have liked. It is probably because he was basically a virtual puppet that an actual puppeteer,controlled and they recorded the data points in a computer and then drew the CGI around his movements. Way better than Jar Jar Binks in Start Wars lol! Expand
  37. May 19, 2013
    8
    The two towers is in my opinion the weakest film of the trilogy, as it does not correct the error of the first film, which was a small inconsistency, it increases this problem, it is very frustrating to be accompanied by an epic battle and suddenly the director cuts, and switches to a scene very quiet, but despite these errors the film behind a good story and that makes us more anxious forThe two towers is in my opinion the weakest film of the trilogy, as it does not correct the error of the first film, which was a small inconsistency, it increases this problem, it is very frustrating to be accompanied by an epic battle and suddenly the director cuts, and switches to a scene very quiet, but despite these errors the film behind a good story and that makes us more anxious for the end of the trilogy. Expand
  38. Aug 9, 2011
    10
    This movie is pure gold. Besides a few weak points like some unrealistic lines and the shield-boarding down the stairs, it's perfect. There is no lack of emotion, all performances are good and the battle at Helm's Deep is perhaps the best ever in a movie. The highlight for me was the introduction to Gollum, though. He is one of the best characters ever.
  39. Jun 24, 2013
    10
    This movie is outstanding and unforgettable, with good visuals and impressive, bigger and better battles, it is equally good as the fellowship of the ring, it picks up were the first one end, for most sequels it is hard to do, easy to ruin, but here it is epic.
  40. Dec 29, 2014
    10
    The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers is yet another near flawless film in this already magnificent trilogy. Oddly enough, this is my least favorite in the trilogy, but it still delivers so much perfection in every single area. It's one of my favorite movies of all time.
  41. Feb 12, 2012
    10
    this is the second best film ever, really, it's even better than the fellowship of the ring, everything about it is incredible, i really, really, really like it.
  42. May 27, 2011
    8
    Another great movie in the trilogy. Maybe not quite as entrancing as The Fellowship of the Ring, but the story cracks along all the same. The final battle is truely thrilling.
  43. Jul 14, 2014
    9
    The second movie of the trilogy doesn't necessarily do anything different. It just continues the story of the first. But hot damn is it good. Just like the Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers is amazing in most every facet. Acting, cinematography, and storytelling are all on point.
    If you see the first, you would be doing yourself a disservice not to see the second.
  44. May 5, 2014
    9
    A sequel on par with its predacessor. Still and insanely fun movie, on the long side, yes, but like the first film it never lets you get bored and it introduces you to one of the best villains....Gollum
  45. Mar 3, 2013
    9
    The two towers is not as good as the fellowship of the ring but is stil a great movie with awesome battle sequences.
  46. Jan 17, 2013
    10
    The best movie from one of the best trilogies ever. Great battle and awesome story. LOVE IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  47. May 28, 2015
    10
    While it's probably my least favorite film in The Lord the Rings trilogy (even though all three TLOTR films are almost equally amazing), The Two Tower is still another masterpiece that should not be overlooked. If you felt that The Fellowship of the Ring was rather light on action, then SEE THIS MOVIE because it has action and excitement in it that definitely feels like an improvement overWhile it's probably my least favorite film in The Lord the Rings trilogy (even though all three TLOTR films are almost equally amazing), The Two Tower is still another masterpiece that should not be overlooked. If you felt that The Fellowship of the Ring was rather light on action, then SEE THIS MOVIE because it has action and excitement in it that definitely feels like an improvement over it's predecessor. This film also introduces Golem (even though he did have a few minor appearances in TFOTR) and Andy Serkis did a fantastic job portraying this corrupted and messed up character. This film does just about everything right, you will be captivated the whole way through despite the film being around 3 hours long. The only thing that makes this film probably the one I love the least of the three (even though I still adore this film) is the fact that it still feels like a middle chapter making you feel a little annoyed that not all will end here. Luckily, we have The Return of the King to fix that all up. See TTT, it's a fantastic action-adventure fantasy film that you don't want to miss. Expand
  48. Jan 26, 2015
    9
    The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers continues the trilogy with more fleshed out characters, the same level of emotional depth as the first, masterful, captivating storytelling, and truly epic battle sequences. I feel compelled to point out the Battle of Helm's Deep, as it particularly stood out. I would even put this a slight, although minuscule notch above The Fellowship of the Ring,The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers continues the trilogy with more fleshed out characters, the same level of emotional depth as the first, masterful, captivating storytelling, and truly epic battle sequences. I feel compelled to point out the Battle of Helm's Deep, as it particularly stood out. I would even put this a slight, although minuscule notch above The Fellowship of the Ring, which is already an incredible film. However, the run time is just one measly minute shy of three hours, which may put off some viewers. If you thought Fellowship was too long, you'll likely feel the same way about this one. Needless to say though, it is still an incredible fantasy film.

    Overall - 9.7/10
    Expand
  49. Jun 1, 2012
    10
    Some of the best battles in the series....this movie is epic.
  50. May 9, 2015
    8
    If there is a primary quality needed to bring J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings to the screen, it is vision - an attribute possessed in abundance by director Peter Jackson. In more than 100 years of motion pictures, few cinematic campaigns of this magnitude have been mounted. Not only has Jackson faced the daunting task of creating and populating an entirely new world based onIf there is a primary quality needed to bring J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings to the screen, it is vision - an attribute possessed in abundance by director Peter Jackson. In more than 100 years of motion pictures, few cinematic campaigns of this magnitude have been mounted. Not only has Jackson faced the daunting task of creating and populating an entirely new world based on Tolkien's blueprint, but he has contended with the real-word rigors of a two-year shooting schedule and an initially nervous group of purse string holders.

    The popular and critical success of The Fellowship of the Ring vindicated Jackson's perseverance. Nevertheless, even as the Oscar nominations came pouring in, the director was moving on. The plaudits heaped upon the first installment would lose their luster if either of the succeeding episodes, The Two Towers and The Return of the King, failed to live up to expectations. And, considering the high ground occupied by The Fellowship of the Ring, the bar would be at an astronomical altitude for the other movies.

    Of the three pieces of the Middle Earth puzzle, The Two Towers is the one with the biggest handicap. It is afflicted with the "middle chapter syndrome" - an inherent obstacle for the second episode of any trilogy. The Two Towers has no real beginning or end. (This is as true of the book as it is of the movie.) It takes situations and characters introduced in The Fellowship of the Ring and prepares them for The Return of the King. The trick is to immerse audiences "in the moment" and keep them from looking ahead - a daunting task, to be sure, but one that Jackson is up to.

    In nearly every way that counts, The Two Towers is The Fellowship of the Ring's equal. In terms of tone, pacing, character development, plot advancement, and visual splendor, there is no drop-off. More importantly, the continuity is seamless (one advantage of filming the trilogy as a single project), allowing a viewer familiar with the first movie to flow effortlessly into the second. Of course, therein lies a drawback, as well. The Two Towers cannot stand on its own. Familiarity with The Fellowship of the Ring is not just advisable, it is mandatory. Anyone attempting to watch The Two Towers without having seen (or read) the first installment is headed for confusion and disillusionment.

    Jackson has added dashes of mirth and romance to the film - two elements in short supply in the novel. Most of the humor, which is decidedly low-key, involves Gimli, who occasionally seems to be around as much for comic relief as anything else. For example, in the middle of the battle of Helm's Deep, he is infuriated that his number of kills can't keep pace with Legolas'. On the romantic front, Aragorn, who is promised to the elven princess Arwen (Liv Tyler), finds himself the object of attention for Theoden's niece, Eowyn (Miranda Otto). This sets up a triangle.

    The Two Towers starts out a little slowly, but the rousing second half, which gathers momentum like a boulder racing downhill, will leave audiences craving more when the end credits roll. Combined, The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers represent one of the most engrossing and engaging six-hour segments of cinema I have ever enjoyed. If the final third of the puzzle is the equal of the first two, this will go down as one of the crowning achievements of cinema. Like its predecessor, The Two Towers is a great motion picture, and not to be missed by anyone who appreciates fantasy adventure.
    Expand
  51. Nov 4, 2011
    10
    It's quite similar to the Fellowship of the Rings in terms of visual effects and overall style. But the story has now become much more interesting and multidimensional as we watch the Fellowship, now divided, struggle to complete their journey to save Middle Earth. 4/4 stars.
  52. Jun 7, 2013
    10
    Acting and scenery was just as fantastic as in the first movie. And while Sean Bean was done, Andy Serkis took a larger role as Gollum. This, along with the increased action, separated The Two Towers from Fellowship. Yes, it was a three hour movie, but the plot moved along seamlessly and included a great deal of drama with some humor mixed in. All and all, this is as close to a perfectActing and scenery was just as fantastic as in the first movie. And while Sean Bean was done, Andy Serkis took a larger role as Gollum. This, along with the increased action, separated The Two Towers from Fellowship. Yes, it was a three hour movie, but the plot moved along seamlessly and included a great deal of drama with some humor mixed in. All and all, this is as close to a perfect movie as one can possibly get. I loved it. Expand
  53. Dec 28, 2012
    7
    It drags at time, and isn't as complete as the first, but the Two Towers is nothing short of breathtakingly awesome, and will satisfy any fan of the franchise and gives us new characters (like the irreplaceable Gollum) for us to ponder at.
  54. Nov 28, 2011
    10
    The best LOTR movie of them all. A 99/100. The third one was a 97/100 in my mind, because of it's epic length, and the first one is a 94/100. The Two towers is so beautifully made, it is hard to go to the bathroom. The epic battle at the end seals the deal.
  55. Apr 19, 2015
    8
    The saga continues: Hobbits Frodo and Sam press on to Mordor in the company of the mysterious Gollum. Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli travel to the troubled Rohan, while Merry and Pippin discover a new ally in the shape of Treebeard the tree-shepherd.

    Peter Jackson has always maintained that The Two Towers is "the second act" of his epic undertaking, and perhaps the true greatness of the
    The saga continues: Hobbits Frodo and Sam press on to Mordor in the company of the mysterious Gollum. Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli travel to the troubled Rohan, while Merry and Pippin discover a new ally in the shape of Treebeard the tree-shepherd.

    Peter Jackson has always maintained that The Two Towers is "the second act" of his epic undertaking, and perhaps the true greatness of the middle chapter will only be clear when viewed in context. As a stand-alone film, however, The Two Towers is not quite as good as Fellowship. (Nor, indeed, does it extend the universe or deepen the relationships in the manner of The Empire Strikes Back.)

    It may lack the first-view-thrill and natural dramatic shape of Fellowship, but this is both funnier and darker than the first film, and certainly more action-packed. An essential component of what is now destined to be among the best film franchises of all time.
    Expand
  56. Aug 14, 2010
    10
    When the "worst" movie of a trilogy is an absolute 10, then you sir, have a damn fine trilogy. This is an incredible movie from start to finish, but the one drawback is that it feels like it was continued and needs continuing. The thing is, it's actually worth the ride.
  57. Apr 19, 2015
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Peter Jackson has always maintained that The Two Towers is "the second act" of his epic undertaking, and perhaps the true greatness of the middle chapter will only be clear when viewed in context. As a stand-alone film, however, The Two Towers is not quite as good as Fellowship. (Nor, indeed, does it extend the universe or deepen the relationships in the manner of The Empire Strikes Back.) That it still merits the full five stars is merely an indication of how high the benchmark has been set.

    Picking up pretty much where Fellowship left off, this is a considerably darker film, with Frodo (Wood) falling further under the influence of the Ring (giving rise to some seriously spooky hallucinations), while Saruman (Christopher Lee) wreaks even more havoc. There's also the first appearance of Saruman's spy, the sinister Wormtongue (Brad Dourif), and the complex Gollum, a brilliant combination of computer trickery and raspy vocals from Andy Serkis (the campaign for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar starts here).

    Other newcomers include Faramir (David Wenham), the understandably miffed brother of the recently deceased Boromir, and Éowyn (Miranda Otto), who spends much of her time casting winsome glances in the general direction of Aragorn (Mortensen). Eventually the plot complexities become more coherent, setting the action up for the forthcoming finale, The Return Of The King.

    As we've come to expect, this is spectacular stuff - from an opening which sees Frodo troubled by dreams about the demise of Gandalf, through to the climactic Battle Of Helm's Deep, which is nothing short of breathtaking. But Jackson cleverly tempers the louder, brasher sequences with some heartstring-tugging moments - peasants despondent as they are forced to abandon their villages, Aragorn and Arwen's troubled relationship, and, of course, the return of Gandalf (Sir Ian McKellen, superb as ever), one of the film's most powerful, memorable images that may well leave Ring devotees a little misty-eyed.

    However, those who still believe that the trilogy is beyond criticism may find their views challenged by The Two Towers. It's just as long as the first film, but gets the heroes no closer to a final victory. And, where the first movie developed its emotional tone from the brightness of The Shire to a darker climax, the sequel is more of a one-note affair, shadowy in both look and content.

    This is particularly true of the Ringbearer's quest, which adds the not-insignifcant Gollum to the party, but suffers more than the other story strands from the cross-cutting and finishes with a nearly identical pep talk from Sam to the tearful speech that climaxed Fellowship. Of course, given the nature of the material, and Jackson's desire to be faithful, this is all understandable. And by the time we all end up under siege at Helm's Deep, it's unlikely anyone will give a toss about narrative arcs: like Gollum, this is simply gob-smacking, mind-blowing, never-seen-before stuff.

    It may lack the first-view-thrill and natural dramatic shape of Fellowship, but this is both funnier and darker than the first film, and certainly more action-packed. An essential component of what is now destined to be among the best film franchises of all time.
    Expand
  58. Dec 5, 2012
    10
    "The Two Towers" is a darker film than its predecessor, and a prelude to the events of "The Return of the King". A sense of foreboding pervades the film.
  59. Jan 9, 2012
    10
    Like all the other films of the LOTR trilogy I watched this movie in one go without taking a break or falling interest. The actors did very well in the film but I personally think Christopher Lee (Saruman) stood out from the rest because of his cold yet powerful voice on several occasions during the film. Bernad Hill (Theoden) also did an excellent job as the king of Rohan. The fightLike all the other films of the LOTR trilogy I watched this movie in one go without taking a break or falling interest. The actors did very well in the film but I personally think Christopher Lee (Saruman) stood out from the rest because of his cold yet powerful voice on several occasions during the film. Bernad Hill (Theoden) also did an excellent job as the king of Rohan. The fight sequence were well choregraphed and the scene Wolves of Isengard was intense, fast paced and humorous (lol gimli). The Ent were also well brought into the screen and I think the best battle scene in all of the trilogy was the battle at Helms Deep. WELL DONE PETER JACKSON Expand
  60. Apr 3, 2012
    10
    Entretenida, con efectos especiales del mejor nivel, con un actuaciones sorprendentes y mas accion que la anterior. The Two Towers es simplemente perfecta, visualmente rica y muy bien dirigida por Peter Jackson. Es casi imporsible poder mejorar a The Fellowship of the Ring, pero Two Towers logra no solo ser tan buena, sino hasta mejor que la original.
  61. Nov 7, 2012
    8
    The movie it's a little worst than the last one.I asked myself:Why the movie was nominated to the Academy Award for best picture?I discovered that it wasn't nominated to Best Director or for Best Adapted Screenplay.I think in the voting it ranked at the lowest place(5th place).Two movies nominated for Best Picture the same year of that movie[2003(The three were released at 2002)]are:TheThe movie it's a little worst than the last one.I asked myself:Why the movie was nominated to the Academy Award for best picture?I discovered that it wasn't nominated to Best Director or for Best Adapted Screenplay.I think in the voting it ranked at the lowest place(5th place).Two movies nominated for Best Picture the same year of that movie[2003(The three were released at 2002)]are:The Pianist and Chicago.There are two movies also nominated too. Expand
  62. Jul 31, 2012
    9
    An action packed ride that is every bit as good as the first movie. It may be the least enjoyable of the films, but the fact that it is still a phenomenal film stands as proof the Peter Jackson has created the most consistent and brilliant book adapted film franchise of all time. My only complaint would be that it does not focus enough on the characters like the first two films did, butAn action packed ride that is every bit as good as the first movie. It may be the least enjoyable of the films, but the fact that it is still a phenomenal film stands as proof the Peter Jackson has created the most consistent and brilliant book adapted film franchise of all time. My only complaint would be that it does not focus enough on the characters like the first two films did, but every other aspect of it is near perfect. Expand
  63. Jul 24, 2013
    9
    This movie is a great follow-up to the Fellowship of the Ring and equally good. The battle of Helm's Deep is sensational. There are some boring parts, especially the Ents but overall it is a masterpiece.
  64. Nov 13, 2014
    9
    A slight hair below Fellowship's quality, Two Towers is still a masterpiece. Although it does seem to slow down at times and differ from the source material in an occasional cliché way, it has the big plus of adding a theme of end and despair.
  65. May 6, 2015
    8
    If there is a primary quality needed to bring J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings to the screen, it is vision - an attribute possessed in abundance by director Peter Jackson. In more than 100 years of motion pictures, few cinematic campaigns of this magnitude have been mounted. Not only has Jackson faced the daunting task of creating and populating an entirely new world based onIf there is a primary quality needed to bring J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings to the screen, it is vision - an attribute possessed in abundance by director Peter Jackson. In more than 100 years of motion pictures, few cinematic campaigns of this magnitude have been mounted. Not only has Jackson faced the daunting task of creating and populating an entirely new world based on Tolkien's blueprint, but he has contended with the real-word rigors of a two-year shooting schedule and an initially nervous group of purse string holders.

    The popular and critical success of The Fellowship of the Ring vindicated Jackson's perseverance. Nevertheless, even as the Oscar nominations came pouring in, the director was moving on. The plaudits heaped upon the first installment would lose their luster if either of the succeeding episodes, The Two Towers and The Return of the King, failed to live up to expectations. And, considering the high ground occupied by The Fellowship of the Ring, the bar would be at an astronomical altitude for the other movies.

    Of the three pieces of the Middle Earth puzzle, The Two Towers is the one with the biggest handicap. It is afflicted with the "middle chapter syndrome" - an inherent obstacle for the second episode of any trilogy. The Two Towers has no real beginning or end. (This is as true of the book as it is of the movie.) It takes situations and characters introduced in The Fellowship of the Ring and prepares them for The Return of the King. The trick is to immerse audiences "in the moment" and keep them from looking ahead - a daunting task, to be sure, but one that Jackson is up to.

    In nearly every way that counts, The Two Towers is The Fellowship of the Ring's equal. In terms of tone, pacing, character development, plot advancement, and visual splendor, there is no drop-off. More importantly, the continuity is seamless (one advantage of filming the trilogy as a single project), allowing a viewer familiar with the first movie to flow effortlessly into the second. Of course, therein lies a drawback, as well. The Two Towers cannot stand on its own. Familiarity with The Fellowship of the Ring is not just advisable, it is mandatory. Anyone attempting to watch The Two Towers without having seen (or read) the first installment is headed for confusion and disillusionment.

    Jackson has added dashes of mirth and romance to the film - two elements in short supply in the novel. Most of the humor, which is decidedly low-key, involves Gimli, who occasionally seems to be around as much for comic relief as anything else. For example, in the middle of the battle of Helm's Deep, he is infuriated that his number of kills can't keep pace with Legolas'. On the romantic front, Aragorn, who is promised to the elven princess Arwen (Liv Tyler), finds himself the object of attention for Theoden's niece, Eowyn (Miranda Otto). This sets up a triangle.

    The Two Towers starts out a little slowly, but the rousing second half, which gathers momentum like a boulder racing downhill, will leave audiences craving more when the end credits roll. Combined, The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers represent one of the most engrossing and engaging six-hour segments of cinema I have ever enjoyed. If the final third of the puzzle is the equal of the first two, this will go down as one of the crowning achievements of cinema. Like its predecessor, The Two Towers is a great motion picture, and not to be missed by anyone who appreciates fantasy adventure.
    Expand
  66. Dec 27, 2012
    8
    Another great film however i did prefer the fellowship of the ring but it was still good, carrying on the amazing story line and developing the characters even more and of course introducing fully one of the most iconic characters Gollum.
  67. Nov 19, 2011
    10
    The best sound effects, also known for its impeccable sound, the script developed, very faithful to the book, good performances, a show well done, as I can say about the soundtrack, direction, costumes, makeup, art direction and visual effects. In short, an excellent movie.
  68. Jan 28, 2012
    9
    The Two Towers is an extraordinary movie which only Peter Jackson can deliver. It's a sequel to the 2001 movie The Fellowship of the Ring, and it continues the adventures of Frodo Baggins as he carries on his quest to destroy the One Ring in the fiery depths of Mt. Doom to sabotage the Dark Lord Sauron once and for all. Peter Jackson once again proves his mastery of the Middle EarthThe Two Towers is an extraordinary movie which only Peter Jackson can deliver. It's a sequel to the 2001 movie The Fellowship of the Ring, and it continues the adventures of Frodo Baggins as he carries on his quest to destroy the One Ring in the fiery depths of Mt. Doom to sabotage the Dark Lord Sauron once and for all. Peter Jackson once again proves his mastery of the Middle Earth universe in this movie. Expand
  69. Aug 17, 2011
    10
    My favorite of the trilogy. Peter Jackson is a cinema god, there is a reason RotK tied for most oscar wins for one movie. Best fantasy novel and the movie does it complete justice. This is what modern cinema is all about: great acting, tasteful and thrilling special effects, excellent story of course, amazing screen play and the most spectacular soundtrack which is epic in battle sequencesMy favorite of the trilogy. Peter Jackson is a cinema god, there is a reason RotK tied for most oscar wins for one movie. Best fantasy novel and the movie does it complete justice. This is what modern cinema is all about: great acting, tasteful and thrilling special effects, excellent story of course, amazing screen play and the most spectacular soundtrack which is epic in battle sequences and harmonious in times of peace. A true masterpiece. To be watched again and again. 5/5 stars. Expand
  70. Aug 9, 2011
    10
    This isnt filming this is art..
  71. Jan 20, 2015
    9
    The second part of Peter Jackson's Rings trilogy is for me, possibly the best film of the series.
    Like the others, it is truly epic in its design and in bringing Tolkien's fantastic legend to life, but this film contains a kind of atmospheric tension (best seen In Sam and Frodo's story) and gritty brutality (in the battle at Helm's Deep) that the other films did not quite possess in such
    The second part of Peter Jackson's Rings trilogy is for me, possibly the best film of the series.
    Like the others, it is truly epic in its design and in bringing Tolkien's fantastic legend to life, but this film contains a kind of atmospheric tension (best seen In Sam and Frodo's story) and gritty brutality (in the battle at Helm's Deep) that the other films did not quite possess in such measure.
    As in the other films, the settings and scenery of the film are outstanding: from the eerie bleakness of the dead marshes to the wild and windswept hills of the plains of Rohan, this is beautifully filmed stuff.
    Much of the acting is also of a very high standard. Ian Mckellen and Christopher Lee fit their roles as wise and mighty wizard (Gandalf) vs evil and corrupted wizard (Saruman) perfectly and Elijah Wood (Frodo) and Sean Astin (Sam) really take their performances to even higher standards in this installment.
    I apologise if the following actors escape me here (!) - there are also several fine additions to the cast in this movie and the characters of Theoden, Eowyn and Grima Wormtongue also shine. But perhaps the finest performance comes from Andy Serkis, who plays Gollum. Gollum is of course 100% computer animated, but such is the strength of Serkis' performance and the realism of the animation, that this is definitely the performance of the film.
    The battle of Helms Deep is also truly memorable, and the finest battle in the trilogy of films. We see lots of bloody fighting, hear swords clanging, arrows twanging from bows, see ladders assailing the fortress wall and even a huge explosion shake the foundations of the wall apart. Brilliantly done. The only that perhaps betters it are the prodeeding scenes - Saruman addressing his huge army at Isengard, the bleakness of the mood inside Helms Deep, the arrival of the elves and finally the tense wait just before the start of the battle, when we see and hear the huge army of the enemy slowly making it's way towards the gates under darkened skies.
    It may be a superb film, but it is not totally without fault. Some characters will tend to irritate Tolkien enthuiasts, particularly Gimli and Legolas, who seem to have been given more trivial roles in this film, especially in the battle scenes. A large chunk of the plot has also changed, or at least been moved in this film as well, and some viewers may find themselves that Sam and Frodo do not get to face Shelob until the final film of the series, rather than in the Two Towers (as they did in the book). But the gripes do not amount to nearly enough to discredit what is an immense achievement and one of the finest fantasy films made in recent years.
    Expand
  72. Nov 9, 2014
    9
    This movie is awesome. Though I admit there is walking which every body seems to hate in the first half with small battles all off a sudden BOOM! there is like a mini war. then it goes to the next battle which is enormous with epic deaths and hand-to-hand combat that is magnificent but the walking I admit could've been more interesting but it's still a really good movie.
  73. Mar 6, 2015
    10
    the best sequel ever made in my opinion, even the two towers can beat the godfather part 2 i think this movie should have won oscar for best picture in 2002. PERFECT!
  74. Sep 14, 2011
    9
    magnificent is the word i will say for this film, i havent read the book . And im sure i wont..cinematography is top notch expecially in the battle scenes its really awesome.
  75. Jun 17, 2012
    10
    This film was my least favourite of the trilogy, but it was still fantastic. It was very well done and I can still watch it over and over again without being bored.
  76. Feb 8, 2012
    10
    When people ask me which film in the Lord of the Rings trilogy is the my least favorite, I usually say The Two Towers. However, seeing as how all three films are all cinematic masterpieces, this doesn't mean jack-squat. The Two Towers, like its other two siblings, is quite simply one of the greatest films of all time. Director Peter Jackson does an outstanding job with staying true toWhen people ask me which film in the Lord of the Rings trilogy is the my least favorite, I usually say The Two Towers. However, seeing as how all three films are all cinematic masterpieces, this doesn't mean jack-squat. The Two Towers, like its other two siblings, is quite simply one of the greatest films of all time. Director Peter Jackson does an outstanding job with staying true to Tolkien's story, while adding some of his own flare to the film. Its visual effects, cinematography, and score are some of the best seen in film, which can be said about the other two films as well. The ending of The Two Towers is one of the most emotionally powerful endings of any film I've seen (which is saying something since I consider myself quite the film expert). The montage with Sam's moving speech to Frodo does the movie justice, and is the perfect ending to the second installation of the trilogy where hope for the defeat of evil in Middle Earth is all but faded. Frodo, stricken with grief and weariness of being the Ring Bearer, asks Sam what they are holding onto, which Sam responds with, and still to this day brings goosebumps and tears to me, "That there's some good in this world Mr. Frodo, and its worth fighting for!" Words we all could live by nowadays. Expand
  77. Jul 3, 2012
    9
    Good acting, top notch visuals, epic battle sequences and a gripping plot make LOTR The Two Towers my favorite movie in the trilogy, and probably my favorite movie period! This movie would be perfect if not for it's length, which is about 3 hours long.
  78. Jan 6, 2015
    10
    Undoubtedly the worst of the Lord of the RIngs movies. Certainly for me at least. And it still warrants a 10. Just increadible how Peter Jackson is able to take source materiel that is already amazing and turn it into something even better. The plot is the thinnest in this one but the action more than makes up for it.
  79. Mar 8, 2015
    10
    long? YES . Boring? ABSOLUTELY NO. this movie are long ( all three) because there is about character development. every LOTR films has a new character especially The Two Towers. your will saying awesome when you see the battle of Helm's Deep.
  80. Mar 13, 2015
    10
    Very good movie. Well done peter Jackson and Crew. They are made a nice job. The Lord Of the Rings: The Two Towers made me love fantasy movie. Because before i saw it i think fantasy movie suck, childish, and cheesy but this is not. This movie has epic battle sequence, beautiful landscape, stunning CGI, real setting and good cinematography. This film should've won best picture oscar 2002.
  81. Oct 17, 2011
    10
    The Two Towers might not be the best of the three Lord of the Rings movies, but it sure is one of the best movies I've ever seen! Great acting, story and scenes - movies cant get much better than this.
  82. Jan 20, 2012
    10
    I am happy to see the awarness of the community. Reviews of those people who do not understand epicness and quality of this movie from some reason , are found unhelpfull. On the other hand almost everyone agrees with those who give compliments to this movie , peter jackson , and of course great tolkien. I watched whole trilogy many times and i can only say , that it is the greates trilogyI am happy to see the awarness of the community. Reviews of those people who do not understand epicness and quality of this movie from some reason , are found unhelpfull. On the other hand almost everyone agrees with those who give compliments to this movie , peter jackson , and of course great tolkien. I watched whole trilogy many times and i can only say , that it is the greates trilogy ever. By my opinion all three of these movies are best there is in the movie world. If someone hasnt still watched it , chances are slim but , he should watch it right away , not just this one but whole tirlogy. Thank you community. Expand
  83. Jul 20, 2011
    10
    Easily the best movie I've ever seen in my life. Great scenery, amazing story, heart warming ending, everything, It's just perfect. By far the best one of all three!
  84. KathrineK.
    Feb 14, 2003
    10
    The Lord of the Rings was a fabulous book and has now been translated to the big screen. There has never been anything like this before. Sure we've seen fantasy, but how many of those have been nearly as successful as The Lord of the Rings? It is completely unique. The two towers is amazing and the screen play is great. It is packed with action and adventure and a strange yet The Lord of the Rings was a fabulous book and has now been translated to the big screen. There has never been anything like this before. Sure we've seen fantasy, but how many of those have been nearly as successful as The Lord of the Rings? It is completely unique. The two towers is amazing and the screen play is great. It is packed with action and adventure and a strange yet beautiful romantic scene between Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) and Arwen (Liv Tyler). The actors are, like in the first one, all wonderfully cast including new arrivals: Miranda Otto (as Eowyn) David Wenham (as Faramir) and Karl Urban (as Eomer). And also there was Andy Serkis who was fabulous as the voice of Gollum. The movie was undoubtedly the most amazing thing I?ve ever seen and will see over and over again! The movie was derived from a difficult and adult text and yet it was portrayed so wonderfully in the movie. It is amazing to see how people who did not read the books before seeing the movie were able to understand it so well, despite its obvious supernatural content. So many things which were explained in the book and couldn?t be so easily depicted on the screen were done successfully. The ideas and mythology behind the movie would have made The Lord of the Rings and demeaning trilogy to film, speaking not only of the actors? physical demands. The music was well set to ever scene, the settings were so beautiful and breathtaking. Edoras, the capital of Rohan, was actually a real set and was captured wonderfully on the screen. Everything was done to the most precise and final detail, everything was made overwhelmingly real. Isengard and the tower of Orthanc, although being models, just captivated the audience. They looked, in every way, genuine. The Two tower?s is a fantastic continuation of The Fellowship of the Ring and the Return of the King will be even better. Anyone who has read the book knows what to expect and, as shown in the movie so far, will be likely to receive nothing less then the best. The Lord of the Rings is simply brilliant, a directing victory for Peter Jackson. Expand
  85. Anonymous
    Jun 8, 2005
    10
    Think the first lord of the rings with a large, epic battle at the end. Better than the already excellent Fellowship, and it doesn't really feel repetetive. Battle, from small to big, are better than ever, and emotional resonance is not lost. Sean Astin's ending dialogue is something everyone needs to hear; a need to fight on in the face of darkness.
  86. Fishball
    Jan 11, 2003
    10
    Saw it for the third time and i can honestly say this film gets better with every subsequent watching!!...thatz more than i can say for most films these days -_-;;
  87. JeffM.
    Jan 15, 2003
    8
    A good, but not great movie. I didn't find it as enchanting as the first. Everything looks and sounds great, but unless you're the type of person who pleasures themselves to Dungeons & Dragons manuals, I don't see how you can truly love the movie. Now 6 hours into the trilogy, I just don't know if I can sit through even one more repetitive (albeit visually dazzling) A good, but not great movie. I didn't find it as enchanting as the first. Everything looks and sounds great, but unless you're the type of person who pleasures themselves to Dungeons & Dragons manuals, I don't see how you can truly love the movie. Now 6 hours into the trilogy, I just don't know if I can sit through even one more repetitive (albeit visually dazzling) battle sequence. Expand
  88. J.Man
    Jan 2, 2003
    10
    What else can you say at this point? The best of its kind. Truly a wonder.
  89. RJG.
    Jan 4, 2003
    7
    I know I saw a good action packed sword epic with a lot of great CGI special effects. The CGI generated Gollum and Treebeard are brillant. Serkis' voice over for Gollum is equally briallant. However, I'm puzzled as to why the producers of this film are allowed to get away with calling this move "The Two Towers." I'm equally puzzled by the people who have read the book and I know I saw a good action packed sword epic with a lot of great CGI special effects. The CGI generated Gollum and Treebeard are brillant. Serkis' voice over for Gollum is equally briallant. However, I'm puzzled as to why the producers of this film are allowed to get away with calling this move "The Two Towers." I'm equally puzzled by the people who have read the book and don't mind the ommissions and liberties taken with the book in this bastardized theatrical version. The movie ends with fully eight chapters, four in Book Three and four in Book Four, not even covered, mostly because the director wastes his time adding scenes that don't exist in the source material and stretching out the battle for Helm's Deep at least a half hour too long. What's next for ROTK? A company of Elves arriving to help Frodo and Sam battle Shelob? Why not have Aragorn marry Eowyn? Better yet, lets' have Aragorn and Eomer decide they're gay and Arwen and Eowyn decide they are lesbian and have a group same sex marriage at the end. Why not have Luke Skywalker become the new Ring Bearer?Who cares as long as what we are watching is called "Lord of the Rings," right? Expand
  90. JerryT.
    Jan 5, 2003
    10
    All i have to say is it blew me away.
  91. AlienU.
    Jan 9, 2003
    2
    Three hours non-stop fighting, killing and chasing. Perhaps there was some very, very deep idea for what all this middle age massacre was doing and showing. But it was too hard for me to find out and justify it. Of course there was some storyline, but nine hours(3+3+3) massacre because of one wrong ring. How worth is human life than, can I ask?
  92. JonathanD.
    Feb 19, 2003
    9
    Not quite as good as FOTR, but that's like comparing gold to platinum; you really can't complain either way. An amazing, immersive movie with a HUGE scope, mindblowing special effects, great sound effects/music, and the best battle scenes ever in a movie (Helm's Deep ROCKS!). If you haven't already, go see TTT.
  93. ANewMulroneycakesIsArising,OrSomething
    Feb 8, 2003
    10
    [******Spoilers, as REM said, follow. Sorry******] I would like to invite Ruisert the Mad to take his finger out of his arse. I'm sorry, but he doesn't seem to understand that Jackson wasn't making a beat-for-beat visualisation of the books. That works for Potter because the target audience is young - the books are simple, the films are simple, the audience is satisfied, [******Spoilers, as REM said, follow. Sorry******] I would like to invite Ruisert the Mad to take his finger out of his arse. I'm sorry, but he doesn't seem to understand that Jackson wasn't making a beat-for-beat visualisation of the books. That works for Potter because the target audience is young - the books are simple, the films are simple, the audience is satisfied, the job is a good'un. That ain't going to cut the mustard here. What Jackson is making is a MOVIE in its own right. For example: Liv Tyler's involvment, and that of Weaving Hugo and Cate Blanchett, is a neat way of bringing people up to speed with what's going on - the sheer scale of the movie (and make no mistake - Two Towers was just the middle third of a nine-hour movie. People who say it should stand alone as a movie in its own right are talking bollocks on an unprecendented scale) required Towers to stop, children, and fill in a few blanks. Reminding the audience of Arwen - who hadn't been seen since halfway through Fellowship, and won't be seen again for a while - and her predicament, or of Elrond and his eyebrows, is quite sensible. Well, it helped ME. As for the "waste" that was the Edoras set - buh? What is he saying, that he'd rather see them wandering around a mountain pretending there was a town there? Talk sense or not at all. Complete altering of the storyline? Not really. Just a few bits here and there to make it go faster, nothing serious. Instead of Aragorn arseing about in some sparkly caves, they cut through the treacle and had Arwen to the rescue instead. They didn't bother with Dunbarrow because, well, "building the set for Dunbarrow? Why? For 1 or 2 scenes? What a waste." It didn't hurt anyone to put them in Helm's Deep. It is a shame that the "Saruman, your staff is broken" bit was left out, but it's not that subtle, f'crying out loud - imagine watching it in a movie. What's subtle on the page is a clarion call on the screen, precious. They presumably changed Halbabrad and Co into elves cos a) it's easier to explain and b) it doesn't make a sod of difference. As for Usgilliath, think about it: as a soldier, Faramir would have had to take Frodo and Sam to Minas Tirith anyway, as his duty. So he did. The whole "revalation of the Ring" thing was just delayed a little. Oh, and Shelob will appear in Return Of The King - which had far too little of the hobbits in it in the first place, so nyer, that's Tolkien's bad. Departure from the story? Departure from the story? Sod off. It's the same story, more or less, just with a book so massive, you need to compromise to adapt it properly. I suspect that Ruisert's failed to spot the merits of the film because he's clinging to hard to the books. That "notorious" bit with Legolas zooming down something and shooting things, for example. I don't remember that because I was swept up so hard in the atmosphere as a whole. It seems sadly likely that Ruisert was too busy nitpicking to enjoy himself. The film he's describing would probably be twenty hours long, and crap. And that's just the mid-section. This one is three hours long and really, rather ace. If you can see the wood from the trees, that is. Expand
  94. SteveM.
    Mar 5, 2003
    10
    Unquestionably the best Lord of the Rings yet. I love the first, but this was easily better. It should win best picture, but the academy always picks real duds. This year they'll probably pick the incredibly disappointing, overhyped and lame Chicago.
  95. MissUnderhill
    Apr 15, 2003
    8
    Good, but I couldn't call it a classic. The first time I saw FOTR I thought "This is INCREDIBLE! It's a classic!" But when TTT ended I thought, "That was a good movie." I just I couldn't call it boring, but it does drag at certain parts. Not to mention it had such a weak ending. The only reason people like this one better than FOTR is because it has more of Legolas, more Good, but I couldn't call it a classic. The first time I saw FOTR I thought "This is INCREDIBLE! It's a classic!" But when TTT ended I thought, "That was a good movie." I just I couldn't call it boring, but it does drag at certain parts. Not to mention it had such a weak ending. The only reason people like this one better than FOTR is because it has more of Legolas, more humor, and great battle scenes. But it just felt like a huge battle and that was it. I mean, the book felt like that too (but the book was WAY better than this movie). The Arwen and Aragorn love story wasn't necessary, and seemed so sappy and long. Gimili wasn't even to be the comical character. While FOTR got most of the parts from the book, including the book's soul, TTT had some points from the book but not all of them. TTT definetly had top-notch special effects, acting, and battle scenes, but it didn't give you that "whoa...that was an INCREDIBLE movie" feeling at the end. Sorry, that's just how I feel. Expand
  96. SephirothDarkheart
    Apr 15, 2003
    10
    This was the best movie of all time...the actors were all hot and it did sway away from the books but it was way----better than the first one and i cant wait to see the third.
  97. TylerS.
    May 30, 2003
    10
    This movie is a awesome display of how directors can enchant a whole audience with their creation, the creativity of this masterpiece shines through with the great actors that portrait the ledgendary tale.
  98. AwpoI.
    Aug 9, 2003
    5
    While this film is a great piece of cinematographic achievement, I left the theatre somewhat apathetic to the plight of the fellowship. All deviations from the book aside, this film failed to capture the sense of hopelessness of the quest that made the second book so gripping. Whether the LA times critic knew what he was talking about when he said that it stumbled too little and coursed While this film is a great piece of cinematographic achievement, I left the theatre somewhat apathetic to the plight of the fellowship. All deviations from the book aside, this film failed to capture the sense of hopelessness of the quest that made the second book so gripping. Whether the LA times critic knew what he was talking about when he said that it stumbled too little and coursed forward too much, I agree. The characters stumbled along in the book, which made their doom seem all the more inevitable. Let's hope for more from the third movie. Expand
  99. Forweg
    Mar 5, 2004
    0
    Horrible. They turned a literary masterpiece into a dumb action movie. Every character is dumbed down. Gimli is only used as comic relief. I feel sorry for anyone introduced to Tolkien's world through this garbage. I can only pray they don't ruin any more Tolkien books.
  100. ChristopherJ.
    Mar 20, 2007
    9
    Great external and internal conflict! This is the best of the trilogy. Gollum is the best computer-generated character in cinema up to this point. I think the extended version it too long, though.
Metascore
88

Universal acclaim - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 37 out of 38
  2. Negative: 0 out of 38
  1. 89
    God forbid this should ever play on an IMAX screen -- the concussive soundtrack and relentless visuals would likely strike viewers deaf and blind (but what a way to go!). Simply breathtaking.
  2. Reviewed by: Ty Burr
    100
    The miracle is that 'The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers is better: tighter, smarter, funnier.
  3. 75
    A rousing adventure, a skillful marriage of special effects and computer animation, and it contains sequences of breathtaking beauty. It also gives us, in a character named the Gollum, one of the most engaging and convincing CGI creatures I've seen.