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.

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 -_-;;

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

What else can you say at this point? The best of its kind. Truly a wonder.

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

All i have to say is it blew me away.

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?

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.

[******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

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

The best movie I've ever seen, i thought fellowship was not gonna be able to be beaten, well i must say that in the acting it wasn't, it was equal, but most of the two towers easily surpasses fellowship, some of the stuff i saw sent me into tears, just at how good it was, my only small gripes were some editing during the helms deep battle, i just didn't feel they integrated the ents / helms deep completely perfect and the changes to farmir, were they absolutely necesary? in the book he was portrayed as a better human than he is in ttt but still, it doesnt prevent me from giving this a 10 =.… Expand

David Brin, writing at Salon.com, has lambasted both Lucas and Tolkien for being 'elitists (proto-fascists) in plain sight'. Brin is wrong - both Lucas and Jackson are indeed trying to awaken the New Man, but the geopolitics in both films are metaphors for the thoughts within an individual's psyche, not for weltpolitik. Jackson just succeeds where Lucas has failed - Lucas has lost touch with Campbell's spirit; Jackson is giving Campbell his greatest monument.… Expand

What a Visual feast! Admittedly Fellowship was a little better at emotional connection with the characters but in this epic adaptation of the 2nd book of the trilogy, it is so easy to have the size and scope of it all overwhelm the individual players. But this is exactly the point. This is war. This is life or death, undertones and inner motivations are no longer relevant not when there are 10,000 effin orcs beating down your door! Yes, know the elves should NOT have been at Helm?s deep and the Hurons should have been (and why did Haldir say greetings from Elrond and not Galadriel, he was a Lorien elf after all.) Quickbeam and Grishnak had the same agent as Bombadil and Glorfindal etc. etc. blah, blah blah. I am as huge a fan of the novels as any, however I find it difficult to understand those who cry foul with such veracity in regards to any alteration as if PJ is destroying Tolkien?s vision of ME when, in fact he is bringing so many more to this world than ever before. They will come, they will see the film, some will then read the source materiel and hopefully the differences between the two will be small enough to keep the virgin reader yet large enough to allow him/her to construct there OWN minds eye view of Tolkien?s world. The CGI Gollum in TTT was exactly what Ian Mckellen was in FotR, the actual character plucked straight from middle earth. God, they NAILED him Great job WETA! .... PJ, you barefooted little Kiwi, you did it again! Thanks!!!! … Expand

This movie is GREAT!!!

Solid, but not as thoroughly mesmerizing as FotR. While I was generally engaged throughout, the Merry & Pippin in Fangorn sequences really broke the narrative flow. I also thought Gimli was far too hammy. His humor in the first film worked within the context of the whole scene, but here the 'jokes' were mostly jarring, as if put in during postproduction. Still, there was much to enjoy, especially Gollum, Helm's Deep, Arwen's haunting view into the future, and the Dead Marshes, so I can certainly recommend TTT without much hesitation.......… Expand

Two Towers is the second book of the famous trilogy of J.R.R. Tolkien that depicted a new world called Middle Earth. It continues the journey of the little hobbit Frodo Baggins to Mordor to destroy the ring of power. If you were touched by the first installment, The Fellowship of the Ring, you would be taken aback by this installment. This installment has a rougher and colder take as Peter Jackson, the director, explored the dynamics of the characters involved in the novel. The effects used in the film are deemed flawless and extraordinary that it would usually keep you at the edge of your seat. A little caution to those who hoped that Peter Jackson would stay loyal to the novel because he didn?t. There were a lot of differenced in the film compared to the book but I reckon that Peter Jackson did justice to it. The changes that he made are forgivable if you look at the magnificence and splendor of the final product that he has created. It lasted for nearly 3 hours but it seemed that it was not enough because once the film ends, you?ll surely yearn for more. The next installment, Return of the King, will be out next December. … Expand

If you want the movie to be precisely like the book. Read the book!!! This movie is a work of art of its own.

Some bad changes but we can live with that.

I am 48 years old and have read the book at least 10 times. I have NO PROBLEM with the changes! Granted, I was worried when the ring headed to Gondor, but the resolution made Faramir even more noble. Fanghorn/Treeberad was exceptional. Battle scenes exceptional! Theoden ... Moving Shelob to film three.....brilliant decision. Eowyn and Eomer were inspired and Edoras a masterpiece and superb location. Bravo New Zealand! But the masterpeice and centerpiece of the film was Gollum. Jackson and Co. and Andy Serkis imbued him with a humanity that defies description. We are so accustomed to computer characters like Jar Jar Binks that we stand truly amazed when someone takes the technology and uses it in a true performance reality. For all those who say this is just action and battle....you didn't WATCH the film. An all encompassing human and moral epic and an achievement os staggering proportions. When the three films are seen together it will represent one of the masterpieces of film......not JUST fantasy or action films or whatever label you want to attach.....but any genre of film. Thank you Peter Jackson for a thrill and continued surprise and awe! Many thanks to the critics for praising a "fantasy" film. You show true bravery as well! I noticed the film made none of the New York Times critics 10 best lists, proving the public can sometimes be better judges of good and bad.… Expand

Amazing ... Simply amazing ...

An excellent film. It was essentially an image of the book ( meaning it translated well from the book) with spectacular battle sequences.

I saw the trailers, I visited the website on a regular basis, I read all the hype, by the time the movie arrived I was almost too scared to see it as my expectations were so high - I was expecting to see one of my favourite films of all time. That the film not only lived up to but surpassed my expectations is the greatest tribute I can pay to Peter Jackson and his band of merry men. Roll on Christmas 2003!… Expand

First of all, this movie is fantastic. People say this movie sucks because it isnt like the book. That argument is getting old, and besides that, its useless. I too have read the book, several times, but I found the films to be stronger, since they compress the best parts and melts them together. This is a movie, not a documentary. People and fanatic tolkien fans cry in wraith and anger over the changes and exclusions, but go ahead and sour like an onion. Everyone else enjoys this movie, every night I have been to the movies peoples have laughed of Gimli`s funny comments, we have been impressed by the visuals and overwhelmed by the battles. What Peter Jackson does, is not harming the book, but he has to make some choices of what is staying and what is going. And since this movie isnt just for you "I know it all", but for ordinary peoples, he did the right thing. The result is a trilogy that will be as strong, and even stronger than Star Wars, and until Return of the King, this is my favoritefilm ever, even surpassing Fellowship. Pure perfection of filmmaking.… Expand

[***Potential Spoilers***] I loved the stunning cinematography and mountain vistas, I'd bet Jackson could do some wonderful tourism films for New Zealand, something a little less ambitious... Another thing that I liked was Gimli's line about dwarf wives and Aragorn's comment about the beards. It's true to the story, but it is information that's in the book, and inserted in such a way as to develop the history that otherwise would be hard to translate to a film. I wish they'd done some of that during all the travel sequences. And the cgi Gollum was pretty well done technically, but watered down scriptwise, and the (gollum,gollum) was overdone. (Fisssssh!) ...... Other than those points, it was horrible. Horrible. A lot of it boils down to some bad decision making, I think - hiring Liv Tyler for what is not just a bit part, but a minor bit part. I love her in the role, but it's extravagant unless you do as was done and rewrite major portions of the story to justify the expense. Another bad decision was building the set for Edoras. Why? For 3 or 4 scenes? What a waste. But the unforgiveable sin is the complete altering of the story line. Someone earlier mentioned pandering to your typical movie-goer's sensibilities, like not sending the women, children and old men to Dunharrow. Or Leg - O - Lamb skateboarding down the stairs shooting orcs on the way. Please. Then there's the whole loony Aragorn/Arwen sequence. Did someone really think this was an improvement over the book's storyline? Send me some of whatever it was you were taking when you made that decision, ok? Instead, we could have had the wonderful scene in Isengard where Gandalf masters Saruman with mere words and not the ludicrous pyrotechnics we were bothered with in the FotR movie. Or to quote from the TT itself 'Wizards are subtle and quick to anger'. Subtle. I'll bet that's even defined in dictionaries in New Zealand. The part I'm referring to is where Gandalf is talking to Saruman in the tower, and Saruman refuses the offer to mend his evil ways and still help, in some small way, those he was sent to help. Then Gandalf says 'Saruman, your staff is broken.', and it breaks, and his power is broken by the same force that reincarnated Gandalf. Subtle, but very dramatic if done right. And why precious, oh why, did they decide to change Halbarad and Aragorn's other Ranger kin into elfses, and then kill Halbarad in Helm's deep instead of later? Why? I'd have thought it much cooler to see riders that even the horsemen of Rohan knew were the better. One of the most dramatic moments in the second book, I think. Lastly, the final ton of hay that breaks this camel's back is the Osgiliath sequence. Faramir deciding to take Frodo to Minas Tirith, instead of showing his better intuition about the ring and allowing them to continue. Frodo offering the Ring to the Nazdrool, right there where there's no real defense to prevent it being taken. I've often wondered if the writers didn't have bad dreams after reading the Cliff Notes of the Reader's Digest Condensed Version for Dummies of the Two Towers and felt the need to rewrite it. I mean, do you really believe a commitee of people I've never heard of before could possibly re-write something that's sold millions of copies over almost 50 years and improve it? Didn't they understand that the whole game was won or lost on keeping the Ring's location and more important, final destination secret? The way the book plays it, Sauron thinks the Ring is in Aragorn's hand after he shows himself as Isildur's heir with the reforged sword that took the Ring. Now obviously I'm one of those that have read the trilogy more than once, which is saying something. I've read tons of books, but not many rate one re-reading, but I've read these more than I can count. Despite that, I can't quite imagine it real enough. I want to see it just like I've read it, or as close as humanly possible. I know it's difficult translating a book into a movie, and we're talking one book, not 3. I have to give the guys credit for being crazy enough to try and pull this off. They certainly did better than the Ralph Bakshi animated movie that only did about the first half of the story. But I was very disappointed by the sudden complete departure from the story in this movie. I had problems with the first one, but they didn't ruin the movie for me. But I'm still glad I went to a matinee and only paid 2.50 to see this dog. … Expand

Some people can take base emotions and unversal truths at face value, no matter what the window dressing is. Some can't. Literary-slash-cinema classics like the Wizard of Oz work on two levels, allowing the viewer to either A: enjoy the work as sensual experience, or B: enjoy the work for its broader allegory and implied metaphors. Obviously, in the case of LOTR, some people prefer option C: simply not give a damn and then cynically bash anyone who does. These people should just avoid the middleman altogether and stay home to watch Bill O'Reilly or something. The rest of us are enjoying the hell out of this trilogy.… Expand

Epic! A true fantasy adventure that engages the mind to wonder. Mr. Jackson you have been robbed of your Oscar.

I have finally gone and seen the movie. I had read a lot of the reviews before hand and I must admit that I was a little nervous about much. I knew about the film from the reviews that I have read. The film was very good, it moved a lot faster than the first (Which is what you would expect) I was expecting it to be a lot darker than the first from what everyone had posted. But I didn?t think it was at all. Gimili's humour wasn?t over the top and if anything there was only one spot that the audience really cracked up with Gimili. I had no problems with [Spoiler Omitted], it highlighted that even heroes can be vulnerable to injury and it worked in well with other story lines within the movie which I think PJ was trying to achieve. I read one personal review thought that the Ents were very 2D; I didn?t think that at all, they definitely looked very rich in colour and character. I am going to go and see it again as I spent half the movie trying to spot the faults at which point I thought that most people had been too picky just for the sack of being picky. How does the saying go "Tall poppy syndrome". Well done PJ and co-horts it was a fantastic effort.… Expand

The battle scenes are spectacular, as is Gollum, but a certain disjointedness at the start and finish, as well as a lack of significant dialogue and characterization weaken the movie somewhat.

Not nearly as good as FOTR. At least an hour too long. The battle at Helm's Deep is a big bore. Much ado about nothing with some of the worst dialog, about par with weak George Lucas scripts. The humans and elves are beautiful/handsome dullards. The final climax has the sweep and excitement missing in most of the rest of the film, but it should have been extended. Christopher Lee is given nothing for his character. If a filmmaker is going to stray from it's source why not make it more interesting and delve into what makes Saruman tick?… Expand

I expected an unbelieveably, incredible awesome movie, but instead I got an awesomely entertaining one. Not quite as good as the Fellowship, but is pretty dang close. Is still one of the best movies ever made.

THIS IS ONE OF THE GREATEST MOVIES OF ALL TIME! i espically loved the battle at helms deep. it was the best 3 hours of my life!

THIS WAS AN AWESUM MOVIE! My friend liked it cuzz she thinks striders hot but i prefer elijah =) lol n e ways AWESUM MOVIE!

An absolutely brilliant movie, perfect acting and great special effects.Not quite as good as the fellowship of the ring though.

I fell a sleep it was so boring and stupid....surely a waste of time.

This movie is so off the hook!man it is so better than the 1st movie because it has more action...But the thing is.... Is that I don't know that I don't know when the movie comes out so that I can buy it so I can watch it over and over again.

I wuz so0o0o0o0o excellent! i saw it 5 times! n legolas wuz so0o0o000o0o sexy 2.lol other than that it wuz awsome*~*

A film for the ages. The best film of 2002.

Fabulous Movie!!

It was like totally awesome and stuff yo, te he he *kiss kiss*

A fantastic movie of the year! love it soooo much!

Fantastic movie. Battle seens were a bit drawn out, but Gollum was utterly captivating.

Oh it missed this bit from the book, ooh Shelob was'nt there, As great as the books & Tolkien are Tolkien did'nt make the films Peter Jackson did. His passion for the original text is evident Good on you Pete!!!

A beautiful, enrapturing epic adventure that remains one of my favorite films.

Ok... If you like the fantasy genre and enjoy a delightful story about the voyage of two hobbits then watch this film. To the people who complain about it being boring have been missing the sheer majesty of this project. Try looking at the beautiful scenes and the inspirational characters, they will capture your attention and take you to a place you have never been before. To the critic who said that this was too violent of a film has obviously never read the classic books either, since the second book is also deeply set in a wartorn world. The battle scenes were phenomenal and the Lord Of The Rings series will quickly become a part of film history.… Expand

Visually striking, but GOD was I bored.

This film is much better than I expected!!!

It was awsome the action im like the lord of the rings biggest fan and they did pretty good on keeping close to tolkiens ideas the special effects were awsome the action ive read all the books to and seen all the movies so take it from me it is worth the 3 hour line.

This is in responce to Lance E.'s comments: I noticed that "your many reasons why the movie was overrated" all came down to one thing: the movie was not true to the book. So what? Does that make it less enjoyable? No. Some people, like you, come into the theatre already with ideas in in your head, which isn't a good idea. You should not care that it's true to the book enough to rate one of the best and coolest movies of all time a 5. And while i agree that basing your rating solely on special effects or how cool gollum looked, all of those little reasons add up to why we liked the movie so much. Here are just a few of the "small" reasons why this movie rocked: the special effects, the beautiful scenery, the great acting, the plot, how hard it must have been to turn this into 3 hours, the way that gollum, the orcs, and the ents looked, and much, much more.… Expand

The Two Towers is one of the best movies I have seen. The characters are believable and performed solidly. There is a character for everyone to relate to in some way or another. The movie is one great masterpiece not only for those reason but for the compelling tale of the ring and it's dark power. Add to this the amazing scenery and entertaining action sequences and you have an all round brilliant film.… Expand

Ilze S. If you don

Not as good as the first, but nothing short of magical nonetheless.

The best movie trilogy. TTT is the 2nd installment and most dark, harrowing, and dreary of the coming events. Starts the war of men vs. evil.

It's a great film. The best of the 3, so in my opinion, the greatest film ever. Go ahead and think that many other films are the best, but in my opinion, this is the best of them all. I will respect your opinions, unless you disrespect mine or say this sucks or other crap is the best. Not just the best for action, but for acting, plot, and development.

A great movie! Full of adventure and fun, more epic than the first.

I didn't think it would be possible, but TTT tops FotR. The first five minutes will take your breath away, and you won't get it back until the credits roll.

Loved this film. I still liked the Fellowship of the Ring better for content and over all feel. The Two Towers crams a lot of information into it's 3 hour space.

Better than the first- Andy Serkis deserves an oscar for his enticing perspectives on Gollum. All the actors are wonderful- and I'm especially happy because we get to see more of Legolas', Gimli's, perspectives, which were hard to see the first time when they were outweighed by Gandalf, Frodo, and Aragorn.

One point for not completely replacing the ents with Arwen. One Point for remembering there WAS a ring. One point for (most of) Gullom talking. The rest of the movie had nothing to do with the book and the huge Arwen/Aragorn intermission almost put me to sleep. I'll only be seeing the ROTK in the hope that Shelob actually makes an appearance (a book late) and eats Sam, Frodo, and whoever wrote the dreadful dialog in TT.… Expand

I can understand why C.busse's friends that read the book might have been disappointed but the people i went with that have read the book as well were still impressed with the film. After a year long wait, here we have LoTR:TT in all its glory. The movie, though ~long~, remains captivating throughout. If director Jackson had squeezed every last subplot from the book into the movie most people would have gotten bored with it but he does a superb job in presenting it regardless. I thought this film showed a lot more emotion from Legolas Gimli and Aragorn and how the 3 have bonded to form a nice little trio. And the final battle scene, you won't believe it it's so amazing. This movie is a very nice continuation of the epic Lord of the Rings. … Expand

I loved this movie, but there are some little things that bothered me. Whatever, its a masterpiece ! One of the best movie i ever saw.

It's better than sex! (whatever that is)

Awesome movie. Gollum and the Battle scenes rock! Going to see this again, shortly.. 12/18/02

The Lord of The Rings: The Two Towers is, as a movie, enjoyable. The special effects are spectacular, to the extent that fully CG characters, such as Gollum, seemed entirely real and natural. As an interpretation of Tolkien's novel, however, this picture is very poor. In particularity, certain characters have been altered beyond recognition, and certain events have been changed without valid reason. Although I understand that certain sequences couldn't be filmed due to time constraints, there was absolutely NO reason for Peter Jackson to exclude crucial scenes from the book, only to replace them with senseless scenes of his own conception. The ending sequence at Osgiliath is a particularly egregious example.… Expand

While visually breathtaking, the screenplay is clumsy, acting hammy and has little to do with Tolkien's Book.

For a long time after I went out of the theater I couldn't believe that a movie can be so beautiful. I LOVE IT!

I've read this series over and over again, and no, this is not a perfect adaptation. So what? Certain changes are better, and before i get tied at the stake for this, think of the Theoden/Wormtoungue deal. Possesed works better than just duped for me. Anyway, this film is pure genius. Better than the first, with more human villains.... Gollum steals the whole show as the tortured soul he is. Simply amazing.… Expand

The best movie you'll ever see this year, and the best one till The Return of the King will be released. The Hellm's deep battle is just astonisghing. The visuals are impressive in every part of the film, and Gollum is just great and really merits something big this movie. 3 hours of pure magic, an epic of such a great scale that you'll never see a movie like this one in your life. EXCELLENT!… Expand

Epic and breathtaking, full of wonders and exciting scenes... loved it!

Wonderful war scenes, good action, nice effects... Well, perfect!

It could hardly get any better.

Let me explain the beef we "book foofs" have with these theatrical interpretations of Tolkien's Lord of the Rings book. We're not talking about Clancy or King novels in film here. We're not talking about a pulp novel written as an outlne for a Hollywood screenplay, but one of the best loved works of literature in the 20th century, so sticking to the source material means a lot more to LOTR fans worldwide than a pulp novel. It's worth knowing the first seven words Tolkien wrote in the prologue to LOTR: THIS BOOK IS LARGELY CONCERNED WITH HOBBITS! Yes, Hobbits, not elves, men, wizards and dwarves. But the viewer of the movies is led to believe LOTR is about groups of men, elves, dwarves and wizards who happen to find a few hobbits to tag along the way. Also, LOTR, particularly FOTR, is as much about the main characters, Tolkien's hobbit heros, traveling from place to place, and fire side storytelling, poetry reciting and songs shared between the main characters and the secondary characters they meet along the way. It's kind of a tourist's guide to Middle Earth. But these movies don't have time for that and are primarily sword epics, with Frodo's quest to cast the ring into Mount Doom a sideshow. The epic battle at Helm's Deep that takes up the better part of the last hour of the movie takes up all of about 16 pages in the first third of the Two Towers book (No, in Tolkein's world Legolas doesn't skate on a board down a flight of stairs like he's Bart Simpson while shooting arrows at Uruk-Hai soldiers). Because of this, plus scenes that are only the invention of the movie makers, fully eight chapters from the book are left uncovered. I'm not looking foward to ROTK for fear of what they might do to Tolkien's work again. I understand that the Scouring of the Shire chapter is not going even be included in ROTK, futher butressing Jackson's short changing of LOTR' hobbit heros. Instead of creating movie's that reflect the sensibilities of the medievalist Tolkien, these movies pander to the sensibilities of the average turn-of-the-millenium moviegoer in the U.S. Trying to create three movies that reflected Tolkien's sensibilities would have been far more interesting and risk taking. Instead Jackson and company play it safe and created action packed sword epics, and they did a pretty good job at that level. I think LOTR in film would be better served as a BBC or PBS produced mini-series, kind of like the BBC's I, Cladius. You don't need to spend a million dollars per minute of screen time to capture the heart of LOTR. You just need to have a heart and love for Tolkein's epic masterpiece. … Expand

Could have been much better if Jackson had stayed truer to the books, not verbatim but closer then Jackson chose to. A little over the top,but then again Jackson isn't the genius, that Tolkien was.

This had to be the best movie ever made, ithad everything a great move needs like action, comedy, suspense, and heart-renching. The story grabs ur soul and makes the movie real to u. In my opinion the battle of Helms Deep was the best because it was exiting and u did not expect or no what was going to happen next. I can't wait until the next movie comes out. If u haven't seen this or the fellowship of the rings, u dont no good movies. Don't miss the lord of the rings: the return of the king coming out soon!!!… Expand

Hur många har sett det här film? Jag tror att många bara säger utan att de har sett filmen....

Absolutely brilliant! Sticks closer to the storyline than any book adaptation I've ever seen, with just a few unimportant changes here and there that are, to my mind, totally justified. Anybody that has read and loved the book will love the movie, anybody that has not will still love the movie.

I loved the movie, even though it trailed off from the book. I've seen it three times and i plan on more!!

Two words. Holy Cow!!!!! Is it me or is this movie unbelievable? Mr.Jackson you my friend are a genius. Thank you for this movie. I feel like my life has meaning now. Mr.Jackson my friend you complete me. Thank you.

The movie in its entirety, was an excellent display of craftsmanship to the world of cinema. The Two Towers, was just as breathtaking if not more so than the first film, a must see for veiwers of many ages!

Lord Of The Rings is a brilliant trilogy that's got me hooked.My friends hate it. An outstanding addon with more action is more than enough to allow me to get 10 dollars out of my pocket to see it again. My favorite series yet. Can't wait until Return Of The King. aragorn's my favorite character because he did that helm's Deep battle like a lord. He's my absolute favorite. Two towers was great.… Expand

This movie should not disappoint. The battle scenes will keep you in your seat and it's a lighter movie than the first movie. Gollum was great. Good movies are always slightly different than the books; that's the nature of the game. Fellowship of the ring was good, The Two Towers was great and I can't wait until the Return of the King.

Simply put, among the top 3 films I have ever had the pleasure of viewing. By assigning it a 10, I do not mean to imply it is flawless - no film is. Much has been made of alterations from Tolkien's tome (Faramir's reluctance seems chief among the offences). While I would have preferred more authenticity here and other portions (LotR is my favorite fiction and better than the films), it does not diminish the wonders and tremendous impact of these epic themes. Reviewers that nitpick on one hand, while extolling the greatness of it on the other, finally arriving at a low score due to minor issues is a pet-peeve of mine. Do not punish what might be minor flaws by ignoring numerous positive elements. It is a breathtaking spectacle with exceptional performances and battle sequences beyond anything preceding it. Who could have handled such a challenging translation with such alacrity other than Jackson? Few come to mind. These will be regarded as classics for the ages, much as the original Star Wars trilogy is esteemed now. A great achievement in the history of cinema.… Expand

Okay so far I have seen this movie 2 times ^___^ AND I LOVE IT!!!!! The second time I threw up in the theatre bathroom (food poison) and I was lying sick in the seat. This is what I said at the end opf the movie; "More! More!" ~Sungirl P.S. All the people who are saying that it's not great are book foofs! (Yes I am aware that is not a real word!)

Just plain amazing! The best movie of the year.

Face it, the geeks like me who read the books will walk away feeling like we didn't see the two towers but, as posted before, an adaptation. It boils down to this, if you have never read the books, this is an awesome movie. The effects are mindblowing in some aspects. If you have read the books, you will probably not dig it. I have seen it twice just to make sure it wasn't the hour or the mood. I almost walked out the first time and the second i was in and out. Perhaps they will release an extended DVD of this movie, perhaps replacing some things...who knows. Hopefully we will return to the book for the Return of the King.… Expand

Okay, but not terrific. I didn't think of the settings as "beautiful" because the sky was polluted, all of the settings were dirty, and gloomy, with no warm or feeling of home AT ALL, a great resemblance to "Attack of the Clones". Even though I knew that if it didn't have those settings, it wouldn't really be the Two Towers. Maybe it was because FOTR had plenty of spectacular settings (the Shire, Rivendell, and Lothrien) that were supposed to be there, otherwise there would be no FOTR. I found the out-of-place subplot of Arwen and Aragorn quite annoying, and my brother thought so too, but he also pointed out that if it didn't have that subplot, the story wouldn't be as big. My brother also thought the Two Towers was ok but not a masterpiece like the spectacular, Fellowship of the Ring. And the Two Towers was his favorite LOTR book, while my favorites were FOTR and the Hobbit (though I'm not sure that the Hobbit counts as a LOTR book as it wasn't part of the trilogy). I didn't find the music as enchanting as the first either. In fact, I found some of the music extremely annoying. I thought Jackson was horrible at making the scene where Gollum (a.k.a. Smeagol) was talking to his evil side as sad and serious as possible because the whole entire audience couldn't help but find that scene extremely funny. The acting was superb, but, sadly, not a single actor or actress was nominated for an Oscar. Probably because Ian McKellen (Gandalf) wasn't as in as many scenes as in FOTR but...still... it couldn't hurt to nominate him for Best Supporting Actor... Though I didn't enjoy TT like I enjoyed FOTR I still think it's a good well-worth-seeing movie.… Expand

I really enjoyed this movie. There was lots of action and the computer animation was very impressive. I was entertained throughout the whole movie. Each character was played really well. I would recommend this movie to everyone because it was very well done and a lot of thought was put into it. It was well worth its money!

great movie. but just barely not as good as the first one i think. and i mean razor width. just barely. like .00000000001 of a milimeter.

After reading the book, you cant give this movie that high of a score, it really brings the world of middle earth to life but some of the changes that jackson made just aren't recognizable, aragorn falling off a cliff? farimir bringing the hobbits to the battle at minas tirith? you wonder how he will make the 3rd movie fit together, without leaving out the most important parts, (The company that set out from roahn coming to isenguard, pippen looking into the orb of orthanc, pippin's being knighted as well as merry. Hopefully he can pull this off.… Expand

It strayed a little too much from the books, but otherwise it was wonderful!!!!!

This was the best movie since the first one, which was stunning how good it was!

While I was disappointed with a few scenes, namely Faramir's. It was the best movie in a long while.

I rate this movie is a ten.