Universal acclaim - based on 38 Critics What's this?

User Score

Universal acclaim- based on 1020 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring:
  • Summary: 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. (New Line Productions)
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 37 out of 38
  2. Negative: 0 out of 38
  1. 100
    What makes Towers so staggering is the way it brings the full scope of Jackson's adaptation into focus. Without missing a beat in three hours, the film shifts from epic to lyrical and back.
  2. 100
    The result is harrowing and inspiring. As escapist entertainment, it's the movie of the year.
  3. Moviegoers should be almost as entranced by the teeming, glorious landscapes and dark, bloody battlegrounds of Two Towers: astonishing midpoint of an epic movie fantasy journey for the ages.
  4. 90
    The virtues of Jackson's trilogy, thus far, have been pace and astonishment, which is almost the same thing. [6 January 2003, p. 90]
  5. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    Epic battles, spectacular effects and multiple story lines make The Two Towers a most excellent middle chapter in The Lord of the Rings film trilogy.
  6. The sequel's battle scenes -- especially the climactic assault on the Helm's Deep fortress by the armies of darkness -- easily put those of the "Star Wars" series to shame.
  7. 60
    This second installment is heavy on battle sequences, which will thrill some viewers more than others.

See all 38 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Negative: 15 out of 304
  1. Aug 14, 2010
    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. Expand
  2. Dec 4, 2013
    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.
  3. Jul 20, 2011
    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! Expand
  4. Mar 26, 2012
    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. Expand
  5. Jul 3, 2012
    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. Expand
  6. Nov 29, 2013
    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. Expand
  7. Dec 10, 2012
    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 Expand

See all 304 User Reviews

Related Articles

  1. Film Critics Pick the Best Movies of the Decade

    Film Critics Pick the Best Movies of the Decade Image
    Published: January 3, 2010
    Dozens of film critics have made their lists of the best films of the past ten years, and we've tallied the results.
  2. Ten Years of Metacritic: The Best (and Worst) Movies of the Decade

    Ten Years of Metacritic: The Best (and Worst) Movies of the Decade Image
    Published: December 17, 2009
    Our best of the decade coverage continues with a look at the past ten years in cinema. While the decade's best-reviewed movie may not have been a commercial blockbuster (or even in English), our lists turn up plenty of recognizable names in addition to obscure gems you may have missed.