Google+ Badge

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

"The Lord of the Rings" Part 2 "The Two Towers" Review

The movie starts out with a scene from the first film, only it ends in a different way, giving us the point of view of another character in the event. That scene plunges us right back into the story as if we never stopped watching, that way it manages to ride the coattails of “Fellowship” quite effectively. Most second installments of a franchise suffer from “sequelitis”, a disease that makes people say “it was good but I liked the first one better”. The trilogy however is not susceptible to that type of illness because it was made as one long movie that was split into 3.

While “Fellowship” was an action packed and very dense first chapter this movie increases the scale of the production and introduces armies of thousands of men fighting thousands of orcs. Heated battles occur with the body count in the hundreds instead of the 2 or 3, while the core story of a journey to destroy the ring is still very much alive and in the spotlight.

Introduced to the story is the character of Golum/Smeagol, a repulsive gnome like creature with a split personality; played be the best actor in the production Andy Serkis. Smeagol is the most interesting of all the characters; he puts an S at the end of almost every word to make it plural, making words like “Hobbits” become “Hobbitses”. His 2 personalities have conversations with themselves providing some of the most entertaining dialogue sequences of any film be it drama, action, or fantasy. Smeagol Is the centerpiece of the entire story; he is the catalyst, the emotional core, the reason everything is happening, so don’t let him become a footnote in the movie; take not of him.

There is not much more to say about the film because it has been said about “Fellowship”. Aside from the fact that it is much bigger in scale, it is pretty much the same movie. If you liked “Fellowship” you will like this one, or at least you will agree that is as good as “Fellowship” but a weaker part of the movie. That can very well happen; often I will watch a movie and I will love most of it but think a particular scene is boring. So if you don’t like this film, don’t use the word “sequelitis” use the phrase “weaker second act” because at the end of the day they are the same film.

Watch this film within 24 hours of watching “Fellowship” or else the continuity of the film will be broken and you will forget that you are watching the same film.


Sorry about the delay. I know I promised this review the day after “Fellowship” but I got sidetracked with errands. If I don’t post my “Return of the King” review within 24 hours of this one then cut me some slack, I am supposed to be on a break.

No comments:

Post a Comment