Write descriptive essay about The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers movie 2002, write an essay of at least 500 words on The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, 5 paragraph essay on The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, definition essay, descriptive essay, dichotomy essay.
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
Year:
2002
Country:
USA, New Zealand, Germany
Genre:
Drama, Action, Adventure, Fantasy
IMDB rating:
8.7
Director:
Peter Jackson
Sean Astin as Sam
John Bach as Madril
Sala Baker as Man Flesh Uruk
Cate Blanchett as Galadriel
Orlando Bloom as Legolas
Billy Boyd as Pippin
Jed Brophy as Sharku
Sam Comery as Éothain
Brad Dourif as Wormtongue
Calum Gittins as Haleth
Bernard Hill as Theoden
Bruce Hopkins as Gamling
Paris Howe Strewe as Théodred - Prince of Rohan
Storyline: While Frodo and Sam, now accompanied by a new guide, continue their hopeless journey towards the land of shadow to destroy the One Ring, each member of the broken fellowship plays their part in the battle against the evil wizard Saruman and his armies of Isengard.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x800 px 16794 Mb h264 (High) 1536 Kbps mkv Download
HQ DVD-rip 720x304 px 3011 Mb h264 1787 Kbps mp4 Download
Reviews
Better Paced than the first, the battle for Isengard was excellent
We have been waiting an entire year for this one!!! The Two Towers picks up right where last years Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring leaves off. The director, Peter Jackson, did not include a recap of the last movie, so if you don't remember what happened in the first movie you better rent it and refresh your memory before you head off to the theater.

When we last left our fellowship, it had splintered apart. Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) and Sam Gamgee (Sean Astin) continue there quest to return the all powerful and evil ring to Mordor where it can be destroyed. They take on the creature Gollum (Andy Serkis) as their guide to Mordor despite Gollum's obsession with getting `his precious' back. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) begin by trying to find the kidnapped Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd), but end up getting caught up in a battle to save a race of humans. The evil wizard Saruman (Christopher Lee), controlled by Dark Lord Sauron created a grand Uruk-hai army that is sent to destroy the race of Humans at the fortress Isengard. The presumed dead Gandolf (Ian McKellen) also returns to lend his assistance in battling Lord Sauron's troops.

This film was better paced than the first in the trilogy. There were still some breaks in the action that were a little dull, but the dialog was necessary to further the story. With three separate stories going on simultaneously between the three groups of the splintered fellowship, the film kept the action moving quickly. Clocking in at 179 minutes, it is just one minute longer than the first film. This time, I didn't mind the length. The battle for Isengard comprised about a third of the film, and it was very intense.

The rest of the film had a lot of the same excellent cinematic shots as the first movie. The shots tracking the actors from above (done by helicopter) with the beautiful New Zealand mountains and countryside in the background were just amazing. The landscapes helped to keep me involved with the story when the action slowed for dialog intensive scenes.

The creature Gollum played a very key roll in this movie, and the computer-generated character was very lifelike and amusing. He reminded me of Dobby the `house elf' in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Gollum and the Dwarf were the two main comic relief characters in this very serious film.

To conclude, we had to wait a year for this film, and it lived up to expectations! A final reminder…this is the middle film in the trilogy so you can expect another ending that leaves you wanting more! Not to worry though, the third and final film is due out next Christmas.
2002-12-18
best movie
Well Lord of the Rings Trilogy is the best movies ever. Lord of the Rings the Two Towers is amazing, with the Ents and the battle of the Ents. The flooding of Isengard. It's amazing stuff to see, honestly. Special affects are so well done. The extended one is obviously better. Fangorn Forest is real beautiful place,so old n mysterious looking, I mean it. The braking of the Fellowshiphas happened, separated in three parts; Frodo and Sam on the road to Mordor, Merry and Pippin captured by the Orcs and Urak-Kais,Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli on the pursuit to get Merry and Pippin back. A good thing that Gandalf is back, he's a real help to the Fellowship. Also the kingdom of Rohan is so beautiful, very viking looking.Honestly Fangorn Forest is the best part of the movie. It's just so funny and emotional. Treebeard is so amazing, he just so slow moving, and he takes his time to do everything. It's quite awesome. The parts are also very well played(the hobbits are the best). It's amazing, anybody who has not seen it should watch it. PETER JACKSON IS THE BEST DIRECTOR EVER!!!!!
2006-02-23
Disappointing
As a fan of LOTR before it came out in paperback and of the first film, I was disappointed in the sequel. Tolkien gets lost in all the mugging for the camera, uglified folks, and computer-battle scenes. It is sort of the antithesis of Tolkien, who presented hobbits as admirable for their simplicity and courage. The wrong aspects of seventeen- year-old boys are being appealed to here.
2003-10-12
A compromised vision.
Some of us may know the back story of how Tolkien himself never wanted his books to be made into a film and I have to say that I agree with him, much of the magic of his books were in the finer details and these could never be conveyed well in a film. Here we have a film that's well done in some ways yet in the grand scheme of things it was never needed, the books stand alone and this trilogy of movies are a perhaps selfish project? -that are essentially a compromised vision of the books, this big budget 'action' movie would serve those looking for a feast of CGI effects and action sequences, thankfully there is some subtlety and the interplay between characters is the films saving grace and I appreciate the tasteful selection of dialog used for the most part. One of my big beefs with The Two Towers and the other 2 movies is just how nonthreatening Sauron is in these films, I think this aspect weakens the movies a great deal, even the ring wraiths come across as impotent compared to creatures such as the Urak Hai. Another is the abrupt transitions between scenes, and the movies lose much of the 'glue' that the books had tying everything together. Finally 'some' of the CGI effects don't do justice to the imagination - Sauron's eye, and the faces in the dead marsh seem to suffer like Gladrieal did in the previous movie - a little bit too overly dramatic and washed out - I am only mentioning this as a comparison to the majority of effects in this movies which are actually very well done. Also the costumes are excellent, I especially thought the depictions of the orcs were excellent. Overall I can only give this 5 stars.
2010-11-07
Jackson tries to do too much here
I must admit that I did enjoy the first film and although it perhaps was a little slow in setting up the story it still remains a fairly compelling watch overall. Sadly I didn't get that same feeling when watching this second instalment for the following reasons...

Firstly, splitting all of the characters up and trying to show the story from various different perspectives is a risky strategy. If it's done wrong then it can make the film feel unfocused and not particularly interesting and sadly this second instalment falls into this very trap.

The film flits about from character to character, story arc to story arc without giving any particular character or story arc chance to develop or grow properly. It doesn't help that sometimes there can be long gaps from one story arc to another meaning that you may have forgotten what was going on in the previous story arc? I got the feeling that Jackson was trying to weave the stories together, but it seems that this isn't one of his strengths.

The second thing that bothered me slightly about this film was the character of Gollum - for some reason I felt that we were being teased in the first film that he was an interesting character that's shrouded in mystery. Whilst his character is fun for a bit, his repetitive rantings and antics do start to grate after a while.

I was also disappointed that Gandalf and Saruman weren't given much screen time here - the former seemed to just drift in and out of the story and the latter was only really featured towards the end. Although their absences were perhaps necessary to the story I found them to be the most compelling characters and was a bit annoyed that they both weren't in the film more often.

The final battle sequences are nicely staged and once again the performances from the principal cast were excellent - Bernard Hill's superb performance helped the film greatly when McKellen and Lee weren't on screen. John Rhys Davies also provided some excellent comic relief which again helped to improve my overall opinion of this film.

The Two Towers is still a worthy film that's relatively enjoyable, but I just felt that by splitting the characters up and in establishing separate story arcs that it felt a little disjointed and lacked the smooth and more simplistic flowing of the story in the first film.
2016-05-07
A true masterpiece!!
Of all three movies in this illustrious trilogy this might be my personal favorite. This is an incredible film. IMHO the opening and closing sequences (Gandalf Vs. Balroc & Helm's Deep) are unmatched in their greatness. The middle isn't too shabby either with a few great action sequences, some interesting character development and some of the most breathtaking settings ever put on film.
2003-12-30
Beautiful Perfection
The Two Towers can only be explained in one word, beautiful. This film left me breathless. I was hoping for a film that could stand in the same depths of the Fellowship of the Ring, and I must say that it has surpassed the film completely. I will have a hard time watching the Fellowship and seeing the ending, knowing there is so much more waiting.

Let's start with Gollum. Gollum gave an astonishing performance. The poor misunderstood beast, or the darkened soul creature whose cares are only based on the One Ring. The performance given in CGI is at times very human. The facial expressions given could strangely give this character a personality as you would see in any great actor. Gollum's voice is still haunting, even when the beast appears to be the loving guide to the dark gates of Mordor. For these reasons and more, Gollum has become my favorite character in the film, replacing Legolas in the Fellowship.

On the other side of Middle Earth we see Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli. I have to say that the dark times of this movie are at times overbearing, and saddening. There is a perfect mix of humor in the film given by the characters Gimli, and Legolas, while still keeping the viewer in understanding that these are very darkened times. Aragorn's performance is outstanding. He has proven that he can be put on an A-List of actors, and deserves appraise for his performance.

Gandalf "the White" in this film was a twist. We remember the friendly Gandalf The Grey in the Fellowship being a kind elderly wizard. Shouting off fireworks for the children of the shire, and smoking "leaf" as explained in the novel. There are no cute scenes with the new White Wizard. No fireworks, or pipes. Just a Wizard that knows the daunting task ahead, and the quest seems to have taken hold of the great wizard.

Very dark are the times for Frodo, and Samwise. Gollum seams to give Frodo hope, as the two ring bearers can associate the pains of the One Ring. Frodo gives an amazing performance this time around as well. It seams that the Ring of power has taken hold of Frodo, and our hero is slipping. But the surprise was aimed at Samwise. Proving that Sam is the definition of a true best friend. Even at times when it seems there is no hope for the troubled trio, it seams that Sam brings hope to the moment. This is what keeps the Frodo's story this time around even more extraordinary, is the hope that is there, even when all odds point to despair.

Merry and Pippin's story is very odd initially. The Ents in the story are very wise and newly troubled creatures from the amazing mind of Tolkien. This story goes back to cut scenes during the worries of the rest of Middle Earth, and gives us a feeling of hope, in the troubled times of Aragorn and the others. The Ents were very well done CGI wise, but it was there personality that moved the audience. They are curiously wise, and well spoken and give the impression of an elderly college Professor. Their story is eventually given a wonderful opportunity, and for those of us who know the story, know that greatness is upon them.

This movie honestly moved me further than I thought any film could. I could see my face and the emotion I felt as I was watching this mammoth film. Peter Jackson has truly given us all a gift of a magnificent. This story has captivated my heart, and the film has taken my breath away. There is no words that can express the greatness of this film. 10/10
2002-12-19
This is short, unlike the movie
A decent movie, worse than the first in the trilogy and equally not deserving of the hype it has gotten. Visually alright the effects are not a good reason for a Lord of the Rings fan to attempt to draw in non-fans or undecideds as I was. All of the matrix movies still dwarf this if you are going to talk Computer animation.
2004-02-21
My precious...
Seriously, I never thought a movie could get better than the Fellowship of the Ring, but it did. This movie should be #1 on the IMDb top 250. This movie, as long as it was, captivated me from start to finish, and those who are not entertained by this movie can not be entertained period.

Yes, I have read the book. Any chapters cut out at the end of books III and IV will probably themselves in the next installment. If you haven't noticed, the beginning of the Two Towers was actually closed the Fellowship of the Ring on the big screen.

Gollum was a CG masterpiece. He added some light to this incredibly dark movie. At the same time, there are areas where you feel sorry for the poor guy, or just want to kill him. Smeagol was probably the most diverse character I've ever seen.

Elijah Wood put on a better performance than he did in the first movie, as did Sean Astin. Ian McKellen, who captivated us in the last movie, captivated us even more in this one. Viggo Mortensen, John Rhys-Davies, and Orlando Bloom made a great trio. They laughed together, cried together, prospered together, and suffered together. This trio gave life to Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas. Eowyn expressed her emotions clearly through Miranda Otto.

The music need not be discussed. Its greatness speaks for itself.

Favorite Scene: The Battle of Helms Deep. Possibly the greatest scene in the book, 50% of the trailer, and action packed climax to this beautiful movie.

The movie, like its predecessor, fails to bring us closure, but that's ok. Closure will come next year. I look forward to the Return of the King.

The Two Towers is now my favorite movie of all time.

The scale is broken. 10 is not a capacity sufficient enough to hold this movie... my movie... my... precious...
2002-12-18
Is It Magical?
Spoilers herein.

One hallmark of science fiction and fantasy is the creation of a world that includes to some extent the creator. That way, instead of inhabitants bumping around in a world, we get a complex set of interactions: some as a result of the world affecting the players, and some the other way around. Tolkien's work fits well within this tradition, in fact why it was so successful I think is the thoroughness with which he developed the magical laws. The reader not only understood that the magic had power, but had some notion of how it worked. That allowed the reader to exist both at the level of Frodo and the magical level of the wizards and demigods.

That's the soul of the books; not any episode, not any `theme' about brotherhood or hope or any such sodapop.

The first film of this saga impressed purely with the sheer ambition of the project, and we now have the second one. It is fun watching, just like `Speed' was in its day, but I'm unhappy with some of the choices that were made.

With film, there are specific ways to span the two worlds, ways which a few filmmakers have been exploiting for a long time -- long enough for some of them to appear in mainstream films. Almost none of those techniques were used here. Nearly all the choices were ones that plant us firmly in the world of the inhabitants who are buffeted by the world's forces just like we as people are. This literally boils all the magic out of the books, and we are left with `Braveheart' meets `The Black Cauldron' except slightly more expensively done and with some monsters.

The travesty is not that these choices were made to protect the investment in the films, but that so many Tolkien enthusiasts miss the point and argue about whether elves appear in the wrong scenes.

Further to the philosophy of the film: the manner in which the characters deal with the camera is roughly equivalent to the relationship the readers' imaginative `eye' has with the text. In addition to being cast at the level of the adventures and not the magic, there are other problems. That stance is inconsistent -- the greatest offense comes in the middle of the great battle. Until then, the players have been dead serious. They've been in their lives, not characters in a movie that wink at us. But all of a sudden, we have a barrage of winking: the `surfing' move, the dwarf-tossing joke, the 007-like standoff on the bridge. All of these depend on us knowing it is a movie and the characters leaving their lives and knowingly entering the movie.

Other problems with that stance. The various technologies used each have their own way the camera must be used. The two perspectives that impressed me were the handling of the fight between Gandolf and the balrog and the relationship we have with Gollum. In the first, our eye IS magical as it swoops around sometimes watching the fight, sometimes IN the fight. This use of the camera is new -- I noticed it also last week in `Treasure Planet' when encountering the black hole. But it entirely different than the soliloquies Gollum (and several others) have. Under the guise of talking to themselves, they are really talking to us, nearly looking at the camera. All of the camera engagement is from Bergman, and is his well-studied solution to the Shakespearean stage technique.

I liked both of these, but they are inconsistent with each other, inconsistent with Tolkien's magic as noted and inconsistent with the movieland jokes. But there are even more diverse perspectives. We have the helicopter shots (again from `Braveheart'), and a few similar shots of virtual sets. We could have had some new movement (like the balrog fight), but we are supposed to recall similar shots.

And then there are the Ents, animation straight out of `Poltergeist.' It is another set of views determined by the technology rather the story. Shifting among the bluescreen of hobbits in Ents, to the humanistic CGI Gollum, to the video game animation of the battle was jarring. We never were in Tolkien's world, just browsing through the aisles of your video store, shifting about.

LOTR was written with specific notions of reading in mind and is bound to them. But `Dune' was not. Imagine a film of Dune with this budget and Lynch's originality instead of Jackson's `me-too-isms.' Now that would be cool.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 4: Worth watching.
2002-12-21
Write descriptive essay about The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers movie 2002, The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers movie essay, literary essay The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers essay writing, narrative essay, The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers 500 word essay, argumentative essay The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.
×