Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

Lord of the Rings: Two Towers Reviews Rolling In 440

Posted by CmdrTaco from the are-we-there-yet-mommy dept.
flogger writes "After the first showing of The Two Towers, the reviews are now coming in. They are positive and SPOILER FILLED. Reviews can be found here, here and a short one here." Don't say you weren't warned. I'm not reading them. I finished re-reading TTT saturday, and am ready to see Ents walk.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lord of the Rings: Two Towers Reviews Rolling In More

Lord of the Rings: Two Towers Reviews Rolling In

Comments Filter:

  • Spoiler filled? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Grylle ( 558338 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @07:59AM (#4800358)
    Like, there is something not in the books?
    • Pictures and sound

      • Re:Spoiler filled? (Score:5, Funny)

        by halftrack ( 454203 ) <jonkje@gmailLION.com minus cat> on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:08AM (#4800392) Homepage
        Apologies to whoever on slashdot who once wrote something very similar to this.

        I've got this genious rendering engine called B.R.A.I.N. It renders hundreds of thousands of characters realtime and it looks so realistic. All you have to do is input a text (ASCII not an requirement) and it output gorgeous scenes instantanious.
        • "I've got this genious rendering engine called B.R.A.I.N. It renders hundreds of thousands of characters in realtime and the output looks incredibly realistic. All you have to do is input some text (ASCII not an requirement), and it outputs gorgeous scenes instantaniously."

          WOW! I know some people who could use one of these...
        • Another of my favorite responses to the threads about games where people get hung up on FPS.

          Goes something like..

          "That is nothing, I can get several trillion polygons with billions of colors at thousands of frames per second! It is called outside, you should try it some time. Check out the cool wind special effects some time as well ;)"

          Jeremy

    • Re:Spoiler filled? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Soulslayer ( 21435 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:06AM (#4800386) Homepage
      Actually, yes.

      It is both spoiler filled for both those that have and have not read the books.

      All info on the new film will be spoilerish for people that have not read the books (a surprisingly large group).

      Information pertaining to specific changes and added scenes as well as descriptions of the flow of the narrative would be spoilers even for the crowd that has read the books.
    • The spoilers:

      The butler did it.

      It turns out that he was dead all along.

      She's a guy.
      • You missed:
        He's "mother"
        Vader is Luke's father
        Samuel L. Jackson caused all those accidents
        He dies in the end. Judas betrays him.

        • Re:Spoiler filled? (Score:5, Funny)

          by Tetsujin28 ( 156148 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @03:28PM (#4803837) Homepage
          He dies in the end. Judas betrays him.

          Man, you didn't stay until the end of the credits, did you? Yeah, he dies at the end, but get this -- three days later they go to the gravesite, and IT'S EMPTY! Creepy, right? But then he actually like shows up and it turns out he came back to life. Seriously, dude. His old friends are freaked out for a while, but then they get used to it. And then they all hang out on the beach and have this fish barbecue, but I'm not sure what's up with that.

          • Re:Spoiler filled? (Score:4, Funny)

            by junkgrep ( 266550 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @03:36PM (#4803907)
            You left out the easter egg at the end where it's revealed that he's the king of the vampires. His followers drink his body and blood to take on his undying powers and spread out through the world looking to turn others to their master's will.
      • You forgot:

        And the Lone Gunmen buy the farm.

    • Gandalf kicks some booty in Isengard while Johnny Cash's "ring of fire" plays in the background. It annoys the purists, but I think the scene kicks ass.

  • Offensive title (Score:4, Funny)

    by 91degrees ( 207121 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:00AM (#4800363) Journal
    I really wish the media would stop trying to cash in on the events of 9/11. I think this title will upset many people.

    What was wrong with The Lord of the Rings II?

    • Re:Offensive title (Score:5, Funny)

      by onnellinen ( 303528 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:18AM (#4800416) Homepage
      Yeah. Let's name it "Attack of the Orcs".

    • Re:Offensive title (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:48AM (#4800516)
      No, it's being renamed The Twin Towers. Or better yet, The World Trade Center, New York City. Or how about, Attack of the Terrorist Drones. Maybe The Phantom Arab Menace? A New Hope for the Al-Quaeda Network? The 'Evil Empire' Strikes Back? Return of the Mujadeen?

      2001: An Urban Crisis Odyssey? Osama of Arabia? The Wizard of Afghanistan? The Day the Earth Watched TV? Birth of a Palestinian Nation? Casabinladen?

    • Re:Offensive title (Score:5, Funny)

      by clickety6 ( 141178 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @09:22AM (#4800637)
      Surely in line with modern thinking, the Trilogy should realy be

      The Hobbit Episode II, III and IV,
      and then the Hobbit will be released about 20 years from now, along with enhanced Episodes II, III and IV featuring a digitally inserted Tom Bombadil with a Jamaican accent and dreadlocks.

      Or wait, should they be The Silmarillion Episodes III, IV and V

      Or maybe...
    • Having read this I skipped to your journal entry. One thing: loads of peeps will have trouble to discern whether you are being sarcastic or honest - really. Just see some of the replies to your post B}

      Boing
    • I vote for:

      Lord of the Rings II: Electric Boogaloo

      and maybe a huge dance number on the battle front with Michael Jackson and 40,000 orcs.

  • Free pass in the super duper DVD box set. (Score:5, Informative)

    by heldlikesound ( 132717 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:01AM (#4800364) Homepage
    Just a heads up to all the peps out there it holdin' down. If you buy the special edition super ultra limited DVD box (with the bookend thingies), enclosed is a free pass to see TTT in the theaters, or theatres depending on your pondsidage.

  • Spoilers?!? (Score:5, Funny)

    by halftrack ( 454203 ) <jonkje@gmailLION.com minus cat> on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:01AM (#4800366) Homepage
    What have the world come to when the submitters warn the /. crowd about spoilers in a LOTR movie. Doesn't the entire /. crowd know it by heart?? It ... makes me sad.

  • SPOILERS, OH NOES!!! (Score:5, Funny)

    by webslacker ( 15723 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:01AM (#4800367)
    Spoilers can be found distributed in Barnes & Noble bookstores for $6.99

    -_-

  • the battle (Score:4, Interesting)

    by katalyst ( 618126 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:04AM (#4800379) Homepage
    More interesting than the reviews, was the write up on the humongous battle scene that takes place in the movie and how the MASSIVE system was used. I especially liked the note on the AI soldiers who ran away instead of fighting , which surprised the animators.
    Anyways, the LOTR movies are a must watch : can't be missed. Though not in the same league as the Star Wars movie, they are a similar phenomenon. Similarly the Matrix movies will not be missed by most geeks. Other movies to watch out for - Star Trek Nemesis ; Equilibrium ; Terminator 3 :D

    • Re:the battle (Score:3, Interesting)

      by angelo ( 21182 )
      Star Wars isn't on par with Star Wars these days.
      LotR > Star Wars.
      • Agreed. AotC was cool, but after watching Fellowship for the first time, I couldn't come up with any descriptions that weren't repeatable in polite company out of sheer amazement.

        While both movies are heavy of effects, Star Wars (which I really do like) comes across like a cartoon and FotR comes across like it's real. Not because of technical skill, but because of the way they were used. Also, FotR had many wonderful performances, especially Ian McKellan, but the whole cast was great. The acting in Star Wars II makes Al Gore look passionate and vivacious. (See my previous post in another thread for the summation of Anakin and Amidala's relationsship in 6 lines of dialogue).

    • I agree completely, LOTR is not in the same league as Star Wars - LOTR is just so much better ;)

      Seriously, this is mostly about taste - I personally look much more forward to TTT than I did to AOTC, but that is just my personal opinion.

    • Though not in the same league as the Star Wars movie

      Please explain further why Star Wars is in its own league. I would really love to hear the sides as to why Star Wars is better than anything else. I know we have some Trek's here too so let bring it all out while we are at it! Personally I don't go crazy for Star War; I waited for a friend to rent Phantom Menace and did not even bother watching Attack of the Clones (???). So I'm oblivious to anything relating to Star Wars so enlighten me please.
    • Um, Terminator 3 isn't so much a Geek thing as it is a Guy thing. Shit getting blown up with guns...yeah guy thing.

  • LOTR (Score:2, Funny)

    by Konster ( 252488 )
    ...I've never read the books.

    Where can I get the Cliff's Notes?

  • Not in the book... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Hoarse Whisperer ( 604444 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:20AM (#4800421)
    Turns out Frodo is Sauron's son.

  • Am I the only one ... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by guybarr ( 447727 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:23AM (#4800431)
    ... who reads some reviews only after seeing the movies ?

    seriously, some movies I'll see no matter what the reviewer says,
    LOTR is one (three) of those.

    I'll read the reviews solely for the purpose of getting other people's take on the movies. Like the "discussion" part of an article comes after
    the "results" section.

    I know it sounds sick but hey ...

    • Re:Am I the only one ... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by szo ( 7842 )
      ... who reads some reviews only after seeing the movies ?

      Why do you do that?
      So you know whether or not you liked the film?

      Szo
      • well, i also read review after i see a movie that i liked. i think it's interesting to read other opinions, and there's the possibility that they will discuss a point that u missed (like an obscure reference). i guess i could just read to some forum but professional reviewers are generaly more agreable to read.

      • Re:Am I the only one ... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Jerf ( 17166 )
        To calibrate my opinions against specific other people's opinions on a known movie, so that if I'm ever wondering about a movie in the future, I know who to turn to for a review.

        Quite effective, actually.

  • Spoilers right in the story (Score:5, Funny)

    by daffmeister ( 602502 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:23AM (#4800434) Homepage
    I am ready to see Ents walk.

    Well that's ruined that bit for me.

  • I can wait... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by SoSueMe ( 263478 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:27AM (#4800445)
    After seeing the first movie, which wasn't bad, I can wait.
    In fact, it is entirely possible that I will wait until the "Final" movie is released and get the "Super Mega Ultra Complete (untill the Sequel/Prequel) Boxed Set Collectors Version Directors Cut" and waste a whole week watching it.
    Or I might just keep my money in my pocket and read a good book.

    • Re:I can wait... (Score:2, Redundant)

      by tswinzig ( 210999 )
      Thanks for filling us in on your plans!

      In a few minutes, I'm going to take a dump. No wait, I might wait until tonight, and take a "Super Mega Ultra Complete (until the Sequel/Prequel) Collectors Version Directors Cut" dump.

      Or I might just keep my poop inside me and read a good book.

  • Unbiased reviews (Score:5, Interesting)

    by drsquare ( 530038 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:29AM (#4800453)
    Three reviews given, not one of them seemed to be from an unbiased perspective. When I read the first two, I began to think the writers were masturbating as they typed. And the third one, being from 'theonering.net', didn't seem a reliable source of an impartial view either.

    Isn't it possible to find a review from someone who isn't an obsessive zealot? I'm interested in finding out how good the film is, and I'm not going to get that from someone who has decided he's going to enjoy the film before he's even seen it.

    Secondly, what is the point in having spoilers in a review? The whole point in a review is that you can find out how good the film is, so you can decide whether to see it or not. By giving away what happens in the film, you sort of take away the fun in watching it in the first place. Most reviewers seem to get by reviewing films without giving away every single thing that happens, why can't these reviewers?

    Looks like I'll just have to see what the Filthy Critic says, although if he does review it it probably won't be up till February, and then he'll spend 90% of the review talking about his personal problems.

    • Re:Unbiased reviews (Score:4, Insightful)

      by IIRCAFAIKIANAL ( 572786 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @09:41AM (#4800714) Journal
      You won't see an unbiased review for awhile. The problem is the novels are so pervasive and anyone into "media" was probably into them at some time, unless they hate fantasy, in which case they would be biased against the Lord of the Rings movies.

      Look at the imdb [imdb.com] - it has a 9.5 right now. I remember when the FOtR came out and it jumped to number one on the "best movies ever" list (#1 fantasy movie of all time, sure, #1 movie of all time, not quite). Eventually it settled to a more realistic spot.

      If I got to see it right now, I would probably gush about it and inflate it's value too. But give me two months and I'll tell you how good it really was. :)

      • Re:Unbiased reviews (Score:3, Informative)

        by Jhan ( 542783 )

        ... The problem is the novels are so pervasive and anyone into "media" was probably into them at some time, unless they hate fantasy, in which case they would be biased against the Lord of the Rings movies.

        That statement is probably very true, which makes it even more interesting that I did not see one review in Swedish media that did not begin with words to the effect of:
        "I never in my life read Tolkien, but..."
        "I hated Tolkiens books, but..."
        "I regularly piss on Tolkiens grave, but..."
        and (this guy must be a real fan-boy) "I haven't read Tolkien in a great while, but...

        After which follows a favourable through enthusiastic review.

    • The whole point in a review is that you can find out how good the film is, so you can decide whether to see it or not.

      That's one of the points of a review. Another point of reading a review is to increase your appreciation of something you have seen or are about to see. However, this presupposes that the reviewer is knowledgeable and insightful, and critical in an open minded way.

      Fan "reviews" which simply reveal juicy tidbits don't serve any purpose other than idle curiosity.
    • Well the way I see it, they're either film zealots or book zealots. If they're film zealots, then they must have loved the film, which is kinda the point of the review, surely?

      And if they're book zealots then even better - no one is likely to be harsher on these films than a true die hard book fan.

      But I agree with you on the spoilers . . .

  • about spoilers (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wiredog ( 43288 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:29AM (#4800455) Journal
    the spoiler obsession, born of the Internet's fan-geek culture, is the enemy of real criticism, real discussion and maybe even real thought.

    Andrew O'Hehir [salon.com], at Salon.com

  • Speaking of spoilers... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dua ( 213683 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @08:43AM (#4800501)
    I thought it was sad that they put pictures of Gandalf the White in the trailers (at least in the UK they did). It does mean that some of the impact will be lost on those who haven't read the books...

    Trailers are evil and spoilery.
  • because I'm stuck in Germany at the moment and I sure don't speak enough German to understand TTT!
    I can't even read this article because of the spoilers!! Anyone know of any English movie-theatres around Cologne/Dusseldorf area?
    • There used to be a English Movie house, just next to the train station. Might check if its still there. I was plesantly supprised that when movies opened in the US it opened there at the same time. Course that was 16 years ago... But im sure there is still a english movie house in Munich, as many Muncher's prefer to hear the movie with the origional voices.
    • Check both
      http://www.cologne-in.de/kino/metro.htm
      http://www.europeguidebook.com/germany/regions/wes /cologne/cologne_cin_agn.cfm
      If you want to drive down to the Kaiserslautern area they have it at
      http://www.broadwaykino.com/01.programm/arthouse.p hp
      They are all releaseing the same day as the US, but because of the time change you actually can see it and have it reviewed here before the US general population can, all 179 mins of it.

  • Noooo! (Score:2, Funny)

    by redNuht ( 213553 )
    I hate you Taco, I hate you! I was avoiding all those spoilers and reading the spoiler-free Slashdot frontpage and you tell me that ENTS CAN WALK!?

    I don't wanna see that movie anymore.
  • I'm not reading [the reviews]. I finished re-reading TTT saturday, and am ready to see Ents walk.

    I thought the Ents were supposed to be the big SPOIL-able thing in this one.

  • Choice quote from one review: (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anarchofascist ( 4820 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @09:42AM (#4800719) Homepage Journal
    Talking about the fight scene in Helm's Deep:

    "...made ATTACK OF THE CLONES look like it was shot in a barn with hand puppets."

  • Unexpected spoilers suck, scene by scene summary (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nitefallz ( 221624 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @09:51AM (#4800757)
    I read the book so obviously nothing surprises me but I was a bit irritated reading the second review(i didn't finish it) and it started giving a scene by scene account of the movie, I didn't want to read a summary of the screenplay.

  • Music (Score:2, Interesting)

    by bicho ( 144895 )
    The thing I want to know, Is if Enya did sing /write another set of songs for this movie and if she will for the next.

    I really like "May It Be", and I still think she deserved an award for it.

    So, did she?

    • Re:Music (Score:2, Informative)

      by AGTiny ( 104967 )
      No, there are different vocalists featured this time around: Isabel Bayrakdarian, Sheila Chandra, Ben Del Maestro, Elizabeth Fraser, Emiliana Torrini, and Hilary Summers.

      Check out the soundtrack [lordoftherings.net].

  • "I'm not reading them" (Score:5, Funny)

    by fungus ( 37425 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @10:04AM (#4800822)
    Don't say you weren't warned. I'm not reading them. I finished re-reading TTT saturday, and am ready to see Ents walk.

    Since when the editors read the articles anyway? :)

  • On a good day... (Score:4, Funny)

    by artemis67 ( 93453 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @10:15AM (#4800926)
    Aint It Cool acts like it is slashdotted. Linking to an aintitcool.com story on Slashdot is only pouring more gasoline on the fire.

  • Comic Relief (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Ann Coulter ( 614889 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @11:35AM (#4801611)
    I feel that it was alright for Gimli to be used as a tension breaker in this film since we spend the most time with him, Legolas, & Aragorn in the film.


    We need comic relief in epic movies as much as we need Jar Jar Binks to show up in The Return Of The King. IMHO it is atrocious to have humor in any serious work of epic scope. I never felt that Gimli served that purpose in the novel and I certainly despise this act by Peter Jackson.

    • Re:Comic Relief (Score:4, Interesting)

      by dswensen ( 252552 ) on Tuesday December 03, 2002 @01:30PM (#4802689) Homepage
      I disagree. The moments of humor in the LOTR movies so far have been very well-done, in my opinion (Merry and Pippin's antics, Gandalf threatening to bash Pippin's head against the doors of Moria, etc.) I was even okay with the line "Nobody tosses a dwarf!" (Regarded as blasphemy by some, but it goes by so quickly it's hardly worth getting excited about.)

      In the Two Towers book, I found the "contest" between Gimli and Legolas as to who could kill the most orcs to be very amusing. Not slapstick, knee-slappingly hilarious, but amusing nonetheless. I imagine TTT will be of roughly the same caliber in terms of humor.

      I don't forsee Jackson making Gimli into a joke character by any means. His role in FOTR was nicely balanced, with some great lines and some very emotional scenes in Moria and in Lothlorien. Hell, the only character to take a pratfall in the FOTR movie was Aragorn (during the hobbit "sword training" scene in the Extended Edition) and it's not like that sullied the movie experience for all time.

      Moreover, Tolkien's work was itself not dark and humorless, but full of joy -- lots of jokes, lots of songs. That joy deserves to be translated to film, not made into something overwhelmingly gloomy. Grimness and maudlin has no meaning unless it has joy and humor to contrast with.

Slashdot Top Deals

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Close