Flawed Where "Fellowship" Wasn't, but Still a Grand Epic

Rating: 8/10 (31 December 2002)

Contains Spoilers
Let me start by saying that I thought "Fellowship" was as close to perfection as film gets. A brilliant realization of the classic book, of which I am also a devout fan.
But unlike other Tolkien devotees, I will not criticize this adaptation simply because it alters certain aspects of the novel. It is a necessary evil in converting a written medium to a visual one. I did not have a problem with Arwen's expanded role in "Fellowship," nor did I lament the loss of such characters as Tom Bombadil. All the changes Peter Jackson made to the first book worked sublimely well on screen.
But he was not so wise in his adaptation of "The Two Towers." Many changes he made simply do not work. And by "not work," I mean in a purely cinematic sense. My reservations include:
1) Aragorn going over the cliff. This is redundant in that the same thing happened to Gandalf. It is not suspenseful because in every trailer and TV spot we have seen Aragorn fight in the battle of Helm's Deep. It also dedicates far too much screen time to getting him back to the keep, thus slowing the film and accomplishing nothing save for forcing an unnecessary appearance of Arwen.
2) The Ents get tricked. The oldest, wisest beings in Middle-earth yet they have no idea what's going on, nor do they offer to help until they are tricked by Merry and Pippin. Defeats the whole purpose of the Entmoot scene and belittles their characters.
3) Shelob pushed to the 3rd film. I don't care what anyone says, this was a huge mistake. As written in the novels, the climax of "Towers" is a perfect, classic cliffhanger. It would have been on par with "The Empire Strikes Back," when Han is whisked away by Boba Fett and Luke learns a little about his family tree. Now imagine if "Empire" had ended BEFORE the lightsaber duel between Luke and Vader and you get some idea of the error Jackson made here. He instead gives us a brief, anticlimactic aside to Osgilath where nothing really happens that hasn't happened before. Worst of all was Sam Gamgee turning into Sam Rockne with a "Some things are worth fighting for" speech that was so corny it made me laugh.
I also felt the film didn't flow very well and could have been edited together much better. At several points in the movie I checked my watch and wondered, "I haven't seen Frodo and Sam for about 45 minutes. What the hell happened to that story?" In comparison, watch any of the "Star Wars" films and marvel at how perfectly they balance and fade to several concurrent story lines. "Towers" lacked this fluidity.
Aside from these flaws, however, I greatly enjoyed "Towers." Its action sequences are unparalleled and the casting remains perfect. For pure visual flair this series sets the benchmark for everything else out there. I eagerly await "The Return of the King," which will hopefully live up to "Fellowship." The first film in this trilogy ranks a 10, but "Towers" falters slightly and falls to an 8.
Score: 8/10