Good: All the stuff from 'Fellowship', plus Gollum Bad: All the stuff from 'Fellowship', plus Ents

Rating: 9/10 (19 December 2002)

Surprising absolutely nobody on this planet, this film is in fact very similar to the Fellowship film. On the plus side, it's got all it's strengths (CGI, New Zealand, mostly wonderful acting, New Zealand, length, costumes, music, etc. etc.) On the minus side, it's got most of its weaknesses (mainly the kinda hokey medievalese dialogue, the weird pronunciation of the r's and Elijah Wood). So assuming you've seen the first one (and if you haven't, and haven't read it, you'll have absolutely no idea what the hell is going on) here are the major points of difference:
-The Sir Ians don't appear much in this one. Also Boromir doesn't, for obvious reasons. So, the three best actors are barely in the movie. Thankfully, Bernard Hill, who does Theoden, makes up for it with a great performance. And the drawing of poison scene with Theoden is one of the most imaginative in the film, which is saying a lot
-Gimli and Legolas aren't so gratingly annoying. Well, at least Legolas isn't. Gimli is comic-relief for some reason (although some of it is funny, like when he tells Aragorn "toss me!")
-Smeagol-Gollum. Oh, man, how wonderful is this? The Gollum is so fantastic, it kicks the proverbial ass of all previously created CGI characters (even the ones in the Final Fantasy movie). I don't know if Andy Serkis (who is billed in the role of Gollum) had a lot to do with his 'acting' but if he did, congratulations to him on a great performance, and if he didn't, well, it's kinda creepy that CG can make better actors than most people actors now.
-Rohan. Might as well be called 'The-Land-Where-All-Men-Look-Like-Chad-Kroeger-From-Nickelback.' Otherwise, however, it is superbly done in a true to Norse mythology style. The gloominess of the place is at times palpable.
-Meriadoc, Peregrin, Samwise actually get to do something in this movie. Which is great, 'cause it was a little bit annoying to me to see those three as bumbling idiots over and over again.
-Faramir. He's not a syrupy-sweet good guy in this one, unlike the book. Which I think is an excellent change, even though some say this is some sort of Tolkien blasphemy. Other changes from the book are also good (well, when they're changes. Straight omissions are a little harder to swallow, simply because one is interested 'how would they have done that?' even if it really wouldn't have mattered)
-Battle of Helm's deep. Overlong. Kinda boring for me. Yet no one can say this isn't a movie-making feat worth celebrating.
-Disjointedness. Good on one hand, as Elijah Wood isn't there so much. Bad on the other hands, since it can be confusing as to what is going on where
-Ents. There is a school of thought that says you can't help but screw up visualising ents. Although I disagree, this movie seems to give credence to that notion. How could people that did so well in other ways mess up so embarrassingly here? These ents are comic to me, when they're supposed to be majestic. I don't remember how it was described in the book, and maybe they stayed true to that description, but it just doesn't make sense to me for ents to be smaller than trees, two-footed and quick runners. I was disappointed that the Buckland and Old Forest scenes were omitted in the first one, but now I see why - they just don't do forests that well. It's kind of a shame, really.

Well, there you have it. I can't give it a ten, cause of the general hokeyness, and cause of the ents. A nine it is, then.