An Epic, no doubt

Rating: Null/10 (31 December 2002)

Normally I don't review movies in great detail, but felt this time that I needed to add my thoughts - even if they probably are worth no more than two cents.
After recently viewing TTT for the second time, I have to say that I enjoyed the movie so much more the second time. The first time, the spectator is simply bombarded with images (not to mention, when I saw it opening night, the theater cued the lights and cut the sound in the middle of the Helm's Deep battle which seriously ticked me off). However, the second time, you can settle in and look for other things you may have missed the second time (for example, who noted that as Wormtongue was looking out at Sarumon's army of 10,000 that were about to be unleashed onto Rohan, a single tear slipped down his face?) That, to me, spoke volumes. So, if you liked it the first time, or even if you didn't, but feel you can afford to spend more time in the theater, go see it again. Look for things you didn't notice before and prepared to be amazed and awed.
For Tolkien purists, let me just say that I've read the books. No, not many times, but I have read them and recommended them to others. So what if not everything that happens in the book, happens in the movie? So what if things are added or changed? No where in the opening credits did it state "J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" (or, for that matter, "Peter Jackson's LOTR: TTT.") In the credits it states: "BASED ON." Get over it! It's a movie. If you're going to fight about something, try fighting for world peace instead. There's more important things going on!
Of course, I state that, but am in the middle of writing this, so what do I know?
Jackson has admitted, in interviews, that he took the most liberty with the storyline and adaptation of TTT more than the other two movies. (If you need to understand what "adaptation" means, go find a dictionary, but it certainly doesn't mean literal, word-for-word storytelling). Fine. He directed the movie and New Line Cinema owns the rights and since they were writing his paycheck that means he can do with the story what he wants. Be thrilled that he didn't completely butcher the books along the way (although, I'm sure, in your opinion, that he did exactly that). He told a story - an entertaining and timeless one. Just enjoy it.
I plan on seeing this movie again - and will forgive the moments in the movie that I feel were unneeded, and be awed again by the scenes I downright enjoyed. Also, what do people have against "Gollum's Song?" If you listen to the words, it fits. (the use of "us" and "we" throughout the lyrics). Not to mention, the use of minor and major chords throughout [much like Gollum, himself. Is he good (major) or bad(minor).] And, the song ends on an unresolved chord - leaves you wanting more, much like the ending of the movie...just a few thoughts. I, for one, am looking forward to what Peter Jackson, Howard Shore, et. al., will give us in RotK. Until December '03.