human element of film good; didn't like as much as first

Rating: 8/10 (20 March 2003)

I went to this movie in anticipation of an intense three hours. But I made a major miscalculation. I thought reading the book would make me enjoy the film more. It did not. I found myself annoyed by what Jackson did to parts of the plot. When I saw the first movie, I was emotionally sucked in because I had a space of a year between the reading of the book and the viewing of the film. This time, I viewed things with an incredibly critical eye. I didn't like what he did to Aragorn in part of the film, seeing it as unnecessary. I thought that Arwen was portrayed in an inconsistent, unjust manner. I remembered what was in the book about the battle scenes at Helm's Deep. I was immediately annoyed by Jackson's frills and the overly sentimental attachment to the roles certain characters played in the battle. I also did not quite like the way he cuts back and forth between the first half of the book and the second half. I like that he does, because it is necessary, but some skill is lacking in the methods used and the pacing, causing some parts of the film to drag and take on a dull quality. I don't like how the end of the battle at Helm's Deep is signified in the film, thinking there was better perspective and handling of it in the book.
I did like the human element. I loved how Gollum, Merry, and Pippin were turned into stars. Merry and Pippin were given especially delightful roles. I loved their interaction the the ents. I loved Gollum's speeches. I love how the environmental themes Tolkein would have loved brought out were treated. I loved the simplicity with which Wormtongue's, Theoden's, and Eowyn's starting situation and relationships to each other were treated. I liked the use of monologues by certain characters. I disliked but found necessary the behind the scenes psychology of the battle of Helm's Deep. Somehow, sentimentality got hold of it too much. But I greatly admired Jackson's very human treatment of all the characters in that situation, and the way he effectively shows the attitudes of those in peril. I admired his attempt to socially and psychologically comment on what was going on. It made a lot of sense even if I didn't find all of it artistically pleasing enough.
I thought some of the great strengths of the film were in the acting, monologues, and highlighting of Merry and Pippin and Gollum. I loved how Frodo is shown in relationship to Gollum and the shots used to clearly, eeerily, and humanly compare the two. The clear storytelling focus really worked for me.
And as annoyed as some people are by the ending, I found it well done and a great way to wrap up the movie, make up for flaws, and really make you want to see number three.
A major flaw of this movie is the forced and ineffective music, obviously intended to get you. But it didn't get me this time. It was as bad as the watered down root beer I was drinking. Another annoyance is Gollum's voice. I didn't think it was quite right.
I have a reservation about the title. "The Two Towers" as a title does not hold up well thematically for the film because of the information the viewer is not given. It is better justified in the book, though still just barely. This has nothing to do with politics, but the fact that I feel it is too incompletely justified in the film and the book itself could have had a better title. I have to say this, though. The title gives nothing away.
Overall, by the end, this film is a lot of fun and thought-provoking, despite my reservations. It was definitely fun for me to think about and discuss with others. I give Jackson points for pulling off anything having to do with these long novels as well as he did.