Pretty Man Episode 30 | Chapter 218 | 1x07 La verdad
Gladys Hamilton (Seattle) i was told that I can migos The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers free download, but I did not believe, especially the year 2002 New York. Michael Whitehead (Lexington) Peter Jackson The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers free download Bluray at high speed, and even in the USA, New Zealand, Germany Cambridge.
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
Year:
2002
Country:
USA, New Zealand, Germany
Genre:
Drama, Action, Adventure, Fantasy
IMDB rating:
8.7
Director:
Peter Jackson
Sean Astin as Sam
John Bach as Madril
Sala Baker as Man Flesh Uruk
Cate Blanchett as Galadriel
Orlando Bloom as Legolas
Billy Boyd as Pippin
Jed Brophy as Sharku
Sam Comery as Éothain
Brad Dourif as Wormtongue
Calum Gittins as Haleth
Bernard Hill as Theoden
Bruce Hopkins as Gamling
Paris Howe Strewe as Théodred - Prince of Rohan
Storyline: While Frodo and Sam, now accompanied by a new guide, continue their hopeless journey towards the land of shadow to destroy the One Ring, each member of the broken fellowship plays their part in the battle against the evil wizard Saruman and his armies of Isengard.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x800 px 16794 Mb h264 (High) 1536 Kbps mkv Download
HQ DVD-rip 720x304 px 3011 Mb h264 1787 Kbps mp4 Download
DVD-rip 480x234 px 797 Mb mpeg4 647 Kbps avi Download
iPhone 640x360 px 2004 Mb h264 1561 Kbps mp4 Download
Reviews
Second installment, great DVD, story a bit muddled, a movie mainly for "Ring" fans.
Almost two years ago, after I saw the first of the trilogy, I wrote in summary...

"As a film of a historic work of fiction, and especially this DVD release, it is almost perfect. However, as a fictional work the story is a bit of a let-down, in my opinion. It is best appreciated by all the "Ringheads" out there who have bonded over the years with the ring trilogy and Tolkien. For my own enjoyment there are more interesting fictional works. Maybe I'll have a different opinion in two years, after I've seen all three of the installments. "

I've not seen the last installment yet, but my opinion has not changed any. First off the movie is entirely too long. Not that length itself is bad, but in an apparent attempt to follow the books faithfully, much of the story drags badly. Wise producers and directors realize that movies made from books must exclude much material, to keep the story interesting and the running time reasonable. People who read novels often do so over weeks. Movies are normally watched at one sitting. So, while this long movie may be just what the "Ringheads" want, for the rest of us it is simply too much of the same, and too long. Still, it has remarkable production values and is a joy to watch. Just too long and boring in spots.
2004-05-18
best movie
Well Lord of the Rings Trilogy is the best movies ever. Lord of the Rings the Two Towers is amazing, with the Ents and the battle of the Ents. The flooding of Isengard. It's amazing stuff to see, honestly. Special affects are so well done. The extended one is obviously better. Fangorn Forest is real beautiful place,so old n mysterious looking, I mean it. The braking of the Fellowshiphas happened, separated in three parts; Frodo and Sam on the road to Mordor, Merry and Pippin captured by the Orcs and Urak-Kais,Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli on the pursuit to get Merry and Pippin back. A good thing that Gandalf is back, he's a real help to the Fellowship. Also the kingdom of Rohan is so beautiful, very viking looking.Honestly Fangorn Forest is the best part of the movie. It's just so funny and emotional. Treebeard is so amazing, he just so slow moving, and he takes his time to do everything. It's quite awesome. The parts are also very well played(the hobbits are the best). It's amazing, anybody who has not seen it should watch it. PETER JACKSON IS THE BEST DIRECTOR EVER!!!!!
2006-02-23
Life enhancing
If you are reading this review (or indeed any other) trying to assess whether or not you should watch this film then please read no further and just go and slip in the DVD and let the sights and sounds of Middle Earth wash over you. Nothing I, or indeed anyone else, can say should help you to form an opinion prior to watching. I guess the audience for the three films fall into two categories; those who have read the books and those who have not. Those who have not, in my experience, tend to be overwhelmed by the absolute majesty of the vision but a little non-plussed by the actual story - seeing it as just some rather dopey fantasy; a Star Wars trilogy set in past times for the modern audience if you like. Then there is the "yes, I have read the books" class who in general seem to have a kind of smug arrogance grounded in comments such as "they left out too much", "its not what I imagined" or "Of course its all an allegory for the rise of the third Reich". Tolkein bemoaned the lack of an heroic mythology for the English people and he sought to create one in his Rings trilogy of books. My opinion is too humble to count - but if you want it, I believe he succeeded. The epic backdrop, the heroes and villains, the rich history, the races and the languages are all utterly plausible as a long cherished story handed down over many generations. Peter Jackson and his team must be congratulated not only for their wonderful realisation of Middle Eath and its inhabitants; but for crafting a series a movies that captured the very essence of what Tolkein was trying to achieve. Well done also for leaving out Tom Bombadil.
2005-02-27
I rally wanted to love this movie.
I really really wanted to love this movie. I loved Fellowship, I found it nearly flawless. I give a 10/10 for the acting and the special effects. If I have never read the books, I would have been absolutely flawed by this movie. Some of the changes detracted from this movie, but not terribly.

But the fundemental changed made to Faramire (compare him in the book to the movie - not merely changed but the opposite) seriously undermined the whole plot of the trilogy.

Still, I have this an 8/10. On its own merits, it is excellent. But changes were made that weakened the story for no good reason...
2002-12-18
The Two Towers! What Is It? The Answer Is: My Precious!
The second part of The Lord of the Rings saga maintains the style, momentum and integrity that made the first film as brilliant as it is and thus what Peter Jackson gives us is one of the best sequels ever and certainly the best film of 2002. I prefer the first film for being closer to the book but I completely understand the changes made from book to film and I see why they are necessary to keep the film's narrative flowing instead of dropping dead. The film is not without a few weaknesses mainly because of it being a middle part linking The Fellowship of the Ring and The Return of the King and therefore not having an obvious beginning or an end. This doesn't stop the film from being an experience that people shouldn't be cheated out of.

The acting is, like in the first film, very good and at times even brilliant. Viggo Mortensen improves greatly and provides a more well rounded and believable Aragorn and proves his qualities as an actor especially in the quit moments (of which there are too few in the theatrical release, this was remedied in the extended cut). Also Elijah Wood deepens his character considerably and shows many of the darker sides of his character in the film. This provides for some interesting exchanges between Wood and his faithful companion played by Sean Astin. Bernard Hill is introduced in this film along with the method actor, Brad Dourif. Both of the aforementioned are excellent in their respective parts even though there are some inconsistencies in Hill's character compared to the character from the book. These changes were obviously made for dramatic purposes and are very plausible. Ian McKellen's character, Gandalf, has been somewhat reduced in the second film but instead he steals every scene he is in. Likewise, Hugo Weaving's character has been reduced but he is still very good and keeps his character in the same style as in the first film. Orlando Bloom and John Rhys-Davies returns as well and I have to comment on the choice to make Gimli into comic relief, because while I understand the necessity given that Dominic Monaghan's and Billy Boyd's characters have taken a turn towards more serious characters there had to be someone to relieve the dramatic tension, I found it a shame that Gimli had been reduced to some bumbling clown. Fortunately most of his comic remarks worked. Among other characters introduced are Faramir, played by David Wenham, and Gollum, played beautifully by Andy Serkis. I'll get back to Faramir but for now I have to comment on Gollum. Gollum is quite simply the most interesting film character in the last decade and this relates both to the ground breaking special effects but also Serkis' performance, which was most unfairly not deemed fit for an Oscar nomination. Overall the acting is excellent like in the first film and all actors manages to develop their characters in ways that are at the very least acceptable.

The effects and fight scenes in this second film are among the best ever and is perhaps only bested by some of the effects in the third film in the series. The Gollum character and the battle for Helm's Deep seem to be excellent examples. Gollum is quite simply the most stunning and beautifully created CGI character of all time and he displays extraordinary emotional range. As previously stated The Battle for Helm's Deep is among the finest battle scenes ever created. Well paced and choreographed and above all the editing in between the hectic battle sequences and scared citizens provides for some emotional depth as well (something that was sorely needed in the battle sequences in Star Wars: Episode II). This gigantic battle isn't the only battle in the film. There are many other interesting battles but I'm not going to spoil them so you'll just have to see the film yourself. The battles are consistent with the style that was laid down in the first film they are simply on a much more epic scale.

Some people have raved that the changes made from book to film were too radical but I completely understand and condone the reasons which were obviously dramatic purposes. Especially David Wenham's character has been criticized and after watching it the first time I was a bit unhappy with his character as well but when you think about it the changes in the character were at the very least essential to maintain the narrative structure. There are other examples but it would really be pointless to mention them because the reason is exactly the same as in the case of David Wenham's character. Dramatic purposes.

Overall The Two Towers serves as an excellent link between the Fellowship of the Ring and The Return of the King and it deserves every bit of praise coming to it. One of the very best films of all time.

10/10 - On my top 10 of best films
2006-06-13
My Visit To The Cinema
Don`t you just hate cinemas ? No matter where you sit you always end up surrounded by people who spend their time chatting amongst themselves as to the events on screen 30 seconds before they happen . If we`re after a running commentary we`ll buy the DVD thank you very much . Add to this unattended mad mental kids running around wild . In fact many years ago our local newspaper saw a no holds barred letter of complaint about a screening of 3 MEN AND A LITTLE LADY which referred to foul mouthed juvenile delinquents in the audience . And on top of all this I`m a chainsmoker and cinema chains don`t allow patrons to poison themselves or others with nicotine so as a rule I don`t visit cinemas . But it`s a rule I broke in order to see THE TWO TOWERS because I was literally dying to see it . So I booked my ticket well in advance for the premier screening in Rothesay on the 26th of January , popped into the cinema that night and demanded to be entertained

****** SPOILERS ******

I was entertained and more , but I later had some reservations . On a technical level TTT not only does not disappoint but it outdoes FELLOWSHIP in terms of both scope and scale but this doesn`t automatically make it as some people have claimed a better film . The battles of Helms Deep and Isengard are truly breath taking and out do anything Hollywood has done , but ironically by concentrating on spectacle TTT feels more like a Hollywood film than FELLOWSHIP . And all this spectacle causes a problem for Peter Jackson - How does he finish all these impossibly epic set pieces ? The simple answer is he can`t ! As several reviewers have mentioned the fractured storyline comes to the rescue of the director in much the same way as Gandalf rides to the rescue of Helms Deep : Cut to the most breath taking calvary charge in the history of cinema , cut to the Ents attacking Isengard and then cut back to Helms Deep where our heroes have snatched victory from the jaws of defeat , except they did so mainly off screen . It`s as if the director has used the fractured storyline in order to get himself out of a corner . Likewise reviewers on this site have noticed the story telling technique hides several plot holes involving characters appearing and disappearing to and from the story .

Of course you don`t notice these flaws at the time due to the awesome onscreen visuals but there is one major criticism you can level at TTT as soon as the credits roll and that`s a lack of an emotional impact . Yes you`ll gasp and cheer and feel your heart race but you won`t burst into tears . Remember the scenes in the first film where the fellowship escape into the mountains after Gandalf has confronted the Balrog or the departure of Boromir ? Remember how your throat tightened and you nearly had a tear run down your face ? Of course you do because these two scenes are amongst the most moving and heart wrenching in cinema history . Unfortunately there is no similar equivalent in TTT . And the film also cries out for a flawed but noble ambigous anti hero like Boromir in a story where everyone is either good or evil and no in between , though this is almost certainly the fault of Tolkien rather than Jackson who does manage to get the best out of his cast in film lacking in character development . Special mention goes to Andy Serkis who alas seems to have missed out on nominations for best supporting actor , Brad Dourif who plays a very slimy villain , and Bernard Hill who made me forget that this is the same actor who played Yosser Hughes in BOYS FROM THE BLACKSTUFF 20 years ago . But I couldn`t help but miss Sean Bean and I suppose casting him as Faramir twin brother of Boromir would have been just too obvious

But despite my criticisms I enjoyed TTT immensely and for three magical hours I forgot all about my nicotine addiction and the world outside . No doubt the audience at the Rothesay cinema felt the same way as me as we watched this film in a hushed silence . We laughed at the right bits , gasped at the technical achievements , but no one cried which means I can only award THE TWO TOWERS 9 out of 10
2003-01-27
Jackson vs. Tolkien 0-2
Peter Jackson has taken one of the greatest stories ever written and turned it into mindless action. First off, the script is horrid. Where did the genius of Tolkien disappear? The dialogue is cut down and resembles one-liners. The directing is unbelievably bad with constant camera movement making character development impossible. Fast cut scenes are at all times jumping at you from the screen so you never get the time to fully absorb the story, forget about the time to think. And you're not supposed to, there are no layers (they are magically gone, thanks to the decisions of Peter Jackson), what you see is what you get. Continuity and development are sacrificed to create a pill more easily swallowed. It's like a restaurant where they feed you, and if they do it fast enough then maybe you won't notice that the food isn't cooked. This might work with traditional action (because let's face it, we like them because they give us a 90 minute vacation from our brain), but in the case of LOTR it only goes to diminish and destroy a work of art. Probably the worst thing about this movie is the music score (still it's much better than FOTR, as it's less titanic). Anyone with any understanding of music will see how shallow the composition is. It reminds me of composed music used in computer games, poorly directed and lacking depth. Also it keeps blowing what little suspense it has by frequently changing to custom fit each and every scene. Really nice touch this considering that the scenes change without logic. From the midst of the battle of Helmsdeep to Merry and Pippin in a quiet forest. Somebody please explain to Peter how suspense is built. Besides this, the music has nothing to do with "the lord of the rings", it doesn't capture the right atmosphere and it keeps repeating itself. It's just there and it's there all the time, every scene (another poor directing decision. It didn't give FOTR an epic feel and it failed again in TT). Wouldn't it have been nice if the music featured in the television trailer was actually in the movie?

In the storyline Jackson has made some unforgivable alterations. Tolkien would weep if he knew. The lord of the rings is mainly about the journey of Frodo, because if he fails then all is lost. This is also the most interesting part of the story because it is symbolic, dark and a psychological struggle. This is why two thirds of the books are about Frodo. In this second movie Jackson has devoted minimum screen time to this most important, atmospheric and perilous journey. In stead he has used countless minutes, not polishing the rest of the actual story (it often feels like it's on fast-forward and in many scenes the emphasis is on all the wrong things), but adding loads of new scenes which have nothing to do with anything. Apart from changing the story he has also changed some of the the characters (why?). Peter Jackson tries so hard to entertain us, deadly afraid that we'll get bored for even a second thus insulting our intelligence. He sets his own trap and blindly walks into it.

**SPOILERS** The book is supposed to be dark, hope is supposed to fade and "the two towers" is supposed to end in the mountains of mordor with Frodo poisoned and taken captive by the orcs and Sam stuck in some dark underground maze with the ring and nowhere to go. Instead the movie ends with Sam giving an inspiring speech about those "favorite stories where all seems lost but where you know that the good guys will win in the end", in some idyllic forest far from mordor with a lot of light and sappy music. This sums up what injustice Jackson has done to the LOTR pretty good. **SPOILERS END**

But why? Because Peter Jackson isn't the greatest director in the world. And because they wanted to make money and "the lord of the rings" as it is today is making buckets of it. They wanted a brainless action adventure that followed mainstream traditions that even children could pay to see. They wanted to sell Aragorn rangers and Arwen barbies. This I can understand, and if it weren't so the movie would never have been made. Work and a lot of money went into creating the visuals. What I can't understand is independent critics praising it, when clearly the movie is lacking. There's more to an epic than visuals. A darker, more true and intelligent tale would make a great movie, but it wouldn't make a sure box office income. In the end, FOTR and TT aren't that bad if you just look at them as action-adventure movies (specially FOTR). And one very good thing is that more people will now read the books. But they're just not Tolkien. And don't tell me that it doesn't matter, because it does. I was disappointed with both The fellowship of the ring and [specially] The two towers, not because they're so bad, but because they could have been so much better.
2003-01-18
Better Paced than the first, the battle for Isengard was excellent
We have been waiting an entire year for this one!!! The Two Towers picks up right where last years Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring leaves off. The director, Peter Jackson, did not include a recap of the last movie, so if you don't remember what happened in the first movie you better rent it and refresh your memory before you head off to the theater.

When we last left our fellowship, it had splintered apart. Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) and Sam Gamgee (Sean Astin) continue there quest to return the all powerful and evil ring to Mordor where it can be destroyed. They take on the creature Gollum (Andy Serkis) as their guide to Mordor despite Gollum's obsession with getting `his precious' back. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) begin by trying to find the kidnapped Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd), but end up getting caught up in a battle to save a race of humans. The evil wizard Saruman (Christopher Lee), controlled by Dark Lord Sauron created a grand Uruk-hai army that is sent to destroy the race of Humans at the fortress Isengard. The presumed dead Gandolf (Ian McKellen) also returns to lend his assistance in battling Lord Sauron's troops.

This film was better paced than the first in the trilogy. There were still some breaks in the action that were a little dull, but the dialog was necessary to further the story. With three separate stories going on simultaneously between the three groups of the splintered fellowship, the film kept the action moving quickly. Clocking in at 179 minutes, it is just one minute longer than the first film. This time, I didn't mind the length. The battle for Isengard comprised about a third of the film, and it was very intense.

The rest of the film had a lot of the same excellent cinematic shots as the first movie. The shots tracking the actors from above (done by helicopter) with the beautiful New Zealand mountains and countryside in the background were just amazing. The landscapes helped to keep me involved with the story when the action slowed for dialog intensive scenes.

The creature Gollum played a very key roll in this movie, and the computer-generated character was very lifelike and amusing. He reminded me of Dobby the `house elf' in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Gollum and the Dwarf were the two main comic relief characters in this very serious film.

To conclude, we had to wait a year for this film, and it lived up to expectations! A final reminder…this is the middle film in the trilogy so you can expect another ending that leaves you wanting more! Not to worry though, the third and final film is due out next Christmas.
2002-12-18
Absolutely, totally fantastic!
Watching this movie is like watching a 179 or 223 minutes long action sequence. The pace is incredibly high. Alright I have to admit that the Extended Edition of the "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" takes an awful lot of this pace away and make some of the scene's unnecessary long and the scene's with Treebeard are also a bit dull and long but still...Especially compared to the first that was just too slow at times this is an huge improvement!

Luckily there also are some welcome additions in the Extended Edition. Best addition are the scene's with Boromir, Faramir and Denethor in Osgiliath.

There also are some newly great characters and actors. David Wenham is a surprisingly talented young actor and I think it's great that they actually have cast someone that really looks like Sean Bean. Bernard Hill also impressed me, he probably is best know for his role as the captain in "Titanic" in which he also already impressed me. Viggo Mortensen probably still is the best actor of "The Lord of the Rings" movies. Yes sure Ian McKellen and Christopher Lee are also more than great but Mortensen really puts some passion and effort in his character. I know Sean Astin is always being praised a lot but I seriously don't think that he is such a good actor in any of "The Lord of the Rings" movies. Andy Serkis also was really good as Gollum/Sméagol and I wouldn't had mind seeing him get an Oscar nod.

Strange thing is that the Gimli and Legolas suddenly changed into some comical sidekick characters. It was odd to see but it works! They provide some good comical relief at times.

Most fantastic thing about the movie is that it's really action filled. The Battle of Helm's Deep truly is fantastic to see. Still favorite and most powerful moment of the movie is when the Ent's march to war. Also the scene's with the riders of Rohan are a true spectacle.

I've never been really a big fan of the editing of "The Lord of the Rings" movies and this one is no exception. Problem is that Peter Jackson shot way too many hours of footage with as a result that the editors have difficulties picking the right scene's and the length of them.

But "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" is one of those movies were the pluses make more than up for the minuses.

A spectacular adventure action experience.

10/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
2005-03-19
Roland J. Tran (Saint Paul) i was looking for a movie free The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers download, as 720p to download it in 2002, one of the first Peter Jackson Tallahassee. Clara J. Lovett (Buffalo) i love how they play Bruce Allpress, Sean Astin, John Bach, Sala Baker, Cate Blanchett, Orlando Bloom, Billy Boyd, Jed Brophy, Sam Comery, Brad Dourif, Calum Gittins, Bernard Hill, Bruce Hopkins, Paris Howe Strewe, Christopher Lee from the movie director Peter Jackson 2002 Miami.
×