aaronjustice

Although this movie was entertaining at the very least, it's sad that this was the best of the three movies. Although not entirely serious, it was never what I'd call campy or tongue in cheek. The next two definitely were. This one was a masterpiece compared to the sequels.

It deserves a bit of a higher rating than this, I'd give it about 6.5 out of 10.

There are three types of people who see this movie.

1.Those who see it and understand it and think it's a great movie. 2. Those who don't, but pretend they do. 3. They don't get it and they hate it.

I have it figured out. I won't bother posting a spoiler based post, but I will challenge you to try to figure out the ending before it ends. I thought I had it right, and so will you, but even when you think you have it figured out, you find out you are only partially right.

I found the movie to be very terrifying, and the gruesome death scenes requiring some special effects are very convincing. This movie is one that would have

been rated PG-13 as The Ring was, but it does have a lot of swearing in it.

Minor Spoiler All in all, I thought it was better than The Ring. It did not have a depressing ending like The Ring had. Although most people will hate the ending, they got to realize it is a psychological ending, not an actual one. As I said before, only those who don't get it will hate it.

If you are a fan of swashbuckling, this is not a film to miss, as long as you are able to overlook the bad acting and the obvious Asian influences in the fighting.

I have seen worse films. Most definitely. The rating of 4.2 is much too low for this movie, I think a 5.5 to 6 is more appropriate. It's not a great movie by any means, but it does have it's moments.

The opening swordfight in the resturaunt is the best in the movie. At least it was the most believable with the exception of the barrels. I found the ladders and some of the ropeplay in the Versailles to be much more unrealistic. However I tend to like movie due to the sophistication of the choreography, because I am involved in fighting choreography too.

*spoilers, beware*

For my birthday I saw The Two Towers with about ten of my friends.

Never before have I seen such an unbelievable spectacle of cinema

accomplishment. My biggest problem with the whole movie was some of the

shots of the hobbits on the shoulders of Treebeard. That's about it.

Gimli, the stout little dwarf who was pretty much in the shadows last time, is now out in front with his quirky and very funny scenes. There was hardly a scene in which the surly "man" didn't give a laugh. Dead wargs piling on top of him, his complaint of a lack of a view at Helm's Deep, and his unbelievably humorous

shot of him gouging a berserker Uruk-Hai in the crotch with his axe. THAT'S

funny.

I was so pleased with Gollum. He interacted so perfectly with the live actors it was hard to looks at him and remind yourself he wasn't real. The close-ups on his face are what give him such a dimension of a real, physical character. Yes, Dobby and Yoda did look quite good in their respective movies (Harry 2 and

Star Wars 2) but Gollum not only looked better, he performed much better. See the movie to understand what I mean.

Well, I have found two other complaints. Merry and Pippin were virtually

forgotten in this movie. Their scenes were almost as if they were put in only because they had to. Also the overall feel to the movie made it drift away from the first, and sometimes, even though I have read the books and seen the first movie quite a few times, I found myself somewhat lost or puzzled by the movie.

However, this movie was filled with scenes that more than made up for the weak points of the movie. Depending on what kind of movie you prefer, this movie is better than the first. If you like the first one better, that's because these two movies share almost nothing in common, and I understand why some people

liked the first one better.

However, other than the first movie, there is one thing that I have never heard in a movie theater, and I've seen nearly every worthwhile movie since Gladiator. Applause. The theater erupted in applause by the film's end. That is the

testament of the strength of this series, and may The Return of the King prove us all wrong that movie making can't get any better than this. 10/10.

Why is this the most successful movie in history all of a sudden?

There has never been much of a buzz about Spider-man before, why now of all times? Personally, I thought the movie was entertaining, but it wasn't that good. The comic bookish lines such as, "I'll get you next time Spider-man!" and such may have been in the original comic book, but should have been left out in the movie. Nowadays, insults like "F__ you Spider-man!" would have been used, but this is a PG-13 movie. I found myself chuckling at a lot of parts in this movie. Whenever something pops up in a movie I don't like, I always make fun of it.

Let's just say I have never made so many comments about a movie in my life. Sure, Tobey macguire and Willem Dafoe were absolutely perfect for the parts, they were the only saving grace for this film as far as I'm concerned. However, having Spider-man computer generated almost the entire movie ticked me off. Couldn't they have hired a chinese acrobat or something? Whenever I see an action scene that is in CG, (ex. Final Fantasy), I never feel any suspense or even the least bit of turmoil because it is all controlled by a guy behind a computer. My biggest beef is that the green goblin guy works for a company that created an anti gravity one man vehicle, a strength serum, and little spheres that disentigrate people and shoot blades out and explode. Please, is Hollywood this dumb nowadays, can't they contribute to the plot a little and at least have him acquire these objects in another way?

My rating, I give it an 8 for entertainment, but a 5 for the movie overall. Spiderman fans who blindly give this movie a 10 because they think they are obligated, get a life or a wife. One of them will change you.

Why is this the most successful movie in history all of a sudden?

There has never been much of a buzz about Spider-man before, why now of all times? Personally, I thought the movie was entertaining, but it wasn't that good. The comic bookish lines such as, "I'll get you next time Spider-man!" and such may have been in the original comic book, but should have been left out in the movie. Nowadays, insults like "F__ you Spider-man!" would have been used, but this is a PG-13 movie. I found myself chuckling at a lot of parts in this movie. Whenever something pops up in a movie I don't like, I always make fun of it.

Let's just say I have never made so many comments about a movie in my life. Sure, Tobey macguire and Willem Dafoe were absolutely perfect for the parts, they were the only saving grace for this film as far as I'm concerned. However, having Spider-man computer generated almost the entire movie ticked me off. Couldn't they have hired a chinese acrobat or something? Whenever I see an action scene that is in CG, (ex. Final Fantasy), I never feel any suspense or even the least bit of turmoil because it is all controlled by a guy behind a computer. My biggest beef is that the green goblin guy works for a company that created an anti gravity one man vehicle, a strength serum, and little spheres that disentigrate people and shoot blades out and explode. Please, is Hollywood this dumb nowadays, can't they contribute to the plot a little and at least have him acquire these objects in another way?

My rating, I give it an 8 for entertainment, but a 5 for the movie overall. Spiderman fans who blindly give this movie a 10 because they think they are obligated, get a life or a wife. One of them will change you.

This summarizes my complaints of the entire movie. 1. Many characters of the fellowship don't have a very big part, especially Gimli. 2. The battle in Moria is WAY too shaky, although I've noticed special effects and the focus of movies is a million times clearer on video compared to blurry, light projected movie film. 3. The climax with Balrog marks a climatic ending, but the movie continues for another 40 minutes. Other than that, I have no complaints. Who cares if they cut out the scene with Tom Bombadil? Not me. Any person who owns a horse named Fatty Lumpkin deserves to be left out of the movie. Yes, I have read the book, and I read it thoroughly. I am very well aware of the Christian allegory written in the story, and I feel pretty certain I understand it much better than most of you do, being a Christian and all. The opening of the movie is symbolic of Satan's war against heaven, the elves are angels and the orcs are demons. Gandalf is the representation of Jesus, and Saruman is Lucifer, the angel that became Satan through betrayal. I saw the movie with three of my friends, two of them never read the book. All four of us left agreeing that it is the best movie we have seen in a long time if not ever. Some people may complain about lackluster special effects in some areas. I did notice them too. However, I thought the Mummy Returns had the worst special effects I've seen in a while, but when I bought the DVD, the effects looked much better than I remember. (However, nothing could fix the hideous Scorpion King). Once it is out on video (New Line cinema promised it by August) I'm sure the effects will look much better. I can't wait until next year, the Two Towers is probably going to be even better.

This summarizes my complaints of the entire movie. 1. Many characters of the fellowship don't have a very big part, especially Gimli. 2. The battle in Moria is WAY too shaky, although I've noticed special effects and the focus of movies is a million times clearer on video compared to blurry, light projected movie film. 3. The climax with Balrog marks a climatic ending, but the movie continues for another 40 minutes. Other than that, I have no complaints. Who cares if they cut out the scene with Tom Bombadil? Not me. Any person who owns a horse named Fatty Lumpkin deserves to be left out of the movie. Yes, I have read the book, and I read it thoroughly. I am very well aware of the Christian allegory written in the story, and I feel pretty certain I understand it much better than most of you do, being a Christian and all. The opening of the movie is symbolic of Satan's war against heaven, the elves are angels and the orcs are demons. Gandalf is the representation of Jesus, and Saruman is Lucifer, the angel that became Satan through betrayal. I saw the movie with three of my friends, two of them never read the book. All four of us left agreeing that it is the best movie we have seen in a long time if not ever. Some people may complain about lackluster special effects in some areas. I did notice them too. However, I thought the Mummy Returns had the worst special effects I've seen in a while, but when I bought the DVD, the effects looked much better than I remember. (However, nothing could fix the hideous Scorpion King). Once it is out on video (New Line cinema promised it by August) I'm sure the effects will look much better. I can't wait until next year, the Two Towers is probably going to be even better.