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 1080p
Resolution 1920x800 px
File Size 16794 Mb
Codec h264 (High)
Bitrate 1536 Kbps
Format mkv
Download
Type HQ DVD-rip
Resolution 720x304 px
File Size 3011 Mb
Codec h264
Bitrate 1787 Kbps
Format mp4
Download
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


Reviews
Tough to put on film but came out very well
Long before it came out, I knew The Two Towers would be the toughest of the three Lord of the Rings books to put on film. Not only is it the middle child, but the very structure of the book makes it hard to craft a linear story with all the plot lines in tact and interesting.

But I think Peter Jackson and company did a very good job. It's not as strong as Fellowship, but is still outstanding.

All the elements of the LOTR films are here: the beautiful photography, set designs, costumes, scenery, special effects. All amazing, all brilliant, all Oscar-worthy.

The performances are terrific, too. Bernard Hill, Viggo Mortensen, Elijah Wood, Miranda Otto, all did great jobs. The supporting actors, too.

It is sad that Ian McKellan's role is relegated to almost cameo status, but that's the nature of the book. The biggest shame is Christopher Lee. He has so little screen time in this film, I think he only says two or three lines on camera, the rest is "brooding". Such a waste, he is one of the great actors of our time, a real joy to watch (and a scene stealer to boot).

But the stars of the piece have to be Gollum and Treebeard and the Uruk army. The sequence with the Ents seeing the destruction Saruman wrought upon the trees brought tears to my eyes, and their revenge brought cheers to my voice. The battle of Helm's Deep was probably too long, but impressive nonetheless (and will probably be the model for "epic battle sequences" for years to come). And Gollum. What can be said about Gollum that hasn't already been said. We have entered into a new age of CGI, and, like all great works of art, it has a human soul.

A great film. 9 out of 10, the only items keeping it from getting a 10 are the short-shrifting of Christopher Lee and that some parts don't quite flow too well (a problem rooted in JRR Tolkien's novel, not the fault of the filmmakers).
2004-08-05
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
boring
I was very disappointed. The movie was so boring I started to check my watch while watching. Even the new StarWars movies offer more suspense then this bad second part of the Ring-trilogy. Just boring! What's boring about part 2? Simply everything! The first Ring-Movie was exciting and it made me curious about part two. But after watching part two I decided not to watch part 3!
2003-01-01
A Continuation of the epic story
As mentioned, Frodo and his buddies continue on their journey to destroy that pesky ring. The first film left us with the Fellowship broken and looking destined for failure, with Frodo and Sam continuing on as a scared yet determined duo, and Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas moving on to fight other battles elsewhere as the evil surrounding Middle Earth continues to rise.

While the first film was all about setting up the story of the ring and the Fellowship's epic journey across Tolkien's globe, The Two Towers throws up a whole series of curve-balls which really gets the action going; Frodo and Sam must recruit Gollum to show them the way to Mount Doom, Saruman builds the strongest army of loyal (and ugly) soldiers in history and we get a visit from an old friend who returns bigger and stronger than ever.

What The Lord of the Rings series comes down to is a masterfully epic story about a hobbit. While these movies could have been overwhelmed by special effects and CGI, Jackson understands the soul of the books were not in the creatures and the battles, but in the characters that have to do things that go against their very nature in order to bring harmony back into their world. The Two Towers is a perfect middle section to this trilogy and, like The Fellowship of the Ring, leaves us with a cliff-hanger and a good reason to go see the next film. When all is said and done, these three films will forever be discussed as part of film history.
2005-06-05
One of the greatest movies of all time
This movie was simply amazing. Great casting, great acting. The way this movie stuck to the book is hard to match by any movie. Although there were some differences this movie still stuck to the plot immensely and there can be no complaints. A must watch for all ages
2003-11-08
A very good, great, fantastic, awesome film!
What a great movie. Through the first movie, we already had the whole story set-up, so in The Two Towers in really pick's up.

There is not one thing about this movie that I would change. Maybe one or two of the extra scenes could have been cut out, but they only are there to lead into the sequel.

This movie really shows the wonders of CGI in full effect. And isn't afraid to use them. The battle of Helm's Deep is a blend of live action and CGI(computer generated imagery), which works so perfectly and just comes across as astounding.

The scene's with Aragorn being lost, were not too bad. The lead up into the scene's were great. The scene's show the connection between Aragorn and his horse who finds him near the river.

The further downfall of Frodo as the ring slowly takes hold of him is very well done. Along with this, we also get to see the first more of the attempts of Sam to help, and protect Frodo.

The breaking into different stories was a cool idea. Showing the progression of the characters from the first film to the second. Orlando Bloom's character is givin a larger part. And he proves to have much to do with the plot this time.

All in all, this is a fantastic movie. Rivaled only by The Return of the King.
2004-09-17
The Greatest of the Three Rings
Yes, it's true. Return of the King may have won more of the Oscars as the culmination of Peter Jackson's magnificent cinematic achievement, but history will in fact adjudge "The Two Towers" as the greatest of the three Rings. If Fellowship was a road movie and ROTK was a friendship film, then Two Towers is an unadulterated war movie of heroic proportions. Peter Jackson said he based it on "Zulu"- and we can see why. It has a dramatic intensity and flow which none of the other films quite share. Good against evil are so sharply contrasted that you could cut your fingers on them. TTT also has the best score Howard Shore has produced. And it has the best dialogue.

The screenplay explains (with barely disguised contemporary resonance) what we are protecting in Western civilisation when we defend ourselves against those who would wish to destroy it. When Sam tells Frodo that there are "some things worth fighting for", when Merry tells Pippin that there "won't be a Shire" unless they do something about it, when King Theoden laments that "the sun has gone down in the West" this film could be entitled not the "Two Towers" but "the Twin Towers". It is Miltonic in its scope. It is cinema as art.

Yes, one may quibble about certain Entish details, and I know that the Elves weren't supposed to be at Helm's Deem, and that Faramir is a little undeveloped, but does this matter? Not at all. The Extended version is better than the original, but does not need to make such a quantum leap as Fellowship managed with its EE. However it will be a film that is seen as a landmark in cinema. A trilogy which may never be bettered. And a reminder of what we are all here for
2004-03-06
A swift Shout out to The Lord of the Rings
In every way, even after reading all 6 books, i love this adaptation and the way it was brought to life. Peter Jackson deserves all adoration and praise for the way he made all, but especially this movie. There is a lot that is missing, but I can Understand how it would be hard to adapt to film. Even though i would not complain on bit if they made a 32 hour movie of all of the events that happened in all of the movies. This movie deserves all 10 stars and much respect. LOTR forever!!! Thank you, Peter Jackson, for all you have done and all you will do. Except for the last 20 min of the latest Hobbit Movie... Garbage.
2014-05-01
When did Frodo and Sam go to Gondor? (Spoiler Warning!!!)
Although I enjoyed this movie I have a few gripes. Why did they decide to stray from a good thing. I have noticed alot of the "excellent" & "best movie ever" comments are from people who have not read the books.

As far as I recall Frodo and Sam did not go to Gondor. EVER. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Also what is going on with Aragorn's storyline? It also seems to have been creatively altered from the original storyline.

And when did Faramir turn evil. He was not like his brother. He didn't want to use the Ring as they portray in the movie.

I realize that the fight scenes were important to the creators of the movie. However did they need to be quite so long? With just a few minutes of cutting and leaving out the "never actually happened" Gondor trip. I believe they could have actually fit in the entire book. I now wonder how long the third movie will be. Not only do they have to fit in the entire third book, but also the end of the second book.

For those of you who thought this was the best movie ever I just suggest you read the book. I too liked the movie, but it is not the best ever. It would have been in contention if they had stuck to the original plot as it was written. Like they did in the first movie. However they didn't and that is that. I just hope they stay truer to the storyline in The Return of the King. We shall soon see.
2003-10-18
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
As the penultimate film representation of J.R.R. Tolkien's book series "The Lord of the Rings," "The Two Towers" was a blockbuster hit in theaters worldwide. Besides the fact that it was the film that would tie "The Fellowship of the Ring" to "The Return of the King, "The Two Towers" closely and effectively portrayed the text of Tolkien's book "The Two Towers" which helped to rake in a large audience - particularly those who knew Tolkien and his story of the Ring from his books. In terms of the film, Peter Jackson's excellent directing as well as the award-winning performances delivered by the star-studded cast allowed for the attraction of millions of viewers. Also, "The Two Towers'" epic battle scenes and constant sequences of action contributed to the film's overall attractiveness. Perhaps one very important characteristic of the film to note, however, is its special effects. Through the use of special effects, Jackson generated a film that stimulated the imagination of the audience, especially those who had read the book series, and brought them into a place where they could easily imagine themselves in Middle Earth, watching Frodo's quest omnisciently. The quality of the film combined with its accurate representation of Tolkien's book series both contribute to the epic nature of "The Two Towers" and also leave fans with an incredible story to remember.
2005-05-24
See Also
Download The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers movie 2002 by Peter Jackson Actors: 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 - loadedmovies.org, the lowest price, high speed.The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers full movie online.The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers HD movie are available too (720p and 1080p). The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers Drama, Action, Adventure, Fantasy download. download movies USA, New Zealand, Germany
×