Ebert's Review of The Two Towers

Sun Times ^ | Ebert

[cardinal4]

I cant wait to see it. I bought the first one the day it came out. If the visual effects are half as good as the ones in LOTR, this one ought to be pretty good.

[eureka!]

Search under "LOTR" and you'll probably find some more reviews here. A Freeper saw it last night and did a bang up review. If you can't find it, flag me. It sounds like "must see" cinema and I loved the first. I won't miss this one either...

[Cincinatus]

If Tolkien had wanted to write about a race of supermen, he would have written a Middle-Earth version of "Conan the Barbarian." But no. He told a tale in which modest little hobbits were the heroes.

Ebert's ignorance of "The Ring" is exceeded only by a) his lack of perception; and b) his waistline.

[cardinal4]

I was mostly impressed by how well the LOTR followed the book. I only read it once years ago, but the movie made me remember it. Yep, I cant wait to see it either,and thanks, Ill check out the review.

[Lil'freeper]

FYI

[aruanan]

The last third of the movie is dominated by an epic battle scene that would no doubt startle the gentle medievalist J.R.R. Tolkien.

Ha ha ha. Yeah, right. The battle scenes in the book were far from "gentle" and they pale compared to what's coming in the Return of the King.

[Cicero]

As Ebert half admits, he hasn't read the book, or he would know that in The Two Towers the action shifts from Frodo to Aragorn in the book as well as the movie.

Ebert is a lazy, ignorant reviewer with very little to say, as is obvious enough from this review. Basically his job is to say what is expected of him by the movie industry, but he doesn't do it very well.

[KantianBurke]

Ebert's take on how Jackson produced J.R.R. T's work is irrelevent and should not have been mentioned. The "tubby reviwer" should stick to commenting on MOVIES, NOT how well or poorly a book was transfered to the big screen.

[Dead Dog]

He's mad there aren't any queers.

[Lil'freeper]

Well, there was at least one, but his character wasn't.

[aruanan]

The details of the story--who is who, and why, and what their histories and attributes are--still remains somewhat murky to me.

Hey, Roger! Read the books! It's like someone complaining about not being sure about who is who in the movie "The Bible". A book is selective in the parts of the story it tells, hinting, by its omissions, at the much larger world that exists outside the narrative. A film made of the book has to be even more selective. It simply cannot mirror the book in detail. The way to get around the problem of an 80 hour long film is to expect those who want a deeper understanding of the story and action necessarily trimmed in the film to do a little work and read the book first.

[the_One_Neo]

More reviews here. Right now there's 78 reviews, one bad, 77 good.

[sinclair]

"The last third of the movie is dominated by an epic battle scene that would no doubt startle the gentle medievalist J.R.R. Tolkien."

Ebert is an idiot. There is simply no other rational explanation for that statement.

[junta]

He is a Lefty with a fixation on his looking like a moral superior to the reactionary rabble. His review of "Fight Club" should be excerpted and posted as a guideline for deciphering his words. In reviewing FC he injected the word "Facist", but withdrew it coyly by mentioning that it could not be Fascist simply because the FC was integrated into a "multiracial" organization. Ebert is a hypocratical kook with an atrocious double standard towards those he views as moral inferiors, he is easily dislikable. I can see he was straining to paint TT as "Nazi" and my guess is that somewhere in his future writings we shall see he uses that term. BTW he is an Illinois casino king due to his wife (who is black, perhaps explaining his moral fanaticism) being a high powered Chicago attorney with connections.

[2Jedismom]

The last third of the movie is dominated by an epic battle scene that would no doubt startle the gentle medievalist J.R.R. Tolkien.

What a bald-faced moron. He obviously hasn't read Tolkien's account of the Siege of Gondor.

Then among the greater casts there fell another hail, less ruinous but more horrible. All about the streets and lanes behind the Gate it tumbled down, small round shot that did not burn. But when men ran to learn what it might be, they cried aloud or wept. For the enemy was flinging into the City all the heads of those who had fallen fighting at Osgiliath, or on the Rammas, or in the fields. They were grim to look on; for though some were crushed and shapeless, and some had been cruelly hewn, yet many had features that could be told, and it seemed that they had died in pain; and all were branded with the foul token of the Lidless Eye. But marred and dishonoured as they were, it often chanced that thus a man would see again the face of someone that he had known, who had walked proudly once in arms, or tilled the fields, or ridden in upon a holiday from the green vales in the hills.

Oh yes, the gentle Mr. Tolkien...;-)

(I actually can't wait to see this part!)

[JohnnyZ]

I think Ebert's descriptions of Balrog and the Gollum are right on. HA!

Perhaps Jackson could have stayed true to the book by having Frodo use the Ring to win the battle of Helm's Deep! Yeah!

[My2Cents]

it's clear that director Peter Jackson has tilted the balance decisively against the hobbits and in favor of the traditional action heroes of the Tolkien trilogy. The star is now clearly Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), and the hobbits spend much of the movie away from the action.

I haven't seen the movie yet, but most of the action in "T3" is with Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, and the Rohirrim. The focus of the action is the battle against Sauroman. Frodo and Sam's quest, at this stage of the story, is more subdued, action-wise. In fact, in terms of sheer pages, the Aragorn/Rohan aspect of The Two Towers takes up more space than Frodo and Sam's journey.

From Ebert's comments, I wonder if he has even read the "Lord of the Rings." If he hasn't, he has no right to judge whether Peter Jackson has strayed from Tolkein's intent or not.

[Leatherneck_MT]

Robert Ebert

Saw Lord of the Rings

He wrote his review and spelled his words right. However, it does appear he has forgotten how to read.

[HumanaeVitae]

I'm going to see this film at 2:30 CST...I'll post my impressions.