Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) Peter Jackson   Having had mixed feelings about The Fellowship of the Ring, I expected this sequel to likewise have its share of ups and downs. The Two Towers, however, proves to be a more deeply flawed film than its predecessor. Mind you, we have a fabulous narrative and have, in Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), a great protagonist who flies in the face of convention. Hardly the great warrior of an epic saga, Frodo is a small, meek person saddled with a quest to destroy the One Ring, which could itself destroy the world. This is a perfect subject for a movie, though admittedly not one easy to adapt. But the cinematic possibilities are endless-provided, of course, that it is placed in the hands of a filmmaker whose wellspring of invention is commensurate with that of John Ronald Reull Tolkien. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Director Peter Jackson has made his reputation on schlocky horror films and toilet humor flicks-not the kind of fare one tends to associate with Tolkien. Not only that, but The Lord of the Rings is a colossally expensive endeavor, whose sheer scope would be daunting to even the most experienced director. That does not necessarily mean Jackson is not up to the task, but despite the high price tag, every frame of this film feels like a low-budget horror movie. Predictably, all the problems of the first film return to afflict this one-narrative flaws, miscasting, a preoccupation with the dark side of the story-only this time, in greater quantity. The result is a production which is cumbersome, overlong, and incessantly dreary. Still, there are bright spots, particularly among the cast. Ian McKellen as Gandalf is even better in this film than he was in the last one. A resurrected healer and spiritual guide, Gandalf has more in common with Jesus than with Merlin. Christopher Lee also returns to exude black-hearted villainy beneath the lily-white robe of Saruman. The Two Towers then introduces to us King Theoden, wonderfully played by Bernard Hill. The most impressive new character however, is Gollum. Previously glimpsed as only a creeping shadow that trails the fellowship, Gollum plays a larger part in this film, and proves to be one of its most interesting elements. At once treacherous and pathetic, Gollum's moral dilemma is believably compelling, moving the viewer to root for this sad wretch. This is all the more impressive, as Gollum is an almost completely computer-animated character, which deserves an Oscar for best visual effects. (Actor Andy Serkis provided the voice and played Gollum on the set, wearing a special suit, over which Gollum's body was later computer-rendered.) Unfortunately, the rest of the cast prove to be a mixed bag. My least favorite is Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn. The wandering "ranger" who is revealed as heir to the throne of Gondor, Aragorn must be a brooding but courageous man of swashbuckling heroism, rugged good looks, and obviously genteel manners. But in the film, Aragorn is unkempt and devoid of charisma. Mortensen is a terrific actor, but one better-suited to playing thugs and oily hippies (though in fairness, it should be pointed out that he was a last-minute replacement and obviously had little or no time to prepare for the role). Elijah Wood makes an adequate lead, but is disappointing as Frodo. Although one of the best child actors of the 1990s, Wood seems poorly directed here, with Frodo ever seeming anemic and passionless. Also, hobbits "are inclined to be fat" in Tolkien's words, yet except for Sean Astin, all the Hobbits are rather on the thin side. In fact, the only actor who really seems like a hobbit is Ian Holm, who was wonderful as Bilbo in the last film. It is also hard not to feel that Jackson copped out by shooting the film in his native New Zealand. To be sure, some of the locations are grand and impressive, but they all look like the same place, merely shot from different angles and doctored with computer compositing. More to the point, New Zealand does not look like the UK and northern Europe, which is where these films should have been made (because they are essentially what Tolkien was describing in his work). But it is the infidelity to the text which is the biggest sore point with me. Aragorn's fall (and apparent death) during an ambush on the caravan was not in the book. Nor did Legolas urge Aragorn to abandon the refugees at Helm's Deep (which is completely out of character for Legolas). Neither were Frodo and Sam forcibly removed to Gondor by Faramir. And never did a host of elven warriors arrive at Helm's Deep to aid the besieged men. Jackson justifies these embellishments by claiming that The Two Towers is a dense and sometimes confusing book. Fair enough; but why did he not streamline the narrative rather than add these pointless tangents, which only exacerbate the narrative flaws and make the film even more cumbersome? The script is poorly conceived, and, at times, even contradicts the first film. For instance, in Fellowship of the Ring, Arwen told Aragorn she would renounce her immortality so that she could grow old with him. Yet in The Two Towers, Arwen changes her mind and decides to live on with Aragorn, eternally young. Well, which is it? Jackson also seems utterly at sea when it come to the elves. In the books they are kind, jovial, and genteel in their manners, yet in the film, they are stern, austere, and humorless. Elrond is an old fusspot who does little more than sneer and complain all the time. And while Liv Tyler's poise and ethereal beauty wonderfully befits Arwen, the character on-screen comes off as little more than a moonstruck teenager, lying barefoot on her bed, longing for her dreamy Aragorn. However, much of the climax of the film revolves around the battle of Helm's Deep, where a modest army wages an almost hopeless battle against an invasion of Orcs. The scale of the battle is epic, but the action on screen is a mess. As in The Fellowship of the Ring, the fight scenes are confusing, with too many close-ups and choppy cutting. The entire sequence is overlong and, coupled with bad lighting and an overpowering sound-mix, by the battle's end, I felt too miserable to care who won. Conversely, the scenes featuring Treebeard are considerably better. Although a CGI character, Treebeard is relatively convincing in appearance and the scene where he and his fellow "ents" make their assault on Saruman's stronghold is powerful and tremendously effective. Despite some some good elements, The Two Towers is a slow, turgid film, and ultimately an unsatisfying experience. Yet for all of their artistic ineptitude, The Lord of the Rings movies have proven that there is need in our culture for tales of courage and the mythic heros of legend. Long a maligned genre, fantasy and mythology are finally regaining the recognition they deserve, and I have no cause for complaint there since it can only pave the way for more (and hopefully better) films of this kind. —Paul Andrew MacLean

Click here to order: Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers     To order Renaissance Magazine, click here.     To order medieval tapestries and other period products, click here.