Note: This review is based on the extended edition blu-ray.

This is probably the weakest entry in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, which isn't saying much because The Two Towers is still a near masterpiece. Most of the problems lie with the screenplay and a muddled middle section, but the acting and special effects are a notch above the previous film. In this review I'll start out highlighting the movie's strengths, then its weaknesses.

[IMG]http://www.the-reel-mccoy.com/movies/2002/images/TheTwoTowers_FrodoAndSam.jpg[/IMG]

Like any great middle act, the film isn't so much about plot rather than it is about character. Greater focus is given to Frodo and Gollum being tormented by the ring, and by the end I feel like they, and the rest of the cast, have grown in some way. I also really like the tone of the movie. It looks more like a war movie than a fantasy, and the film is grittier, bloodier, and darker than The Fellowship of the Ring. We see families being torn apart, villages being massacred, children being forced to take arms and fight, etc. It's the perfect antithesis to the first movie, and only at the end does hope and victory emerge once more. Sam's final monologue is perfectly delivered, and, intercut with the other stories, it is very powerful and gets the film's message across wonderfully, even if it isn't very subtle.

Andy Serkis is a revelation as Gollum, who is still the greatest CGI character in modern cinema. Serkis has fully mastered talking in Gollum's distinctive voice, and develops two completely different personalities, shot as if two people are having a conversation, instead of Gollum talking to himself. The fact that he wasn't nominated for an academy award is an atrocity. Newcomers Bernard Hill and Miranda Otto shine as King Theoden and Lady Eowyn. Hill is great as the conflicted king who wants what is best for his people, and Otto gives us a strong female character to root for. As for the returning cast, they all give much stronger and complex performances. This is really Aragorn's movie, and Viggo Mortensen allows us to see the darkness and hidden strength in his character. You really will believe he can become the king of Gondor in the third installment. Also, David Wenham as Faramir is excellent and sympathetic, but his tragic character gets butchered in the theatrical cut, which makes him look like an asshole (Yet another reason to watch the extended edition).

Like I said, the battle scenes are more ambitious and epic in scale than its predecessor, benefiting from outstanding visual effects and Peter Jackson's attention to detail and camerawork. The battle of Helm's Deep is one of the great screen battles, even though the main characters cheat death an innumerable amount of times (Which robs the film of some tension if the characters are not in any harm). It is a perfect meld of live action with lots of extras and CGI for the establishing shots. The explosion of the wall is a magnificent special effect that will have you on the edge of your seat, and the final charge is glorious!

[IMG]http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/3131/lasdostorres.jpg[/IMG]

Those are the major positives of the movie, but I have a few minor negative things to say about it, despite the very high rating. First, since the film follows three parallel storylines, you can imagine the difficulty Jackson and his editors must have faced in the editing room, and they do the best that they can, but there is room for improvement. The pacing is extremely uneven. We'll follow Frodo and Sam's story for 10 minutes, then cut to Aragorn's for 40 minutes, then get a quick update on Merry and Pippin's story for about one minute. The extended edition is a little better, letting each segment breath since there's an extra 40 minutes, but even that doesn't fix another problem with the screenplay. Half of Frodo and Sam's story was left out of this movie and put into The Return of the King, as well as the ending of Aragorn's and Merry and Pippin's. By moving these scenes into the next movie, The Two Towers lacks closure. I know it's the middle act, but it feels incomplete and pointless. At the start of the movie, Frodo and Sam are traveling to Mordor, and by the end they are still traveling to Mordor. Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli are searching for Merry and Pippin at the beginning, and after the battle of Helm's Deep they are still searching for Merry and Pippin. I feel like no progress has been made, except for Saruman's defeat (Even though he dies in the next movie!). I'm not saying that the ending is bad, but I feel like it should be extended slightly to include the cut Isengard scene, to resolve Aragorn's story as well as end on a cliffhanger and set up the third film. But overall, this is very minor.

For me, the biggest problem is the middle section where the people of Rohan travel to Helm's deep. Peter Jackson and his screenwriters added a battle scene where Saruman's warg riders attack them, which causes Aragorn to fall off of a cliff and be presumed dead. He then must travel to Helm's Deep on horseback after having a brief dream sequence. So, what's the point of all this? The battle has no consequences on the overall story or arc of the characters, so why is it included in the movie? In Lawrence of Arabia, Prince Feisal's people have been attacked so they must move to another location, which takes two minutes of screen time. Now, I'm not suggesting that they reduce the journey, but I've seen fanedits of The Two Towers that remove the warg attack and work even better than the original, pacing wise. Drawing it out for this long just to have a cool action sequence is without purpose and makes the film drag. The battle itself is incredibly shot and entertaining, even though Jackson admitted the CGI is weak and everything was disorganized. But, if it doesn't contribute to the whole, then the smart thing to do would be to remove it completely.

There's something else worth mentioning. When Jackson first started shooting the movie, Arwen was originally supposed to lead the elves that aid Rohan in the battle of Helm's Deep and fight alongside Aragorn. However, this whole plot was removed after a major fan outcry, since this is completely different from the books. This just leaves me really confused. The screenwriters drastically expanded Arwen's role in the first film and stood by their decisions, so why not now? I rather like the idea, and it is a lot of better than having the elves come out of nowhere and die without being mentioned ever again. Instead, we get a new plot where Aragorn convinces Arwen to leave Midde Earth, and we get that oddly stitched together scene of Elrond communicating with Galadriel (In front of a terrible green screen) that uses obvious stock footage from the first film. Things get really surreal when some frames show Arwen fighting in Helm's Deep! I'm not saying that the story changes were bad, just how poorly the changes were implemented.

[IMG]http://st-listas.20minutos.es/images/2008-11/59140/696607_640px.jpg?1227798780[/IMG]

The Two Towers has its fair share of flaws, but it overcomes them with great storytelling and emotional impact, plus stellar performances and special effects. Overall, a worthy successor to The Fellowship of the Ring.

Directed by: Peter Jackson
Produced by: Peter Jackson
Barrie M. Osborne
Fran Walsh
Screenplay by: Fran Walsh
Philippa Boyens
Stephen Sinclair
Peter Jackson
Based on: The Two Towers
by J. R. R. Tolkien
Starring: Elijah Wood
Ian McKellen
Sean Astin
Viggo Mortensen
Andy Serkis
Cate Blanchett
Liv Tyler
John Rhys-Davies
Orlando Bloom
Bernard Hill
Christopher Lee
Billy Boyd
Dominic Monaghan
Hugo Weaving
Miranda Otto
Karl Urban
David Wenham
Brad Dourif
Sala Baker
Sean Bean
Music by: Howard Shore
Cinematography: Andrew Lesnie
Editing by: Michael J. Horton
Jabez Olssen
Studio: WingNut Films
The Saul Zaentz Company
Distributed by: New Line Cinema
Release date(s): 5 December 2002 (New York City premiere)
18 December 2002 (United Kingdom)
18 December 2002 (United States)
19 December 2002 (New Zealand)
Running time: 179 minutes
Country: New Zealand
United Kingdom
United States
Language: English
Budget: $94 million
Box office: $926,047,111

Note: This review is based on the extended edition blu-ray.

If I was stuck on an island in the middle of nowhere with no hope of rescue, and could bring only one movie with me, this would be my choice. Like The Godfather, Seven Samurai, Chinatown and The Dark Knight, it is a studio blockbuster that entertains but also succeeds artistically. It has a great cast, a superb screenplay that streamlines the novel without losing any thematic depth, a rousing musical score, exciting battle scenes, beautiful cinematography, and practical and computer effects that still hold up over a decade later. I pretty much spent my whole childhood watching this film, and it gets better with every viewing. It is without a doubt one of the greatest fantasy movies ever made.

[IMG]http://historianet.nl/files/bonnier-his/imagecache/630x420/pictures/his_140676_18_0203_the_shire_0.jpg[/IMG]

There are two reasons why The Fellowship of the Ring is more enjoyable than the other two films in the trilogy. First, the magic. While The Two Towers and The Return of the King are dark and filled with war and death, The Fellowship of the Ring is more fantastical and stuffed with some of the most memorable moments in the cinema. The Shire, Rivendell, Dwarrowdelf, Lothlorien, etc. Secondly, unlike the uneven pacing and structure of the other two films, The Fellowship of the Ring is clearly divided into two equal acts, and follows one single storyline until the Fellowship breaks off at the end. This allows for more character interaction and development between the protagonists, and has more focus on the quest to destroy the ring rather than cutting between three parallel storylines. Near the end of the movie, Sauron kind of fades into the background as the Ring takes center stage, but it works well with the arc of the characters so I don't see it as a problem. The extended cut, although not Jackson's preferred version, adds more character development and important plot points to the film and feels less rushed and choppy than the original cut.

The trilogy has one of the best casts ever assembled for a motion picture, and there isn't a single weak or bad performance. The standouts in The Fellowship of the Ring are Viggo Mortensen, Sir Ian Mckellen, and Sean Bean. Mortensen plays Aragorn, the reluctant heir to the throne of Gondor, and he does a great job of showing the internal conflict and doubt within the character, but also conveying a strong sense of leadership and nobility. As for Mckellen, he IS Gandalf, nuff said. Sean Bean (Who of course is the only main character who dies in the trilogy) plays Boromir, the most intriguing character. All he wants to to is please his father and be strong for his people, but he is easily tempted by the evil powers of the ring and eventually attempts to steal it from Frodo. His final scene where he fights to the death protecting Merry and Pippin brings tears to my eyes ever time. An astounding performance by Bean, who's presence is sorely missed in the next two films.

[IMG]http://i46.servimg.com/u/f46/11/26/77/43/aaq11.jpg[/IMG]

Although the movie is three and a half hours long, Peter Jackson's amazing direction constantly keeps my attention. Notice the fast and fluid camerawork, and those really amazing aerial views of New Zealand. There is one shot during the final battle where the camera pans over the action that leaves me breathless. Slow motion, used excessively in King Kong, is used sparingly and highlights important or emotional moments (Boromir's death). Jackson also co-wrote the screenplay with Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens. I've never read the books (I will soon though), but I know what was cut, and I agree with the changes. The re-structured first half, cutting between the hobbits' journey and Gandalf's visit to Saruman, keeps the tension going, and using the opening chapter of The Two Towers for the climax is much more rewarding than leaving things unresolved in the first installment. I also like how the romance between Aragorn and Arwen is given greater importance than in the novel.

As for the other aspects of the movie, the cinematography is lush and delicious (Although the blu-ray has altered color timing), and the music makes every scene just plain epic. The "ring goes south" sequence is a case in point. Instead of relying on CGI for every effect shot, the production team instead used models, actual sets, and traditional stunts and makeup whenever possible (Legolas standing on top of the cave troll is silly though).

There are, however, a few minor flaws worth noting. First, the prologue needs to be more fleshed out. I mean, who made the rings of power? What do they do? I'm sure it's explained in the books but since I haven't read them I'm confused as hell. Moreover, why don't Sauron and the Ringwraiths detect Bilbo when he puts on the ring to disappear from the Shire? How does Aragorn know that the hobbits are waiting for Gandalf? What's Merry and Pippin's motivation for helping Frodo and Sam early in the film? Also, there's a few weird Peter Jackson moments and unintentional comedy throughout the movie. The most famous example is when Frodo gets stabbed by the cave troll and makes some of the most over the top expressions ever (In slow motion too). It is impossible not to laugh during that scene, and there are some pretty bad continuity errors. How about Ian Mckellen getting is foot caught in some kind of cord while entering Moria, or a dead Uruk-hai getting up after the final battle and surveying the scene before laying his head down? But again, these are minor complaints that don't detract from the film's majesty.

[IMG]http://playeraffinity.com/images/lord-of-the-rings-hobbits.jpeg[/IMG]

As you can see, I can't stop gushing over this work of art, so if you haven't seen it, watch it immediately! Overall, The Fellowship of the Ring is a wonderful start to one of the greatest film trilogies ever made!

Directed by: Peter Jackson
Produced by: Peter Jackson
Barrie M. Osborne
Tim Sanders
Fran Walsh
Screenplay by: Fran Walsh
Philippa Boyens
Peter Jackson
Based on: The Fellowship of the Ring
by J. R. R. Tolkien
Starring: Elijah Wood
Ian McKellen
Liv Tyler
Viggo Mortensen
Sean Astin
Cate Blanchett
John Rhys-Davies
Billy Boyd
Dominic Monaghan
Orlando Bloom
Christopher Lee
Hugo Weaving
Sean Bean
Ian Holm
Andy Serkis
Music by: Howard Shore
Cinematography: Andrew Lesnie
Editing by: John Gilbert
Studio: WingNut Films
The Saul Zaentz Company
Distributed by: New Line Cinema
Release date(s): 10 December 2001 (United Kingdom premiere)
19 December 2001 (United Kingdom)
19 December 2001 (United States)
20 December 2001 (New Zealand)
Running time: 178 minutes
Country: New Zealand
United Kingdom
United States
Language: English
Budget: $93 million
Box office: $871,530,324

While watching Sergio Leone's Once Upon a Time in the West, one notices that the film is slow, almost unbearably so. The famous opening scene sets the tone: 13 minutes of build up for a mere 5 seconds of violence. Leone and his screen writers have stretched a rather thin revenge plot into a 166 minute epic of the last days of the wild west, filled with death and beauty. Why the deliberate pacing? Because the film is what Leone called a "dance of death". It is a tribute and farewell to the American Western, frequently subverting the generic conventions of the genre. The characters are what Harmonica calls an "ancient race", and by the end, when the railroad arrives, they must ride away from civilization into the wilderness (Echoing John Ford's The Searchers).

[IMG]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ER-mC5jJOy8/UBueLAtqtsI/AAAAAAAAAiQ/j_6bwj2M_zM/s640/Once+Upon+A+Time+In+The+West+3.jpg[/IMG]

Sergio Leone, after completing his Dollars Trilogy, reaches the apex of his powers with this movie. His first three films feel like a warm up for this one. His trademark style is fully realized. The frequent close ups juxtaposed with the enormous landscapes, the fast zoom ins, the stunning compositions, and the highly stylized gun play are all here. The film never feels rushed and moves at a steady pace. Heck, the plot only really gets moving about halfway through, but the direction is impeccable. I'm in the minority but I think that the final duel between Harmonica and Frank is better directed than the great Mexican Standoff in The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, and the massacre scene is a great example of the power of sound, images, and editing.

The casting is pitch perfect. Henry Fonda is spectacular playing against type as Frank, one of the most memorable villains in movie history. His entrance, where he and his gang massacre a whole family, still sends a shiver down my spine, and Fonda's distinctive blue eyes are perfectly exploited for a chilling effect! Jason Robards as the bandit Cheyenne is witty, muscular, and contemplative, and when he finally dies in the final moments of the film I feel a great sadness wash over me. Claudia Cardinale, although terribly dubbed, really makes me feel the anguish and turmoil that her character is going through, purely through the expressions on her face (The scene when Harmonica and Cheyenne leave is a perfect example of this).

The performance that has the most impact though is Charles Bronson as Harmonica, one of the most enigmatic characters in cinema. Bronson effortlessly accentuates the mystery of the character, and he's a complete badass to boot. Harmonica appears to be almost like an avenging angel. When Frank asks who he is, Harmonica replies with the names of people Frank has killed in the past. When he enters a scene, he always comes from the right side of the screen and pauses in the middle (No really, EVERY SCENE HE IS IN). He seems to appear and disappear, like when he comes from behind the train in the opening. I don't know the significance of these compositions, but it's very interesting.

[IMG]http://samouchka.net/uploads/posts/2012-08/1345028970_c9cece74751d98d8238382065a1a2a44.png[/IMG]

But what would a Sergio Leone picture be without a great Ennio Morricone score? Morricone doesn't disappoint, and the legendary score can easily stand with The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly's. Each character has their own theme this time, and the music majestically enhances the action on screen (Jill's entrance and the final showdown in particular). My favorite track is "A Dimly Lit Room", one of the most beautiful pieces I've ever heard. There's not enough adjectives in the world to describe how freaking epic the music is. The cinematography is absolutely stunning as well, capturing the harshness and vast terrain of the west, and gives the story an epic scope.

Finally, the screenplay. With help from Dario Argento and Bernardo Bertolucci, the film has much more depth and power than the Dollars Trilogy (Not that they aren't masterpieces as well). I do think that the scene in Lionel Stander's trading post could use some trimming, and the plot gets a little muddled during the middle of the film, but things pick up during the final 30 minutes. I could be wrong, but I think that the film is about how humans cannot escape history and their destiny, just as the main characters cannot prevent the coming of civilization and must depart, since there is no longer any place for them in the dying west. There is less action than Leone's previous films, but the homages to other westerns are enjoyable and the characters are very memorable.

[IMG]http://www.diema.bg/pics/OUATITW_Still_131.jpg[/IMG]

With a long running time, a dark and somber tone, and told with minimal action and dialogue, Once Upon a Time in the West is less entertaining than the Dollar's Trilogy, but it is ultimately more rewarding and definitely one of the greatest films in the history of cinema. Highly recommended!

Directed by: Sergio Leone
Produced by: Fulvio Mosella
Bino Cicogna
Screenplay by: Sergio Donati
Sergio Leone
Story by: Dario Argento
Bernardo Bertolucci
Sergio Leone
Starring : Claudia Cardinale
Henry Fonda
Jason Robards
Charles Bronson
Music by: Ennio Morricone
Cinematography: Tonino Delli Colli
Editing by: Nino Baragli
Distributed by: Paramount Pictures
Release date(s): December 21, 1968
Running time: 166 minutes
Country: Italy
Language: Italian
English
Budget: $5 million
Box office: $5,321,508