A re-watch of the the Two Towers film basically met my expectations -- an okay film overall but too long. It's certainly not as engaging as the Fellowship of the Ring.
The star of the film of course is the computer generated Smeagol. Even though the CGI looked a bit dated, the portrayal and voice acting is fantastic. One of best ideas of this whole film was how they shot the split personality of Gollum -- changing camera angles so it looked like he was having a conversation with himself. It's funny and tragic at the same time . . . and a great way to capture an inner monologue on film.
What disappointed me most on the re-watch was how one-dimensional Faramir is. The book paints Faramir as a dichotomy of his brother, with the will to reject the call to the ring. Instead, in the film, Faramir seems like a brooding bully. Jackson would have done better to stick to the source material. Instead of dragging the hobbits to Gondor (the film), Faramir should have given up his claim to the ring when he learned what it was (the book). I think Jackson's approach was a mistake.
The subplot then plods along so that the hobbits and Faramir are being attacked by Nazgul. Drawn by the call of the Nazgul, Frodo approaches the Nazgul and hands out the ring for the taking. Perhaps this subplot was developed so that there was better trailer eye-candy? Whatever the reason, Sam knocks Frodo down just in time, and the Nazgul misses. Phew. That is intensity.
Not really, especially because as soon as Sam interrupts Frodo's attempted betrayal, Faramir approaches the hobbits and says: "I think we now understand each other, Mr. Baggins. I'm now going to let you go to Mordor."
WHAT???? If anything, Faramir should have all the more reason to take Frodo to Gondor. From Faramir's perspective (without the benefit of having read the trilogy like we have), he has all the more reason to prevent these hobbits from going into the land of the enemy so they can just hand the ring over to Sauron. There is no reason for Faramir to suddenly "understand" what the freak just happened. What a contrived subplot!!!
On the Theoden / Aragorn side, Theoden does a nice job of painting a king watching the downfall of his kingdom. Like Jacob, I actually found his hopeless battle against reckless hate a compelling metaphor for the times. Lines like "What can a man do against such reckless hate," which rang cheesy while I was younger, seem particularly relevant now.
