You may argue against that in terms of
my exceptional reaction to Signs (for the film not being an
original film concept), but I guess the difference is that
watching the Shyamalan film, the movies M. Night based his
flick off of didn’t come to mind during my viewing. And
watching Two Towers unfold, those two film references came
right at me.
And it almost feels like some moviegoers are willing to
ride over/dismiss what could be considered flaws to whatever
degree in order to still label themselves as crazed and
devoted fans. I wouldn’t classify TTT’s visual effects as
outstanding, which already, despite being just my perception,
would keep it from getting a top of the line rating. The
acting in the sequel was all around pretty good, but that
division didn’t exactly break any new ground or anything. It
was a popcorn flick executed properly. It had somewhat of an
ensemble cast (not all well known, but a large roster), but
when someone like me compares The Two Towers to something like
Ocean’s 11 which had almost every name in showbiz attached,
Ocean’s leads the way by a good margin. I’d watch that one
again any day than a third trip to the Lord of the Rings
sequel.
I enjoyed Two Towers very much, but it didn’t have enough
substance to make it a truly excellent motion picture. Fans no
doubt love the action sequences (and the story), but to me
action sequences can’t be the founding of "A" material and
even the story wasn’t overly profound. There has to be layers
beneath the surface and the film didn’t present me with the
outermost juiciest results. It was a well-done action film
that has excitement, good performances, and is very well told
visually, but I can’t really logically see how someone can
brand it as an almost superior motion picture. It doesn’t
bring anything new to the table outside of an adrenaline rush.
It has a message and heart in the end, but beneath the surface
it is not very profound. It’s an epic film without real true
meaning.
Great credit needs to be given to Peter Jackson for giving
the trilogy vibrant life on the big-screen, but the movie
really isn’t anything much more than dazzling fun. On my
scale, that would rank as a B+ film (as Two Towers did) unless
there was more honest material involved in its game, which
would’ve propelled its rating to a more terrific A- position
(depending on how sincere the script could’ve been - "A"
material wise).
Some box office fans are letdown by the film’s failing to
ignite $400 million in flames, but really, what’s
disappointing about its run? In a way, Spider-Man has changed
moviegoers’ perceptions come ticket sales, as we’re all now
expecting the unexpected when it comes to upcoming film
events. But Spider-Man also appealed to a gigantic, wide
audience that The Two Towers doesn’t have. Spider-Man was
about the average teenager who was able to get all the power
in the world, which appealed to millions and millions of
moviegoers. Two Towers has no theme like that, as it is purely
a crusade. Watching Spider-Man on DVD, I came to a realization
that it wasn’t that great of a movie (B- re-grade after my
original A- critique) but it held an idea with the theme just
mentioned that many audience-goers can be intrigued by. There
are plenty of average people in the world, which Spider-Man
targeted with dynamite.
'TTT Rules Praise' Continued...