nalepis
A rejoint le déc. 1999
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours de développement. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines fonctionnalités manquantes seront bientôt de retour ! Restez à l'écoute de leur retour. En attendant, l’analyse des évaluations est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur la page de profil. Pour consulter la répartition de vos évaluations par année et par genre, veuillez consulter notre nouveau Guide d'aide.
Badges2
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Avis8
Note de nalepis
As difficult a feat as that might seem, Jackson delivers an even better film than The Fellowship of the Ring.
The Two Towers is the grandest spectacle that has ever graced the screen. As near-perfect as a film can possibly get, no longer comparable to other genre pictures, but to the great classics of the art.
The sheer scope of The Two Towers makes its predecessor look like an idle stroll in the park. It starts with a bang and doesn't quit for the whole three hours of its duration. And like in the first part, Jackson doesn't fall victim to all the eye candy (and there's more than plenty), he injects the endeavour with a sense of humanity and gravitas that transcends fantasy film-making.
Perhaps the greatest surprise is Gollum, a CGI creation that is guaranteed to make your jaw drop. Acted by Andy Serkis and replaced in the final version by a marvelous computer creation by Wetta Digital (surpassing all previous digital characters by miles), he delivers the best performance in the movie. Dynamic, incredibly expressive and ultimately conveying a sense of real pity for the character. And that's no small achievement in a film filled with actors of this calibre.
It all concludes with what is probably the best medieval battle scene ever shown and will leave you with a hunger for more.
The Two Towers is what film's all about. A true masterpiece. And we still have one more film before the trilogy is completed.
The Two Towers is the grandest spectacle that has ever graced the screen. As near-perfect as a film can possibly get, no longer comparable to other genre pictures, but to the great classics of the art.
The sheer scope of The Two Towers makes its predecessor look like an idle stroll in the park. It starts with a bang and doesn't quit for the whole three hours of its duration. And like in the first part, Jackson doesn't fall victim to all the eye candy (and there's more than plenty), he injects the endeavour with a sense of humanity and gravitas that transcends fantasy film-making.
Perhaps the greatest surprise is Gollum, a CGI creation that is guaranteed to make your jaw drop. Acted by Andy Serkis and replaced in the final version by a marvelous computer creation by Wetta Digital (surpassing all previous digital characters by miles), he delivers the best performance in the movie. Dynamic, incredibly expressive and ultimately conveying a sense of real pity for the character. And that's no small achievement in a film filled with actors of this calibre.
It all concludes with what is probably the best medieval battle scene ever shown and will leave you with a hunger for more.
The Two Towers is what film's all about. A true masterpiece. And we still have one more film before the trilogy is completed.
For the love of God, people hated poor Jar-Jar and are actually coming out saying that they liked Dobby? Not only he looked like an Auschwitz survivor (albeit a short one), but he was the most irritating, self-abusive, ultra-annoying piece of CGI I've ever seen.
As for the movie, it was pretty much a dud. Take all the bad things form the (mediocre) first one, magnify them and you have this cold, calculated money trap. Why do we have to spend more than half an hour to see everything that we've already seen in the first movie? Such as Harry's eeeeevil uncle and aunt, the bloody train station and that wizards' hidden alley? Or another, meaningless, go at the boring and illogical quidditch game? Which serves nothing to the plot, may I add. This is the film's greatest problem. It consists of dozens of little vignettes that add absolutely nothing to the story. They're only in, because: a) they're in the book and b)give an opportunity for another effects shot. Thus, the pacing is terrible. Somewhere in here there's a good film, but to get out it would need a brave team of screenwriter, director and editor that would deliver a tight 90 minute film. As it is, it's terribly boring and at the same time rushed, something which I thought was physically impossible. Oh, did I mention that the characters are cardboard cut-outs? Or that the music is recycled from the first film and padded with differently orchestrated pieces from Attack of the Clones? And what's the big deal with Harry? He spent the complete first movie and 2/3 of this one doing absolutely nothing, it's always Hermione saving the day and doing all the spells and tricks. Some weird self-pitying sexism from mrs. Rowling perhaps? And is there some conspiracy by the teachers to kill Potter? In the first film they send him to the deadly forbidden forest for detention (!), in this one, they send him back and into the lair of a giant spider. Do they warn him? Nooo sir!
On a final note, there's no question about it, Voldemort is Harry's father, no matter what Potter-heads might say to you. He might not be mr. Potter, but his father he is. Can you say Star Wars rip-off?
I haven't read the books, but, judging from the films I can't get what's so special about them. Especially for adults. Next one, I'm watching it on video.
As for the movie, it was pretty much a dud. Take all the bad things form the (mediocre) first one, magnify them and you have this cold, calculated money trap. Why do we have to spend more than half an hour to see everything that we've already seen in the first movie? Such as Harry's eeeeevil uncle and aunt, the bloody train station and that wizards' hidden alley? Or another, meaningless, go at the boring and illogical quidditch game? Which serves nothing to the plot, may I add. This is the film's greatest problem. It consists of dozens of little vignettes that add absolutely nothing to the story. They're only in, because: a) they're in the book and b)give an opportunity for another effects shot. Thus, the pacing is terrible. Somewhere in here there's a good film, but to get out it would need a brave team of screenwriter, director and editor that would deliver a tight 90 minute film. As it is, it's terribly boring and at the same time rushed, something which I thought was physically impossible. Oh, did I mention that the characters are cardboard cut-outs? Or that the music is recycled from the first film and padded with differently orchestrated pieces from Attack of the Clones? And what's the big deal with Harry? He spent the complete first movie and 2/3 of this one doing absolutely nothing, it's always Hermione saving the day and doing all the spells and tricks. Some weird self-pitying sexism from mrs. Rowling perhaps? And is there some conspiracy by the teachers to kill Potter? In the first film they send him to the deadly forbidden forest for detention (!), in this one, they send him back and into the lair of a giant spider. Do they warn him? Nooo sir!
On a final note, there's no question about it, Voldemort is Harry's father, no matter what Potter-heads might say to you. He might not be mr. Potter, but his father he is. Can you say Star Wars rip-off?
I haven't read the books, but, judging from the films I can't get what's so special about them. Especially for adults. Next one, I'm watching it on video.
A series about a world ruled by a New Age cult,full of brainwashed individuals that do as they are told and go around repeating the most trite haikus/fortune-cooky messages ad nauseum and which have the bad tendency to keep outsiders as their prisoners.
What's offensive is that this is not a satire of totalitarian, pseudo-enlightened societies. This is a society that the writers want us to admire!
Sorry, but I prefer free will and human rights over robe wearing stupid freaks that read too many bad angel books and would rather condemn their entire population to death than do something non-tantric/Cabbalic.
What's offensive is that this is not a satire of totalitarian, pseudo-enlightened societies. This is a society that the writers want us to admire!
Sorry, but I prefer free will and human rights over robe wearing stupid freaks that read too many bad angel books and would rather condemn their entire population to death than do something non-tantric/Cabbalic.