What's sad is Richard Armitage, the guy who plays Thorin, was SO EXCITED to be a dwarf! He grew out a big bushy beard. He learned the dwarf language. He learned the entire history of the character... Then he showed up for filming and they shaved his beard and told him they wanted Thorin to be attractive and subdued and he was so disappointed 😢
This is honestly the most tragic event to come out of this trilogy. Armitage could've had the chance to be a true dwarf if the movies had the chance to be something great. Unfortunately, they were practically born to fail 😔
As a little note, in hobbit book, Gandalf was actually dealing with the necromancer. You just don’t find that out until the end of the book and he just kinda mentions it. Then he mentions it once more when telling Frodo about the ring in fellowship.
Glad someone else caught that. When he shit on the idea of the necromancer in the movie I was just thinking, "the necromancer is in the book, mentioned as causing some evil behind the scenes passively, but later on in LOTR it is confirmed that the necromancer is Sauron."
I could've sworn there was a mention of the necromancer earlier in the book. But I do remember reading the Hobbit and going "wtf is this necromancer stuff" before my dad told me "that's Sauron" "oh ok"
@@kadebrockhausen The Necromancer was mentioned in the first chapter as having killed Thorin's father. He is also mentioned when Gandalf tells the group to not go near the south of Mirkwood because that's where his lair is.
I highly recommend the M4 fan edit. It's brilliant. Cuts it down to 4 hours by removing all the filler and making it as true to the book as possible. Really enjoyed it.
Great recommendation, thanks. I watched these films again the other day and realised there was a decent film ( or 2) in there if they just cut out all the bloat.
I still can’t wrap my mind around the fact they got Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett, Christopher Lee, and Ian McKellen into a green room together to pretend to hit ghosts with sticks and give one liners
@@OwenTheLegend I remember crying when I read he died. I've seen most of the movies he was in. Mr. Lee was such a fantastic actor and wonderful human being. I hope he is at peace right now 🙏
Before LOTR, he directed The Frighteners which was a commercial and critical failure. I have no clue how he convinced anyone to invest a single dollar in adapting LOTR, a book many felt was unfilmable.
@@thingsicantfind9545 He would definitely have presented a different vision of Middle Earth from Jackson, but I don't think that would have been a bad thing. The Hobbit is so different from LOTR that it should have felt almost like it belonged in a different world.
I think if the studio was desperate for another trilogy, they should’ve gone with the plan of splitting the hobbit in two and have a third movie that tied the Hobbit to Lotr. Also, everyone say thank you to Viggo Mortenson for refusing to reprsise the role of Aragorn for these movies because as he said “Aragorn isn’t in the Hobbit.” Also, I think the character would have been like, 2 at the time
It's weird that you chose Dwalin as your first example of poor characterization... as I feel he is easily the best characterized dwarf. Dwalin is the first dwarf to arrive at Bilbo's house and serves as the first example to the audience of the culture-clash between Bilbo and the dwarves. Dwalin is shown to be kurt, tough, and assertive. Like most dwarves, he is very direct and "to-the-point." Having been told that there would be food waiting for him by Gandalf, he immediately helps himself to Bilbo's dinner. He is demonstrated as fiercely loyal to Thorin, but values honor and integrity even above said loyalty. It is Dwalin's speech to Thorin in the third film that triggers Thorin to realize he has gone mad with dragon sickness.
I agree and the hobbit movies aren’t bad, just like Lotr Peter Jackson made the better version over Tolkien. People were never gonna like the original hobbit over Lotr anyways, which out of the two books was more popular? I think they did a better version in both cases because the hobbit was for kids.
@sercravenmohead3631 Nah sorry the hobbit movies are quite bad. I couldn't make it through any of them, despite loving LOTR. The tonal confusion, the cartoony CGI movements and visuals, the flat characters, pacing....Like it has a coupe good things about it out of ten things that make a good movie. That said, Cosmonaut is a dumbass "edgy film critic youtuber".
If over the course of 3 movies, him eating Bilbo's dinner is all that separates him from a cardboard cut out of Gimli's character before they enter Moria, he's not a strong character
There was a cut scene in Battle of the Five Armies, where Gandalf scolds Thranduil for prioritizing the shiny necklace over his son. The scene revealed that the necklace belonged to Thranduil's wife, who died fighting the forces of Anmar a long time ago, and the necklace was recovered by Dwarves later. That scene was like 20 seconds long, yet it revealed Thranduil's motivation for starting a war with the Dwarves. But nope, it got cut, because we needed more scenes with Alfred?
Yeah i wish more people knew the context of why Thranduil wanted the necklace so badly. I will never understand why that tiny clip was cut from the theatrical version. Also I thought Lee Pace was a stand out actor and one of the better aspects of these deeply flawed movies
@@luciaalicea8186 Lee Pace in these movies is how I found out I'm bisexual (and put into perspective a whole decade of confusing feelings I would get when Viggo was onscreen in the original LotR). It's the only positive thing I ever got out of these movies
As much meaningless filler as there was, that would at least complete the arc between Thranduil "knowing dragon fire well," and fighting the battle, ect. It's not a good arc, but at least it'd complete it. On the one hand these films are such a missed opportunity, so many people talk about "the films that could have been" with Del Toro's whimsical folky vision, but I genuinely think there basically isn't a world where WB signs off on Del Toro's vision without asking for things I hope he'd never agree to.
Love or hate this trilogy, I’m glad everyone can basically agree that Martin Freeman is like, THE perfect casting for Bilbo. Like one of the best casting choices in history if you ask me
Felix Felton, Paul Daneman, John Le Mesurier were given to the BBC radio serialization; old, forgotten and auditory. Orson Bean, Norman Bird, and Bernard Cribbins to the animated adaptations, full of whimsy and charm. And Ian Holm to the original trilogy, who above the others played Frodo in the BBC broadcasts. For within these actors were bound the strength and the will to govern over each. But they were all of them deceived, for another actor was hired.
I would like to give credit where credit is due: I did like the idea of integrating Radagast. I can't help but think that when tasked with extending the story, Peter wanted to look at ways to integrate established lore, and bringing in another wizard to help Gandalf in the sections he is absent from the story is a clever thing to do.
@@petervanschepen8809 I actually liked that interpretation of Radagast; the idea of a druid/wizard hybrid who's gone kinda crazy from living alone in the deep forest for so long is really interesting to me. I just wish they had made him more competent.
@@jimshotfirst4887 I can see your point about his 'druid-ness', the wizards were interesting creatures in the original literature, even those only mentioned, like the blue wizards. They seemed, to me, to be more of celestial messengers or chess pieces of the Valar. Having Radagast dumbed down, literally shit upon and used as comic relief was irritating and negated the felling that they were otherworldly beings. In fact, besides the unnecessary drama, romance and cgi, the campy slapstick humor throughout really irked me the most.
I like how for your "Guess what this dwarf's name is" you chose Bofur, literally the only dwarf I remember the name of because of his goofy hat and how sweet and adorable he is in the first movie. I wanted to see more Bofur dangit. I can name Thorin the "main character," Kili and Fili because they're the "hot dwarves" that got shoved in our faces, and Bofur. And there's that old dwarf who might be Balin or Dwalin or something? IDK. Like you, I enjoyed the first movie a lot, and the last two were awful. I was miserable watching them. I can't remember a single moment in the last two movies that I liked. Everything that was good about the movies was in the first one.
Oh my god YES THANK YOU. When I heard him say that in the video I had to pause because Bofur is LITERALLY by far the dwarf that gets more screen time, characterization, and attention than the other dwarves (apart from Thorin, Kili, Fili, and whatnot). Also Balin!
Just sounds like y’all wouldn’t like a condensed Hobbit movie to begin with, if it was one movie and 2hrs I could already see y’all crying over how there wasn’t enough time to develop the characters. The Hobbit was never as good as Lotr just in the source material itself, it’s a kid’s book. I still think Peter Jackson did categorically better, I personally enjoyed the Dol Guldor scenes, bringing back Legolas, among other things because I like cool shit.
Seeing Ian McKellen having a break down over just being in a green screen ( most likely hours / days of shooting) and feeling " distressed" over the movie is heart breaking. WB just wanted money so they hurt the actors, franchise and fan base for greed.
In terms of time it was right though, they needed to make this movie rather sooner than later, especially because of the actors aging. Although Gandalf was old anyway and we know he wasn’t exactly close to dying and Christopher Lee didn’t really need to be in the movies even though it was great to see him again, but Saruman and most other characters from Lotr were pretty superfluous. You could argue it mattered with Elrond though, who did look visibly older and is a character from the book too.
@@wonderfred it's not always about money. You think Ian doesn't have enough money for 2 lifetimes? He broke down because if his love for the franchise and the hobbit movies shat all over it. Check the making of of the lotr trilogy and you'll see the difference
Laughing about the phrase “green prison” then becoming somber over seeing Ian McKellen break down is probably the biggest case of emotional whiplash I’ve experienced.
I read this as “green inferno” for some reason. That movie is wild and I spent 5 minutes thinking of some kind of crazy mashup before re-reading what you said
Same here, I've loved Ian since I was a kid for his role as Gandalf and just the guy himself and seeing him hurt like that just feels awful. At least the next day or smth he got a surprise from what I've read.
The Necromancer was mentioned in the Hobbit in passing and sauron was the necromancer. He was the reason why Mirkwood was becoming dark and foreboding. While it isn't explicity mentioned in the book, and arguably shouldn't have been in the movie, it can't be thrown out as completely made up. Jackson loved all of LOTR and the expanded lore around it, and probably wanted to incorporate some of that to tie the stories together better than they already were. Still all bad movies though.
@@Insanepie There wouldn't be anything wrong with trying to make a movie out of it, other than there isn't much to go off of, but that's besides the point. The issue is that it wasn't it's own movie, it was tacked on to the already bloated Hobbit movies. It's addition added nothing to the story of the Hobbit. If it was a stand alone movie (short film would be OK) and made well, there would be no problem.
28:40 Gold in Middle Earth is a metal that was heavily affected by Morgoth, who put some corruptive potential into everything, as stated in the Similarion. Different places and materials were affected differently, such as the Undying Lands, which were barely affected (still affected, that should not be forgotten) and gold, which was very heavily affected, allowing it to easily corrupt otherwise good people. Morgoth was basically the big baddie before Sauron, and infinitely more powerful than him. Sauron knew how to do the ring magic stuff because Morgoth invented the magic with the spell that "Made all of Middle Earth his ring"
"dragon sickness" may be able to be rationalized through the oodles of source material throughout the silmarillion and appendices and such, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a stupid fucking idea. thorin's greed was just that - greed. he was an imperfect character whose flaws in the book led to death and war. it was the nature of man (in this case a dwarf) that led to the mayhem that ensues. that was tolkien's point and to chalk it all up to "dragon sickness" not only neutered a central theme of the book, but also started/continued the trend of "he's a main character and has to be likable and heroic, therefore he can't have such a major flaw". the idea was never that thorin was some evil horrible guy. just that this is who people are and how they act, and this is what it leads to. on his deathbed he realized the folly of his greed, but it was too late and he died along with many others. tolkien's writing was incredible and the idea of a "dragon sickness" being the spark that led to this war leaves the entire thing absent a meaningful theme. it has "hollywood" written all over it and it's a symptom, but not the root cause of why these movies sucked.
@@SynsityGW Amen. It's not like he wasn't intermittently an asshole all the way through the story, just let him be an organically flawed character. Even if you simply must couch it in fantasy metaphysics come up with a better bloody name for it. Dumbest unnecessary exposition since Lucas shat out midichlorians.
@@SynsityGWKinda like the conflict between kingdoms in LotR. "Oh phew, our people are safe thanks to outsiders' help! ... but why should we help others when *they wronged us in the past?*" It's just human nature showing its selfishness, doesn't have to be magical influence.
@@ND-nr6mx at some point hollywood stopped believing that the average movie/tv show viewer could sympathize with a character who had any major flaws. complete idiocy.
I love that Evangeline Lilly was essentially promised there wouldn’t be a love triangle, only to find out that was the only reason her character was in the movie.
I don't know if there were scenes deleted, but I'd hardly even call it a love-triangle. Say what you will about how awful the Kili/Tauriel romance was, but Legolas' part in it is really miniscule. There's like...one brief blink-and-you'll-miss-it sentence where he mentions that Tauriel has his heart, but that's about it. Sure, Legolas' line about Tauriel having his heart shouldn't have been there, but the thing is, Tauriel doesn't even acknowledge it. I swear, people act like the Hobbit films had a non-stop love-triangle fest going on like the Twilight films when such a love-triangle just doesn't exist.
@@retloclive9118 But that’s the thing. It WAS mentioned so even if it’s not developed much further throughout the movies, it’s still in the back of your head while watching the movie. Had it not been mentioned, then yes she would just be the love interest to the dwarf, which is still dumb to throw into the movie.
The biggest disappointment for me was not getting to see Gandalf go ham in the battle of the five armies. It was my most anticipated moment from the books and it didn't happen, because he was too busy being captured by Sauron.
The thing about the Hobbit too is that Bilbo's return is another huge disconnect between movie and book. When the Fellowship went back they were so struck by PTSD and all that they weren't really able to fit in with society, both in the movie and in the book. Hell Frodo leaves. Bilbo is fine when he comes back because Bilbo didn't go on a LOTR adventure, he went on a Hobbit adventure. But in the movies they have him go on more of a LOTR type adventure, so the ending of the movie doesn't really work.
The pictures and footage of Peter Jackson wandering around the sets with his head in his hands are pretty heartbreaking. It's too bad WB seemed intent on not only milking as much money as they could from it but also used it like a technical demo.
Seriously. Even beyond that it seems like they WANTED it to fail. Every decision they passed down only made things more miserable and challenging for the film.
Watching Ian pretty much have a huge attack because he’s locked in a green screened room acting off no one… I couldn’t imagine being on the original trilogy and being around that magic and then having to do the hobbit. I bet those conversations between Ian and Peter were heartbreaking to try and get the film made.
The reason for the 'Bloom' in the video is due to the fact that the movie was made to be released in 3D so the video had to be brightened up to compensate for the darkness caused by the 3d glasses. Great video.
Seems everyone don’t include that this trilogi isn’t just «The Hobbit» but a lot of the appendices Tolkien wrote himself at the end of the LOTR books. It’s a meds sometimes, yes. But it’s not all fabricated filler! But, they should definatly kept it simple and not make a trilogy, or at least start the process over after Jackson returned
I feel so sorry for ian mckellen, imagine going through the frankly incredible journey of LotR triology and then having to do... this. Must have been damn depressing.
Peter Jackson was in a bad pressure when he directed McKellen too since the entire production was rushed. Imagine if LOTR trilogy prep time was 5 months like Hobbit under Jackson, this is what it would've look like for the most part
They don’t care. They get a lot of money for everything they do. If they’d be asked to stick a banana up their mouths and do chimpanzee noises throwing their own shit at each other, they wouldn’t even skip a beat
one thing you didn't mention that I found weird af about this movies is the quasi love affair between gandalf and galadriel, did no one else find it super awkward and weird whenever they were on screen together? like gandalf turns into a bumbling idiot whenever he's talking to her. 1) galadriel is married 2) gandalf is a maia, quite literally one of the most powerful beings in the universe in a similar tier to sauron himself.
@@electricpepperoni4789 that doesn't explain his behaviour in the slightest and no they are not on the same level at all, a maia is a member of the ainur which are well above any elves.
@@konguy3 Well, look at how they portrayed the brown wizard. He is running around literally being shit upon. The Maiar didn't feel otherworldly in The Hobbit at all. They at least appeared to be of the status of the high elves in the LOTR trilogy; with Gandalf the Grey feeling more corporeal at times due to his attachment to Middle Earth and its struggles. The Hobbit Films should have never introduced themes of romantic love at all.
Quick correction: a lot of the 'original content' wasn't made up by PJ, it's from Tolkien's unfinished work. Still added into The Hobbit unnecessarily tho
Yeah, unfortunately it's almost possible to avoid and creators who wanna stay monetized and relatively mainstream are kept on a 2 inch leash with what they can and can't do now.
I didn’t know that about Sir Ian McKellen and the green screen moment. That just breaks my heart. If anyone on this earth respects those original films more than anyone, it’s him
If it's any comfort they had a "Gandalf Appreciation Day" right after that where they filled his trailer with fun Gandalf nick-nacks, and had a small celebration where the cast and crew watched LotR with him. It doesn't make up for how they still made the films, but at the very least they actually took his emotions seriously and tried to comfort him.
14:39 The Necromancer (Sauron) is present in the book. The White Council drives out the Necromant out of Dol Guldur in Mirkwood. It's only mentioned, however, and not explicitly described how they did it.
The behind the scenes from both trilogies are fascinating. LOTR is filled with passion, top notch craftsmanship and common goal to make something special. The Hobbit is, sadly, a story of Peter Jackson having an extended mental breakdown. WB is truly a champion of totally destroying their own successful properties.
Honestly the worst part is how perfect the cast is. They did so well with what they had, they all had great chemistry with each other and so likeable but the big guys in charge kept trying to control everything and screwing it up
Theres way more to that story with the actors who played the dwarves. And really everything with these films, their production was a disaster. But the studio treated them like trash, 7 of them werent invited or flown out to the premiere of the third film.
Idk if I can even say casting is that good, when 90% of the cast is dwarves and they look like absolut dogshit, they either 1: don't look like dwarves, just small humans or 2: are a caricature to such a degree that it makes it so it doesn't even feel like we are in the same universe as LOTR. Martin Freeman is an amazing bilbo, however, he did an amazing job.
dude the encounter with the necromancer did happen, it makes sense to add it when the imaginarium of Tolkien is complete and the hobbit was written befor LoTr, so obv. its not depicted. Tho i agree with most of the stuff u said
Tbh, Bofur is my favorite dwarf in the movies. Because in subtle ways Bofur shows that he actually cares about Bilbo and the crew in the first movie especially. He's the first to notice Bilbo was missing on the rock giant mountain and one of the first to reach out, and he's the one that catches Bilbo trying to leave tells him that he has a right to be there but still concedes to Bilbo's choice. Even in the third movie when kili is dying, Bofur is the one that books it through the town looking for the plant to fix it.
So it's only out of a sense of pedantry and the fact that I don't see it in any of the top comments, although i'm guessing you've seen plenty by now - Sauron is in the Hobbit because it was one of Tolkien's many hasty retcons. He has stated that originally he added a "necromancer" because the plot needed Gandalf to go away, but in Fellowship during the great exposition chapter aka the Council of Elrond Gandalf explains that the "necromancer" was, in fact, Sauron All Along, which he suspected at the time but had confirmed later (right before Aragorn admits he waterboarded Gollum for a few months). I'm not sure how to eloquently include that in a film like this as it was a plot point with no payoff in the Hobbit, but that doesn't fall under "shit added by WB". Even Tolkien admitted it was a rather clumsy retcon.
Great to hear from you Lindsay! I lament your yt departure daily, but I'm happy and proud you prioritized yourself:) wishing you all the best! Forever a fan, Alex
@@Lonit-be Agreed. I believe they were stunt doubles. I remember hearing that while watching a commentary video (forgot the name of the video though; duh....).
The Hobbit was never suppose to surpass LOTR, it was just to meant to complete the story. Sadly, it did not look cohesive and consistent as much as the first trilogy did. Either way, if they did something great they definitely nailed Smaug, his presence conveys terror and dread. His voice too is perfectly abysmal.
To be fair, Tolkien later revealed that while Gandalf was away from the group, he was indeed tracking down the Necromancer who turned out to be Sauron in disguise. And the whole reason Gandalf was involved with the Dwarves in the first place was because he was worried Sauron might enlist Smaug into his army upon his return.
True and also besides the name of "Dragon Sickness" Tolkien did talk about how treasure that has been hoarded by a dragon has a strong corrupting influence.
@@StonedWolf666 just re-read the hobbit a couple days ago. Tolkien names “dragon sickness” as the undoing of the master of laketown. Basically he runs away with the treasure and is presumed dead of starvation in wilderland. This leads me to believe this was just a name Tolkien had for greed as a vice. Smaug himself seems to be the embodiment of the destruction that results from greed. This doesn’t really help the case of the Jackson movies, as taking the dragon sickness idea literally seems stupid with that in mind.
Yeah the stuff they added bothered me less than the stuff they changed. I didn't want three movies but the additional gandalf content was at least plausible, if clumsily done.
@@StonedWolf666 But in the movies it made little sense. They talked how Thorin fell victim to dragon sickness like his grandfather did. Except that Thrór was already obsessed with gold way before Smaug came and took over Erebor. Dwarves in the Tolkien-universe were always known for their greed, it's just that Sauron's and Smaug's corruption made it even worse.
'That's a good name for Orlando - ezboy recliner' their banter was as funny as anything Marcus did in this excellent video. I need to seek it out and watch it in full
Just rewatched all 3 Hobbit movies again for the first time in years and completely agree with "the Hobbit movies get worse as they go one." The first one was actually better than I had remembered it, and I even liked the second one too, but neither were ANYWHERE near the LOTR trilogy. Then the third Hobbit was just outright bad. As a whole, I can only get the Hobbit trilogy a C, B- at absolute best. What's even more crazy is.... the Hobbit is STILL even better than the rings of power show lol
If they wanted a subplot about an elf and a dwarf mending the historic rift between the two peoples and learning to love one another… well they could have just properly adapted Legolas and Gimli’s relationship in the first trilogy
Yeah they definitely left out the crucially important and dare I say most enthralling moments of the elf on dwarf,hot, hot steamy butt action that is in the original lore😢. I was devastated 😭
I felt they kinda did not romantically sure but to steal a line from Jay and Silent Bob "we are h3t3ros3xual life partners" (yes the 3's are on purpose....)
The fact that they got Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett, Christopher Lee, and Ian McKellen into a green room together to pretend to hit ghosts with sticks is still mind numingly dumb.
The Sauron arc in the Hobbit actually does have a purpose. At the time of the hobbit, Sauron in the form of the Necromancer was taking refuge at Dol Guldur. Gandalf leaves the dawarves and Bilbo to implore the white council to take measures in expelling Sauron from Dol Guldur, which they do, after which Sauron flees back into Mordor. The account isn’t in the Hobbit but it is in the history of what happened when Gandalf left the protagonists in the Hobbit. So while yeah, it doesn’t really fit the technical story of the Hobbit, I really do see why they would put it in the movie. It’s LOTR history.
It's worth noting that The Necromancer was always meant to be Sauron, or rather, the idea of Sauron as a character came about through Tolkien's audience's interest in the Necromancer's origins. In the book, Gandalf actually does leave the group explicitly to deal with the threat the Necromancer represents, alongside "other white wizards." It's not really surprising that a film adaptation of the Hobbit would delve deeper into what actually happened during that time, though I do think that they ended up handling it poorly.
Sauron wasn't always the Necromancer; in the original version of the book, 'The Necromancer' was just some guy who Gandalf had to look into, a hint that there was always more going on elsewhere in the world, and a reason to have Gandalf absent for some of the story. Nothing more. And in that same original version, Gollum offered the Ring to Bilbo as a prize for their riddle-game, rather than showing the way out. He's lying, and intends to kill Bilbo anyway, but the Gollum we know now wouldn't even toy with the idea of giving the Ring to someone else. As the Lord of the Rings was developed, Tolkien revised the story of the Hobbit, so that Gollum became more aggressive with Bilbo and instead offers to show Bilbo the way out rather than his Ring; and when Bilbo leaves with the Ring, Gollum curses Bilbo for a thief, swearing to hate him forever. And, retroactively, 'The Necromancer' became Sauron. These changes are explained in story as the version in which Gollum offers the Ring being Bilbo's original version of the tale, in which Bilbo wanted to make it seem as if he'd earned the Ring and that it was definitely his now. The revised version was the real tale that Gandalf eventually got out of him.
@@Maehedrose Tolkien would not like the LOTR movies either, tho. I do not like this argument. Also he did want to change what the Hobbit was about with making it darker and tying it to LOTR directly but I think his editor convinced him that it was a shit idea and he stopped but we got the info of the council fighting Sauron similiar to the Hobbit movies and Gandalf thinking Smaug will work with Sauron and that being his motivation for helping the dwarfs (the Bree scene in the movie is a short story that Tolkien wrote later to put the two together). The Hobbit movies are still a bad adaptation.
I still remember watching the dwarves sing in the first one and got so excited for what was to come. It was such a cool way to kick it off and I wish they kept that connection between all the dwarves more centered throughout.
I also read the Hobbit. My favourite fun fact is that in the books, in the final battle, Bilbo just trips and hits his head on a rock with the ring on, sleeping throu the entire battle. I find that hilarious.
I agree with you… mostly. I think that adding the bits with the White Council at Dol Guldur and the Necromancer are great additions, and really help to connect the stories of the hobbit and LOTR together. They may not be in the hook, but they are canon in the universe
I...would say that they *could* have been great additions, but the execution was terrible. It's way too much high action, way too campy, it comes off as ridiculous to me. The way everybody else feels about Legolas climbing falling rocks (not actually impossible, remember how he can walk on top of soft snow?) is the way I feel watching Saruman go all Ninja Gaiden.
@@ryankwon8785 And it works because that was what actually happened in the same timeline. The Necromancer ordeak was settled the same time as the Dwarves and Hobbit adventure happened.
The thing I hate the most about the Five Armies is how all the dwarves suited up in cool armour, but then they swap to their old outfits for no reason when they are CHARGING FIRST to battle!
The line of eisenfoot was pushed back and the company of Thorin did clearly not think that thorins gonna change his mind so they puttet it off with no hope but I’m the last minute thorin decided to be Party of the battle and they didn’t have enough time to put on the armour as the orcs were chasing
Okay, Im not really a regular commenter, but I can’t help but express the tragedy that Del Toro wasn’t able to direct the Hobbit. While officially he “left,” I can’t help but think Del Toro left because of creative differences. (If you watch any interviews where they ask him about it, it really seems like he was sad about leaving too) His care and devotion to children’s tales and the magic in them would have made a wonderful, iconic addition to a beloved series. I imagine that it would have balanced the nostalgia of LOTR while still being its own thing. Anyways I will always be sad about the lost potential of Del Toro and the Hobbit.
Didn't Del Toro left because of MGM's bankruptcy that caused the movie to be delayed many times? It drove him nuts for that, he was ready to shoot the movie but MGM and WB hadn't gave him a greenlight because of MGM's problem. Del Toro can't wait for another year so he instead left
It would have been good, since they obviously wanted and needed the Hobbit to the lord of the rings to explain more about Gandalfs motivations. He was in the North because he believed Sauron to be the necromancer. He was afraid of a possible alliance between Smaug and Sauron because that would have made the battles in the South almost impossible to win., with Sauron united to a flying fire spewing dragon. The reason for the Orc attack and the battle of the five Armies fromSaurons side was to weaken the North so he could take it basically without resistance. Later he also learned about the ring found by baggins, Shire, ... so Tolkien himself linked the bedtimestory logically and geographically to the lotr. He also got the peace of Lore, why the Sindarin woodelves and the dwarves hated each other into the Hobbit. Even if the story about the Nauglumir and the death of king Thingol belonged in the first age and the Silmarillipn. But part of the story bungle lies in Tolkiens redconning the Hobbit himself in order to make it fit into the wider Legendarium.
There are fan cut versions or the movies, where they just left the good bits and reduce it to 1 or 2 movies, really recommend those, makes it waaaay better
As lindsay ellis pointed out in her in-depth review, Evangeline Lilly wanted to be in the movie on the one condition that she wasn't forced into a love-triangle. Which the studio promised they wouldn't do. And then did it anyways. Thanks WB. Also it's crazy to me that the movies are sitting on a 7.8~ on IMDB.
I watched those videos when they came out but had never seen Lost, but now after watching Billiam's unhinged lost videos I know the context of her being Kate. I can only imagine how infuriating it was for her to get to be in The Hobbit on the stipulation that she not be used for cheap relationship suspense the same way she was all throughout Lost, only to be shoved into it once again by men who love money far more than well-written women.
In the original video before WB's continuous stupidity and greed got it taken down, what happened to Evangeline Lilly in this movie is what I told someone stuck out to me the most. Of all crappy forced romance subplots in media, that particular subplot still manages to be one of the worst, which is saying *a lot* given how annoyingly commonplace it is. This trilogy basically wasted the talents of everyone it in, but I feel like she got it the worst of basically anyone overall save for maybe Lee Pace.
IMDB's ratings are inflated by fake accounts and those in the industry. It doesn't matter how bad a movie is, everyone involved in the industry will pop in and give it glowing reviews.
Thor: Love and Thunder has a 6.3 and I wouldn't inflict that movie on anyone. While The Hobbit trilogy is a bit of a drawn out mess, they're not bad movies, they're just not very good. IMDB ratings are always slightly high but compared to other movies 7.8 os fairly accurate. The real crime is that 6.3
29:45 my favorite part is how in this scene they put the Kili/Tauriel love confession immediately after a bunch of shots of Laketown citizens running around screaming and dying and weeping while searching for their lost or dead loved ones. And then during the love confession you can still hear screams of terror in the background
I mean, that could work. A love confession after being in a dire situation is a well established trope, it's fine. It just doesn't work for that particular pairing because it's on a fucking speed run. It's like the 3rd time they've met, so a love confession feels... empty? Unearned? There's no emotional response to it.
The thing is, aside from tauriel and a few minor changes, a lot of these storys werent made up. Azog was real, and he was also the one who killed Thorin. The war of Kazad-Dum also happened. The white councel also attacks Dol-Goldur and repels Sauron around the time of the Hobbit.
Was sick in bed the other day and decided to watch the extended lotr trilogy and still love it, they really caught lightning in the bottle with them, could not get into the hobbit trilogy just wasn’t the same, I still got chills as I did when I saw it in theaters when gandalf and Eomer rode down the mountain with the massive army at the battle of helms deep fucking awesome, battle of the five armies when Thorin came out of the mountain after coming back to his senses just had me like meh who cares, I actually fell asleep in the theater
@@PanthalassaRo bullshit copyright claim. UA-cam allows people and companies to file copyright claims against videos and even if the video is clearly fair use UA-cam will still take the video down.
I was so upset when it was taken down cause I got about half way then stopped cause I had to do other things and was depressed I didn't finish it Glad to see it up
It's a shame that Warner Bros and MGM gave Peter Jackson very short time for preparation after Guillermo Del Toro left the production. It's the main reason why The Hobbit trilogy didn't do well. He had a 2 and a half year of prep for LOTR and then 5 months prep for Hobbit, I can imagine how stressful that was for him. But honestly, I still respect Jackson for doing his best in that short prep time and made the movie that's atleast watchable enough
@@KitKat-sv9qp the average pre-production time is typically 8-9 months for ONE film it's absolutely insane that and a testament to his talent that there's any good moments in these films
@@KitKat-sv9qp Yes, May 2010 was when Del Toro left, from June to October, WB was in talks with Jackson to take over, on October he signed on to direct not one but three Hobbit films. He and his team began shooting in March 2011, WB couldn't afford to delay the movie for more time because the money has been spent on the previous production that Del Toro was involved
@@KitKat-sv9qp During filming of what became The Battle of the Five Armies Peter Jackson recalls, "I got no storyboards. I don't know what the hell I'm doing." Basically no preparation. He also revealed that the scripts were never satisfactory because he needed to create something in less than a year before filming. It also explains the increased, LoTR also had blue/green screen work too, usage of composites in The Hobbit trilogy. Because production was rushed most of the work needed to be done in post.
The world needed Martin Freeman as Bilbo. The world needed the Bilbo-Gollum scene. The world needed the Bilbo-Smaug scene. The world really didn't need the ~6 additional hours around these things.
Kinda feels excessive to me, all these people complaining about the Hobbit movies. I recently rewatched them, and they're not half as bad as everyone claim. I'd rather sit through all of them than watch generic Superhero movie #85.
@@sercravenmohead3631 ye sorta, it never takes longer to watch a movie adaptation of a book, just shows how much they milked the f**k outta these movies
Yeah especially since I've read the book multiple times since these were all released, and not once am I like "man, I wish we could see what Alfred's up to during this, I wanna see more unibrow guy"
Where can I find an edit of these movies that cuts out all the extraneous bullshit that was added in to pad it out and only has what was in the book? Great video, btw.
If you like the book and own copies of the Hobbit films, you should look up M4's Hobbit fan edit. He cut out all the stuff that wasn't in the book and what's left is a 4-hour cut that in my opinion, fits in with the LOTR Extended Cuts. It's really professional quality visual and sound and he even digitally altered some shots to fit better. I was really disappointed with 'The Lord of the Rings Prequel Trilogy' too and M4 proved there was a good movie underneath.
Fun fact, in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Orlando Bloom rarely knew what was going on in any given scene, that's why he so often looks goofy and/or lost lol my favorite is actually the scene you make fun of when they're about to fight in front of the Black Gates, he just looks so curious, like "death means nothing, what is Mordor like???" It just screams "immortal being who couldn't give less f*cks if you paid him" 😂
I kind of always liked his relaxed nature as it gives his Helm's Deep scene more meaning when he was no longer able to hide his emotions. It's also made his scene at the black gates better as Aragorn was right and they survived a hopeless situation, he was probably content dying with his company similarly to how Aragorn would die for his people. Never understood why people would want a 3000 year old being to behave with human emotions to begin with, even though elves mature differently a 50 year old human has to be the equivalent to a elven child emotionally.
Immortal, not invincible. There's a difference. Elves can and did die from violence and extreme despair. Many died during the first age in the war against Morgoth
My biggest gripe with the story in this trilogy is the orcs. In the book, Gandalf kills the Goblin King, which causes them to show up multiple times later, including the battle of five armies, to avenge their murdered king. *That makes sense.* Their exclusion from the third movie has always bothered me.
I think that what did not help the trilogy is the fact that they did not have a diverse cast of different ethnicity. They should've had black, Asian and Hispanic dwarfs. Bilbo should've had a side story of him struggling with his homosexuality. What really would have improved tolkiens story is if they added a deeper layer of allegory that reflected modern political issues we face today.
I dont know what is more entertaining...that people think the hobbit trilogy is garbage or just the simple fact people get so rabid about it when you tell them that it is actually good.
I have never understood why Azog was the villain of these films because in the books he’s dead So if they had to have a more definitive villain beyond Smaug I’m not sure why they didn’t just have Bolg (Azog’s son) be the main villain because coming after the Dwarves to avenge your father is more compelling than Azog seeking revenge for having his arm cut off
He probably didn't sound as cool? that's a really shit reason and an even worse excuse to not follow and deviate from the source material but that is very much on par with the level of rationale that seems to have been used in the making of most of these movies
I always thought that too. It's been a whole since I read The Hobbit but I believe Bolg is in the book. Azog is in the appendices for LOTR. They changed a lot. Bilbo is like 60 in the book. Thorin is even older. And Bilbo is degraded to sidekick in the movies. I do think a lot of this was studio interference but PJ didn't want to do this either. His heart wasn't in it.
@@rivendelldaughter He wanted to do it, but a producer at New Line had beef with him, so said producer wanted to make these movies without PJ at the helm. That's why they got GDT. When GDT backed out because production was taking too long, no other competent director cared to do it except PJ, so New Line had to go with him. Which is probably why he wasn't afforded more time.
@Motsognir I know all of this actually. He didn't want to do it. But he had to. His heart wasn't in it. And I'm not convinced that's why GDT backed out. The way he was about the project and his passion. I think this was just the Hollywood answer.
You could literally depict the battle of the five armies for 3-5 mins from Bilbo's perspective and it being like a horrific ww1 through the trenches "don't know what the hell is going on" sequence. Would have made it different from LOTR at least and would have Biblo as our perspective character (you know, the title character).
It's almost as if the battle is a metaphor for WW1 and a commentary on how pointless the horrors of war can be, and was portrayed in the source material as such intentionally by a guy who had seen it in person. OH WAIT
The funniest thing about these movies is how they actually impacted and changed New Zealand labor unions. No seriously, these movies genuinely affected the unions because of their production.
@@TheWinjin he had most to all his scenes isolated in green screen and he felt really sad since he wanted to interact with human beings. Like. Seriously, they made him deprived of human interaction, next day they thre a Gandalf appreciation day tho with old props from LOTR and other stuff to make him feel better tho
@@Kicksncoffee1983 the best part is you don't even need a nebula subscription, you just need to be on her patreon for $2 a month, which is something even a broke college student like me can afford. i can't thank her enough for that.
can we give ian mckellen and martin freeman another chance to make this movie. As a fun jovial bedtime story like it should be? I want them to have that happy ending
Warner Bros could have easily split the Hobbit into two movies, with the first movie ending after they are rescued by the eagles, or, alternatively, after they arrive in Erebor, if you want to devote a lot of time to the Battle of Five Armies. Splitting it three just unnecessarily drags the story out. I like Lindsay Ellis's comparison to Bilbo's analogy of feeling like butter stretched too thin over a slice of bread.
It was scripted as a 2 parter, part one ending with the barrel sequence. Jackson wanted the extra film, according to him. While he claimed it worked better that way, I think the truth is that he was so far behind schedule that an extra film and an extra year was desperately needed to finish at all.
@@Henez89 no, Jackson never wanted a third film. He always wanted a Duology, Warner Bros forced him to make a trilogy in an attempt to replicate the success of Lord of the Rings. In fact, the ending of Desolation of Smaug had to rewritten hastily due to this coming late into production, iirc.
@@qzilla5102 Jackson claimed to want a 3rd film when it was announced (by him) and never suggested otherwise. I've never seen anyone say it was a studio decision in the years since. Looking at the production it is clear they were never going to get things done in time. A 3rd film gave them an extra year to finish.
When the media were first talking about The Hobbit, it was 2 movies. There was this whole thing in this time period of making the last installment two movies. We saw it with this, The Hunger Games, Twilight, Harry Potter. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find they are all Warner Bros, but I can't be bothered to look it up. I think Harry Potter started it, and then all these series decided to do the same because it was profitable. I even think they had made most of the first Hobbit movie when it changed from 2 to 3, and you can tell because the first movie just mostly follows the book, even keeping in scenes that would normally be reduced just because they had time to cover it. The second and third movie just have very long action scenes, and some of it is pure CGI (the actors do very little) because it was pasted in to pad out the runtime from 1 movie to 2. You can also tell by how some characters, like Bard, barely interact with the main cast, and instead have their own plot with side characters that the main cast never interact with: all that was added in after the main cast was mostly done.
@@garrick3727 Jackson had to film without any prep time. As the films progress he's basically winging it more and more. The battle stuff wasn't even done in the main shoot. This is why I suspect that Jackson added another part just to play catch-up. I'm sure the studio were more than happy to sell another movie. Unexpected Journey was originally going to end with the barrel sequence in the 2-film plan, so it no doubt would have been very different. A lot would have been cut to fit all that in.
I feel really bad for Peter Jackson. He and Fran Walsh did such a magnificent job on LotR and made it as true to Tolkien as possible while still making brilliant films. But with The Hobbit, when del Toro dropped out, Peter felt obligated to pick it up, otherwise the films would be moved out of New Zealand. He did the best he could- it was alright. I felt like a lot of the bullshit in it was studio mandated like the inclusion of Tauriel, or her god-awful love story with Kili, as well as the unnecessary inclusion of Legolas just as clear nostalgia-bait. There are fan edits of the films- one makes it into one 4 hour film which works a hell of a lot better, especially for a story from 1 book.
You can see it written all over his face and body language in most of the BTS footage: PJ is absolutely miserable the whole time they're making this. They're literally rewriting scenes the morning they're due to shoot, have no storyboards, props are arriving between takes, everyone is exhausted and they're having to green screen ensembles because the ridiculous deadline the FIVE studios involved have demanded means that half the cast isn't available for chunks of their allotted shooting time. And did I mention THERE WERE NO STORYBOARDS? I don't think Raptor Jesus working alongside Stanley Kubrick himself could have made a watchable movie in those circumstances.
@@EmperorPylades Capitalism ruins art confirmed. No serious art work can have 5 massive money hungry and controlling entities pulling it back and forth trying to make sure it gives them top dollar.
@@EmperorPylades thanks guy, I was about to say the Tauriel + Legolas nonsense and Thorin's actor beard are a bit of a shame but it's the overall production in general that's missing the beat IMO.
Actually, if you look into how Jackson turned his back on New Zealanders actors who wanted to have proper conditions under a union, you may realize it's more complex than what it seems. I think he is a superb director with unique visions when he is given the freedom to, and I'm sure he has his own reasons for all the decisions that he makes, we're all humans after all, but in order to keep the LoTR franchise in NZ sacrifices was made.
I don’t think my dad ever smiled again after coming home from the theatres after seeing the first Hobbit movie. That was not a good day. Ruined my dads whole month it did
the lore with gandalf and the necromancer is all canon and talked about in the lord of the rings book after the hobbit, but the best part about the hobbit is that gandalf just disappears and the characters don't know why since its more whimsical, and you don't find out until you read lord of the rings that that's where he was
Galadriel's smile before she helps pull Frodo up was one of the most beautiful moments of the movie. She didn't have much screen time at all, but her character was so memorable and powerful. That was incredible storytelling.
That whole tower sequence with Legolas inspired a sense of wonder. As in, "I wonder how anyone could have thought this nonsense belongs in a major motion picture."
Literally these movies would be a million times more watchable if they A: turned down the excessive glow filters and oversaturation B: cut out all the unnecessary cheese moments like big boy spinning in the barrel scene and homie in the women's clothes. Just like all those scenes throughout each movie
probably the millionth nerd to tell you this but gandalf hunting the necromancer is canonically what he was doing while he was absent in the hobbit and probably would have at least made the director's cut even if this was only one movie.
As a child I asked my mom, who is a die hard Tolkien fan to name all 13 dwarfs. She couldn’t even get to 10. To clarify this is a woman who read the Silmarillion multiple times. Like if she couldn’t remember than how is most of the audience? Edit: okay I asked her again recently and she got to 11
The only reason I remembered Bofur is because I liked the actor in bbc's Jekyll and out of all the dwarves he had the most face time and lines interacting with the rest, he even started the "Bilbo baggins hates" song. After reading the book for school (8th Grade?), we had to draw portraits of a dwarf and no one in the class remembered who they got and in what part of the story they were described 😂
Because the dwarves are meant to be comical background noise, not real characters (outside of Thorin). The Hobbit is a lighthearted children's story with a bunch of silly dwarves with rhyming names. It's not LotR or the Silm, with its complex characters and genealogies. The audience and readers aren't supposed to remember all their names because they aren't important to the story.
I only remember their names because of how they are introduced in the animated version. "Thorin and company, at your service. Balin, Dwalin, Fili, Kili, Dori, Nori, and Ori. Oin-sir and Gloin-sir. Call him Bifur and him Bofur." "And Bombur, at your service."
Wow, I've read the hobbit dozens of times and now that you mention it I tried to recall their names and the most I can remember is 10. Fili, Kili, Oin, Gloin, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Dwalin, Balin, and Thorin. So there are 3 I'm missing. I get the distinct impression they all have rhyming names but I can't recall them. Only a few actually matter to be fair.
Legolas being in the hobbit isn't the issue given the fact that they are in elven land and the king of the elf's is his father so it does make sense for him to be there, the issue is that he hogs screentime from characters who really deserve it.
Fucken aye man. There could of been more time developing the dwarfs more but instead they went down the nostalgia shit. Legolas was one of my favorite characters as a kid who I dressed up for Halloween 5 times and always thought he was an absolute badass but in the hobbit, it just felt like they were forcing Legolas in too many scenes to show everyone "hey!! Legolas is back".
@matthewnathe2049 he is thranduils son. He could have been in the background and just not get mentioned. I don't have an issue with him being in the movie but he didn't need a whole part. Be glad they didn't give us a young aragorn.
I understand why people don’t like the hobbit franchise, it’s no nowhere near lotr. However, I still enjoyed the movies in overall. I don’t think they’re great or terrible, but they’re fun.
Sauron was mentioned in the Hobbit though I don't know if they ever specifically name him, as he is just called the Necromancer. Gandalf talks about the Necromancer during the Hobbit and tells them that's why he had to leave (in the book)
Its ironic that the overall message of The Hobbit was a warning about greed and the whole reason The Hobbit movies were made was because of greed.
That is not true
@@parkersmith7736 what was the message then?
@@WFUNews I think they’re disagreeing on why they were made
@@DeathnoteBB I know, I wanna know what he’s arguing was the message instead lol
@@yrantiquebrand the guy is busy, give him a few hours or days.
What's sad is Richard Armitage, the guy who plays Thorin, was SO EXCITED to be a dwarf! He grew out a big bushy beard. He learned the dwarf language. He learned the entire history of the character...
Then he showed up for filming and they shaved his beard and told him they wanted Thorin to be attractive and subdued and he was so disappointed 😢
Ohhhhh god
He felt out of place among the dwarves lol he was too handsome looking
Dang
This is honestly the most tragic event to come out of this trilogy. Armitage could've had the chance to be a true dwarf if the movies had the chance to be something great. Unfortunately, they were practically born to fail 😔
Pi
As a little note, in hobbit book, Gandalf was actually dealing with the necromancer. You just don’t find that out until the end of the book and he just kinda mentions it. Then he mentions it once more when telling Frodo about the ring in fellowship.
Yah, I did not mind that he was included because he was actually part of the events of the time
Glad someone else caught that. When he shit on the idea of the necromancer in the movie I was just thinking, "the necromancer is in the book, mentioned as causing some evil behind the scenes passively, but later on in LOTR it is confirmed that the necromancer is Sauron."
@@toddmartin7030not only that but the necromancer plot is VITAL to saurons plan post war of the ring
I could've sworn there was a mention of the necromancer earlier in the book. But I do remember reading the Hobbit and going "wtf is this necromancer stuff" before my dad told me "that's Sauron" "oh ok"
@@kadebrockhausen The Necromancer was mentioned in the first chapter as having killed Thorin's father. He is also mentioned when Gandalf tells the group to not go near the south of Mirkwood because that's where his lair is.
I highly recommend the M4 fan edit. It's brilliant. Cuts it down to 4 hours by removing all the filler and making it as true to the book as possible. Really enjoyed it.
wow, thanks for the recommendation!! I just watched it and it's fantastic!
nah ill pass
Thanks !
just watched it, and it's honestly really good. thanks for the rec
Great recommendation, thanks. I watched these films again the other day and realised there was a decent film ( or 2) in there if they just cut out all the bloat.
I still can’t wrap my mind around the fact they got Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett, Christopher Lee, and Ian McKellen into a green room together to pretend to hit ghosts with sticks and give one liners
If Jackson was given more time to prepare, he might've done it on location or even gave the visual effect artist more time to finish the CGI
Christopher Lee couldn't fly so all of his scenes were done in London in front of a green screen
@@OwenTheLegend I remember crying when I read he died. I've seen most of the movies he was in. Mr. Lee was such a fantastic actor and wonderful human being. I hope he is at peace right now 🙏
The power of 💰 💴 💵 💰
As mediocre as the trilogy is, I won’t lie, that scene had my lizard brain firing on all 2 cylinders. I turned into Caveman SpongeBob for a little.
I would give anything to live in the universe where The Hobbit was one single 2 hour movie directed by Del Toro
let’s start a petition for a reboot
As much as I like del toro, I really don't think his style would've worked at all
I mightve been wrong no idea
and made in Stop Motion.
Before LOTR, he directed The Frighteners which was a commercial and critical failure. I have no clue how he convinced anyone to invest a single dollar in adapting LOTR, a book many felt was unfilmable.
@@thingsicantfind9545 He would definitely have presented a different vision of Middle Earth from Jackson, but I don't think that would have been a bad thing. The Hobbit is so different from LOTR that it should have felt almost like it belonged in a different world.
I think if the studio was desperate for another trilogy, they should’ve gone with the plan of splitting the hobbit in two and have a third movie that tied the Hobbit to Lotr. Also, everyone say thank you to Viggo Mortenson for refusing to reprsise the role of Aragorn for these movies because as he said “Aragorn isn’t in the Hobbit.” Also, I think the character would have been like, 2 at the time
He would have been like 20 or 30 actually ahah
@@johnrambo5795 If we take the book's timeline, he must have been 10 at the time of The Hobbit
I agree. The third Hobbit movie felt like fanfiction of the Hobbit. Good on the actor for standing his ground.
no, you and your mindcanon imagination can go far far away
He would be 17 , he's 87 in The Two Towers
It's weird that you chose Dwalin as your first example of poor characterization... as I feel he is easily the best characterized dwarf. Dwalin is the first dwarf to arrive at Bilbo's house and serves as the first example to the audience of the culture-clash between Bilbo and the dwarves. Dwalin is shown to be kurt, tough, and assertive. Like most dwarves, he is very direct and "to-the-point." Having been told that there would be food waiting for him by Gandalf, he immediately helps himself to Bilbo's dinner. He is demonstrated as fiercely loyal to Thorin, but values honor and integrity even above said loyalty. It is Dwalin's speech to Thorin in the third film that triggers Thorin to realize he has gone mad with dragon sickness.
Classic cosmonaut not watching the movie and complaining
I agree and the hobbit movies aren’t bad, just like Lotr Peter Jackson made the better version over Tolkien. People were never gonna like the original hobbit over Lotr anyways, which out of the two books was more popular? I think they did a better version in both cases because the hobbit was for kids.
@sercravenmohead3631 Nah sorry the hobbit movies are quite bad. I couldn't make it through any of them, despite loving LOTR. The tonal confusion, the cartoony CGI movements and visuals, the flat characters, pacing....Like it has a coupe good things about it out of ten things that make a good movie.
That said, Cosmonaut is a dumbass "edgy film critic youtuber".
Did you steal this quote from Random Film Talk's video? Lol
If over the course of 3 movies, him eating Bilbo's dinner is all that separates him from a cardboard cut out of Gimli's character before they enter Moria, he's not a strong character
There was a cut scene in Battle of the Five Armies, where Gandalf scolds Thranduil for prioritizing the shiny necklace over his son. The scene revealed that the necklace belonged to Thranduil's wife, who died fighting the forces of Anmar a long time ago, and the necklace was recovered by Dwarves later. That scene was like 20 seconds long, yet it revealed Thranduil's motivation for starting a war with the Dwarves. But nope, it got cut, because we needed more scenes with Alfred?
Yeah i wish more people knew the context of why Thranduil wanted the necklace so badly. I will never understand why that tiny clip was cut from the theatrical version. Also I thought Lee Pace was a stand out actor and one of the better aspects of these deeply flawed movies
@@luciaalicea8186 same! He's so great in it
@@luciaalicea8186 Lee Pace in these movies is how I found out I'm bisexual (and put into perspective a whole decade of confusing feelings I would get when Viggo was onscreen in the original LotR). It's the only positive thing I ever got out of these movies
I always thought it was stupid how that scene was cut but none of the other meaningless filler. So stupid.
As much meaningless filler as there was, that would at least complete the arc between Thranduil "knowing dragon fire well," and fighting the battle, ect. It's not a good arc, but at least it'd complete it. On the one hand these films are such a missed opportunity, so many people talk about "the films that could have been" with Del Toro's whimsical folky vision, but I genuinely think there basically isn't a world where WB signs off on Del Toro's vision without asking for things I hope he'd never agree to.
Love or hate this trilogy, I’m glad everyone can basically agree that Martin Freeman is like, THE perfect casting for Bilbo. Like one of the best casting choices in history if you ask me
Felix Felton, Paul Daneman, John Le Mesurier were given to the BBC radio serialization; old, forgotten and auditory. Orson Bean, Norman Bird, and Bernard Cribbins to the animated adaptations, full of whimsy and charm. And Ian Holm to the original trilogy, who above the others played Frodo in the BBC broadcasts. For within these actors were bound the strength and the will to govern over each. But they were all of them deceived, for another actor was hired.
Yet another example of WB wasting great casting on bad movies.
He was charming and charismatic in the trilogy
He was a shining bright diamond in a river of shit. God I wish del Toro hadn't pulled out
I liked the Bilbo in the LotR series better. The Hobbit Bilbo was too artificially quirky.
I would like to give credit where credit is due: I did like the idea of integrating Radagast. I can't help but think that when tasked with extending the story, Peter wanted to look at ways to integrate established lore, and bringing in another wizard to help Gandalf in the sections he is absent from the story is a clever thing to do.
Bringing in Radagast wasn't a bad idea at all. Making him a hippy stoner coward with birdshit on his face, however...
@@petervanschepen8809 I actually liked that interpretation of Radagast; the idea of a druid/wizard hybrid who's gone kinda crazy from living alone in the deep forest for so long is really interesting to me. I just wish they had made him more competent.
@@jimshotfirst4887 I can see your point about his 'druid-ness', the wizards were interesting creatures in the original literature, even those only mentioned, like the blue wizards. They seemed, to me, to be more of celestial messengers or chess pieces of the Valar. Having Radagast dumbed down, literally shit upon and used as comic relief was irritating and negated the felling that they were otherworldly beings. In fact, besides the unnecessary drama, romance and cgi, the campy slapstick humor throughout really irked me the most.
I like how for your "Guess what this dwarf's name is" you chose Bofur, literally the only dwarf I remember the name of because of his goofy hat and how sweet and adorable he is in the first movie. I wanted to see more Bofur dangit. I can name Thorin the "main character," Kili and Fili because they're the "hot dwarves" that got shoved in our faces, and Bofur. And there's that old dwarf who might be Balin or Dwalin or something? IDK.
Like you, I enjoyed the first movie a lot, and the last two were awful. I was miserable watching them. I can't remember a single moment in the last two movies that I liked. Everything that was good about the movies was in the first one.
Oh my god YES THANK YOU. When I heard him say that in the video I had to pause because Bofur is LITERALLY by far the dwarf that gets more screen time, characterization, and attention than the other dwarves (apart from Thorin, Kili, Fili, and whatnot). Also Balin!
That one is Dwalin, Balin is the old one in red who goes on to refound Moria and is Gimli's uncle.
@@comeridewithmeAEI thought Balin was Gimli’s cousin?
@@directorforplastic7929 you're right, my mistake,
Just sounds like y’all wouldn’t like a condensed Hobbit movie to begin with, if it was one movie and 2hrs I could already see y’all crying over how there wasn’t enough time to develop the characters. The Hobbit was never as good as Lotr just in the source material itself, it’s a kid’s book. I still think Peter Jackson did categorically better, I personally enjoyed the Dol Guldor scenes, bringing back Legolas, among other things because I like cool shit.
Seeing Ian McKellen having a break down over just being in a green screen ( most likely hours / days of shooting) and feeling " distressed" over the movie is heart breaking.
WB just wanted money so they hurt the actors, franchise and fan base for greed.
In terms of time it was right though, they needed to make this movie rather sooner than later, especially because of the actors aging. Although Gandalf was old anyway and we know he wasn’t exactly close to dying and Christopher Lee didn’t really need to be in the movies even though it was great to see him again, but Saruman and most other characters from Lotr were pretty superfluous. You could argue it mattered with Elrond though, who did look visibly older and is a character from the book too.
Seeing this made me so sad...
Usually WB makes bad decisions like this snoooo I'm not surprised
Spare me. Dude was getting paid millions to sit in a green room. I'd gladly switch jobs with him.
@@wonderfred it's not always about money. You think Ian doesn't have enough money for 2 lifetimes?
He broke down because if his love for the franchise and the hobbit movies shat all over it. Check the making of of the lotr trilogy and you'll see the difference
Laughing about the phrase “green prison” then becoming somber over seeing Ian McKellen break down is probably the biggest case of emotional whiplash I’ve experienced.
Yeah same. That shit hurt
Yes I felt that. Acting is really his passion, he loves people.
I read this as “green inferno” for some reason. That movie is wild and I spent 5 minutes thinking of some kind of crazy mashup before re-reading what you said
Same here, I've loved Ian since I was a kid for his role as Gandalf and just the guy himself and seeing him hurt like that just feels awful. At least the next day or smth he got a surprise from what I've read.
The Necromancer was mentioned in the Hobbit in passing and sauron was the necromancer. He was the reason why Mirkwood was becoming dark and foreboding. While it isn't explicity mentioned in the book, and arguably shouldn't have been in the movie, it can't be thrown out as completely made up. Jackson loved all of LOTR and the expanded lore around it, and probably wanted to incorporate some of that to tie the stories together better than they already were. Still all bad movies though.
It’s mentioned explicitly in lotr book 1 tho so why not try and make a sick movie out of it?
@@Insanepie There wouldn't be anything wrong with trying to make a movie out of it, other than there isn't much to go off of, but that's besides the point. The issue is that it wasn't it's own movie, it was tacked on to the already bloated Hobbit movies. It's addition added nothing to the story of the Hobbit. If it was a stand alone movie (short film would be OK) and made well, there would be no problem.
28:40 Gold in Middle Earth is a metal that was heavily affected by Morgoth, who put some corruptive potential into everything, as stated in the Similarion. Different places and materials were affected differently, such as the Undying Lands, which were barely affected (still affected, that should not be forgotten) and gold, which was very heavily affected, allowing it to easily corrupt otherwise good people.
Morgoth was basically the big baddie before Sauron, and infinitely more powerful than him. Sauron knew how to do the ring magic stuff because Morgoth invented the magic with the spell that "Made all of Middle Earth his ring"
"dragon sickness" may be able to be rationalized through the oodles of source material throughout the silmarillion and appendices and such, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a stupid fucking idea. thorin's greed was just that - greed. he was an imperfect character whose flaws in the book led to death and war. it was the nature of man (in this case a dwarf) that led to the mayhem that ensues. that was tolkien's point and to chalk it all up to "dragon sickness" not only neutered a central theme of the book, but also started/continued the trend of "he's a main character and has to be likable and heroic, therefore he can't have such a major flaw". the idea was never that thorin was some evil horrible guy. just that this is who people are and how they act, and this is what it leads to. on his deathbed he realized the folly of his greed, but it was too late and he died along with many others. tolkien's writing was incredible and the idea of a "dragon sickness" being the spark that led to this war leaves the entire thing absent a meaningful theme. it has "hollywood" written all over it and it's a symptom, but not the root cause of why these movies sucked.
@@SynsityGW Amen. It's not like he wasn't intermittently an asshole all the way through the story, just let him be an organically flawed character. Even if you simply must couch it in fantasy metaphysics come up with a better bloody name for it. Dumbest unnecessary exposition since Lucas shat out midichlorians.
@@SynsityGWKinda like the conflict between kingdoms in LotR. "Oh phew, our people are safe thanks to outsiders' help! ... but why should we help others when *they wronged us in the past?*"
It's just human nature showing its selfishness, doesn't have to be magical influence.
@@ND-nr6mx at some point hollywood stopped believing that the average movie/tv show viewer could sympathize with a character who had any major flaws. complete idiocy.
I love that Evangeline Lilly was essentially promised there wouldn’t be a love triangle, only to find out that was the only reason her character was in the movie.
I've just realised Evangeline Lily is a discount Jessica Biel... Who is a discount Kate Beckinsale
I don't know if there were scenes deleted, but I'd hardly even call it a love-triangle. Say what you will about how awful the Kili/Tauriel romance was, but Legolas' part in it is really miniscule. There's like...one brief blink-and-you'll-miss-it sentence where he mentions that Tauriel has his heart, but that's about it.
Sure, Legolas' line about Tauriel having his heart shouldn't have been there, but the thing is, Tauriel doesn't even acknowledge it. I swear, people act like the Hobbit films had a non-stop love-triangle fest going on like the Twilight films when such a love-triangle just doesn't exist.
@@retloclive9118 But that’s the thing. It WAS mentioned so even if it’s not developed much further throughout the movies, it’s still in the back of your head while watching the movie. Had it not been mentioned, then yes she would just be the love interest to the dwarf, which is still dumb to throw into the movie.
I feel so bad for her. I'm shocked her career continued after that disastrous boondoggle
@@IaMaPh1991 Don't feel bad for her. Her career is fine, and also she's an anti-vax loon.
more like the battle of the five copyright claims amiright -R
Osp! Best UA-cam Channel!
hey red
The battle of the five armies of lawyers
Ah! Two of my favorite UA-cam channels! A blessed day.
It always brightens my day when I see channels I love commenting on each other
The biggest disappointment for me was not getting to see Gandalf go ham in the battle of the five armies. It was my most anticipated moment from the books and it didn't happen, because he was too busy being captured by Sauron.
Yeah he’s supposed to be finished with Sauron by then
The thing about the Hobbit too is that Bilbo's return is another huge disconnect between movie and book. When the Fellowship went back they were so struck by PTSD and all that they weren't really able to fit in with society, both in the movie and in the book. Hell Frodo leaves. Bilbo is fine when he comes back because Bilbo didn't go on a LOTR adventure, he went on a Hobbit adventure. But in the movies they have him go on more of a LOTR type adventure, so the ending of the movie doesn't really work.
Hearing Sir Ian McKellen break down and legitimately resent the process of how the movie is being made is sad.
If only he wasn't an open pervert...
@@iamcleaver6854 Evidence?
@@-TEMPESTZ- evidence: trust me, bro
@@iamcleaver6854 bit of an homophobe, aren´t you?
@@-TEMPESTZ- homophobia
The pictures and footage of Peter Jackson wandering around the sets with his head in his hands are pretty heartbreaking.
It's too bad WB seemed intent on not only milking as much money as they could from it but also used it like a technical demo.
The irony: The Hobbit is a cautionary tale of the ruinous effect of greed and Warner Bros greed ruined The Hobbit.
Seriously. Even beyond that it seems like they WANTED it to fail. Every decision they passed down only made things more miserable and challenging for the film.
Watching Ian pretty much have a huge attack because he’s locked in a green screened room acting off no one… I couldn’t imagine being on the original trilogy and being around that magic and then having to do the hobbit. I bet those conversations between Ian and Peter were heartbreaking to try and get the film made.
I'm glad Jackson is honest about the whole production of the movie. Had they gave him more time for preparing, it could've been great
@@15Candles I don't know. I think they still would've asked for an unnecessary trilogy
The reason for the 'Bloom' in the video is due to the fact that the movie was made to be released in 3D so the video had to be brightened up to compensate for the darkness caused by the 3d glasses. Great video.
Seems everyone don’t include that this trilogi isn’t just «The Hobbit» but a lot of the appendices Tolkien wrote himself at the end of the LOTR books. It’s a meds sometimes, yes. But it’s not all fabricated filler! But, they should definatly kept it simple and not make a trilogy, or at least start the process over after Jackson returned
I feel so sorry for ian mckellen, imagine going through the frankly incredible journey of LotR triology and then having to do... this.
Must have been damn depressing.
Ya I really hate cgi/green screen rooms
Ian McKellan actually had a breakdown on set because he was mostly working with nothing.
Peter Jackson was in a bad pressure when he directed McKellen too since the entire production was rushed. Imagine if LOTR trilogy prep time was 5 months like Hobbit under Jackson, this is what it would've look like for the most part
@@Dan-ts2lz theres another clip where he falls asleep on set. he couldnt care less about this cg nonsense.
They don’t care. They get a lot of money for everything they do. If they’d be asked to stick a banana up their mouths and do chimpanzee noises throwing their own shit at each other, they wouldn’t even skip a beat
"I feel thin, sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread"
-The Hobbit
underrated
Just finished reading the hobbit and onto lotr now. This quote is exactly what i thought of too.
Great comment my friend
one thing you didn't mention that I found weird af about this movies is the quasi love affair between gandalf and galadriel, did no one else find it super awkward and weird whenever they were on screen together? like gandalf turns into a bumbling idiot whenever he's talking to her. 1) galadriel is married 2) gandalf is a maia, quite literally one of the most powerful beings in the universe in a similar tier to sauron himself.
Well I mean Gandalf is an Istari which is a subset of the Maiar which means that they are both on the same level.
@@electricpepperoni4789 that doesn't explain his behaviour in the slightest and no they are not on the same level at all, a maia is a member of the ainur which are well above any elves.
@@konguy3 Well, look at how they portrayed the brown wizard. He is running around literally being shit upon. The Maiar didn't feel otherworldly in The Hobbit at all. They at least appeared to be of the status of the high elves in the LOTR trilogy; with Gandalf the Grey feeling more corporeal at times due to his attachment to Middle Earth and its struggles. The Hobbit Films should have never introduced themes of romantic love at all.
Agreed.
Quick correction: a lot of the 'original content' wasn't made up by PJ, it's from Tolkien's unfinished work. Still added into The Hobbit unnecessarily tho
i can’t imagine what it’s like to work so hard on a video just to have it blocked by youtube for no reason im sorry marcus this video slaps
Yeah, unfortunately it's almost possible to avoid and creators who wanna stay monetized and relatively mainstream are kept on a 2 inch leash with what they can and can't do now.
Us after Marcus gets the video unlocked.
ARAGON:My friend,you bow to no one.
I didn’t know that about Sir Ian McKellen and the green screen moment. That just breaks my heart. If anyone on this earth respects those original films more than anyone, it’s him
God, imagine if Christopher Lee was still here. He probably would have just backed out.
If it's any comfort they had a "Gandalf Appreciation Day" right after that where they filled his trailer with fun Gandalf nick-nacks, and had a small celebration where the cast and crew watched LotR with him. It doesn't make up for how they still made the films, but at the very least they actually took his emotions seriously and tried to comfort him.
Christopher Lee was in the hobbit movies@@iamjackspyramidshapedhelmet
@@iamjackspyramidshapedhelmetChristopher Lee was in the Hobbit movies. Did you not watch them?
@@Satellaview1889 this makes it like 100x sadder lmao
14:39 The Necromancer (Sauron) is present in the book. The White Council drives out the Necromant out of Dol Guldur in Mirkwood. It's only mentioned, however, and not explicitly described how they did it.
Your outro is gold. Thank you.
The behind the scenes from both trilogies are fascinating. LOTR is filled with passion, top notch craftsmanship and common goal to make something special. The Hobbit is, sadly, a story of Peter Jackson having an extended mental breakdown. WB is truly a champion of totally destroying their own successful properties.
As well as trying to remove Cartoon Network shows for shitty reasons as seen nowadays.
Peter Jackson having extended mental breakdown, and the studio screwing over every kiwi actor in the movie.
I mean, Jackson never directed after this trilogy... 'nuff said.
@@madderthanever Beatles Get Back was terrific, even if he wasn't really a director
Lindsay Ellis' videos go through the behind the scenes stuff in more detail that Marcus did. Heavily recommend watching them too.
Honestly the worst part is how perfect the cast is. They did so well with what they had, they all had great chemistry with each other and so likeable but the big guys in charge kept trying to control everything and screwing it up
Theres way more to that story with the actors who played the dwarves. And really everything with these films, their production was a disaster. But the studio treated them like trash, 7 of them werent invited or flown out to the premiere of the third film.
Idk if I can even say casting is that good, when 90% of the cast is dwarves and they look like absolut dogshit, they either 1: don't look like dwarves, just small humans or 2: are a caricature to such a degree that it makes it so it doesn't even feel like we are in the same universe as LOTR. Martin Freeman is an amazing bilbo, however, he did an amazing job.
I dont care, the hot elf chick did it for me. She carried this shit big :D
Cast was far from perfect.
@@henriquerodrigues7795 that is not a casting issue tho, more of a costume/makeup department issue
dude the encounter with the necromancer did happen, it makes sense to add it when the imaginarium of Tolkien is complete and the hobbit was written befor LoTr, so obv. its not depicted. Tho i agree with most of the stuff u said
Honestly the final battle in the last movie may be unnecessary but is pretty freakin epic, especially in the extended version.
As much as Desolation Of Smaug annoyed me, the line "Papa, there are dwarves coming out of our toilet. Will they bring us luck?" absolutely killed me.
Tbh, Bofur is my favorite dwarf in the movies. Because in subtle ways Bofur shows that he actually cares about Bilbo and the crew in the first movie especially. He's the first to notice Bilbo was missing on the rock giant mountain and one of the first to reach out, and he's the one that catches Bilbo trying to leave tells him that he has a right to be there but still concedes to Bilbo's choice. Even in the third movie when kili is dying, Bofur is the one that books it through the town looking for the plant to fix it.
I figure Bofur was chosen because of the joke because yeah, he's honestly one of the more memorable ones (and had one of the more well-known actors).
Bofur DeezNuts
Plus he's cute 🫦
@made-line7627 sounds like you're interested in Bofur Dozenuts
Bofur, the 2 pretty ones, the fat one, and the grey one are the only ones I remember if you showed them to me.
15:46 you didn't have to caption the laugh but you did and it gets me every time ha ha ha
What is the name of that track he plays? I've tried to find it but the Misty Mountain song is what appears.
So it's only out of a sense of pedantry and the fact that I don't see it in any of the top comments, although i'm guessing you've seen plenty by now - Sauron is in the Hobbit because it was one of Tolkien's many hasty retcons. He has stated that originally he added a "necromancer" because the plot needed Gandalf to go away, but in Fellowship during the great exposition chapter aka the Council of Elrond Gandalf explains that the "necromancer" was, in fact, Sauron All Along, which he suspected at the time but had confirmed later (right before Aragorn admits he waterboarded Gollum for a few months). I'm not sure how to eloquently include that in a film like this as it was a plot point with no payoff in the Hobbit, but that doesn't fall under "shit added by WB". Even Tolkien admitted it was a rather clumsy retcon.
Cool , it's the other channel that talked about these movies
Ohmygosh! It's Lindsay! Missing your voice on YT and hope you're thriving in other endeavours :)
Great to hear from you Lindsay! I lament your yt departure daily, but I'm happy and proud you prioritized yourself:) wishing you all the best!
Forever a fan,
Alex
I remember seeing your original video's about this topic and I'm so glad you commented here. You did an insane amount of research for it.
@@g-alicenine those were the first videos I watched of hers years ago and I instantly subbed; they are indeed amazing.
I think that the most impressive feat that the third film accomplished is getting a 90 year old Christopher Lee to do his own fight scenes.
Why ? He did all his own stunts in revenge of the sith
@@thebodynelson6118 it's still 90 years old.
He was the most metal MFer to ever live.
@@thebodynelson6118 lmao, he didn't.
@@Lonit-be Agreed. I believe they were stunt doubles. I remember hearing that while watching a commentary video (forgot the name of the video though; duh....).
The Hobbit was never suppose to surpass LOTR, it was just to meant to complete the story. Sadly, it did not look cohesive and consistent as much as the first trilogy did. Either way, if they did something great they definitely nailed Smaug, his presence conveys terror and dread. His voice too is perfectly abysmal.
Gandalf 100% does pursue the Necromancer and he is indeed Sauron.
To be fair, Tolkien later revealed that while Gandalf was away from the group, he was indeed tracking down the Necromancer who turned out to be Sauron in disguise.
And the whole reason Gandalf was involved with the Dwarves in the first place was because he was worried Sauron might enlist Smaug into his army upon his return.
True and also besides the name of "Dragon Sickness" Tolkien did talk about how treasure that has been hoarded by a dragon has a strong corrupting influence.
@@StonedWolf666 just re-read the hobbit a couple days ago. Tolkien names “dragon sickness” as the undoing of the master of laketown. Basically he runs away with the treasure and is presumed dead of starvation in wilderland.
This leads me to believe this was just a name Tolkien had for greed as a vice. Smaug himself seems to be the embodiment of the destruction that results from greed.
This doesn’t really help the case of the Jackson movies, as taking the dragon sickness idea literally seems stupid with that in mind.
@@maxheilman5314 when I watched the movies I interpreted it as metaphorical not literal.
Yeah the stuff they added bothered me less than the stuff they changed. I didn't want three movies but the additional gandalf content was at least plausible, if clumsily done.
@@StonedWolf666 But in the movies it made little sense. They talked how Thorin fell victim to dragon sickness like his grandfather did. Except that Thrór was already obsessed with gold way before Smaug came and took over Erebor.
Dwarves in the Tolkien-universe were always known for their greed, it's just that Sauron's and Smaug's corruption made it even worse.
That final clip of the actors was so sweet it was beautiful
I had the biggest smile on my face during that part. Love that cast
It unironically made my week :,)
'That's a good name for Orlando - ezboy recliner' their banter was as funny as anything Marcus did in this excellent video. I need to seek it out and watch it in full
Just rewatched all 3 Hobbit movies again for the first time in years and completely agree with "the Hobbit movies get worse as they go one." The first one was actually better than I had remembered it, and I even liked the second one too, but neither were ANYWHERE near the LOTR trilogy. Then the third Hobbit was just outright bad. As a whole, I can only get the Hobbit trilogy a C, B- at absolute best. What's even more crazy is.... the Hobbit is STILL even better than the rings of power show lol
gandalf did actually go to dol guldur and found sauron, which then escapes to mordor to build his evil realm
If they wanted a subplot about an elf and a dwarf mending the historic rift between the two peoples and learning to love one another… well they could have just properly adapted Legolas and Gimli’s relationship in the first trilogy
sTOOOP THE WAY I CACKLED 💀💀💀💀💀
they did a pretty good job despite all the stuff they left out
Yeah they definitely left out the crucially important and dare I say most enthralling moments of the elf on dwarf,hot, hot steamy butt action that is in the original lore😢. I was devastated 😭
@@KingOfHarlots86 who knows what they got up to in Entwood after the books end
I felt they kinda did not romantically sure but to steal a line from Jay and Silent Bob "we are h3t3ros3xual life partners" (yes the 3's are on purpose....)
The fact that they got Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett, Christopher Lee, and Ian McKellen into a green room together to pretend to hit ghosts with sticks is still mind numingly dumb.
To be fair to Christopher Lee, he wasn't in the same room as the rest of them. He stayed back in London due to his age.
The Sauron arc in the Hobbit actually does have a purpose. At the time of the hobbit, Sauron in the form of the Necromancer was taking refuge at Dol Guldur. Gandalf leaves the dawarves and Bilbo to implore the white council to take measures in expelling Sauron from Dol Guldur, which they do, after which Sauron flees back into Mordor. The account isn’t in the Hobbit but it is in the history of what happened when Gandalf left the protagonists in the Hobbit. So while yeah, it doesn’t really fit the technical story of the Hobbit, I really do see why they would put it in the movie. It’s LOTR history.
You'd think they would give more screen time to Gimli's father.
It's worth noting that The Necromancer was always meant to be Sauron, or rather, the idea of Sauron as a character came about through Tolkien's audience's interest in the Necromancer's origins. In the book, Gandalf actually does leave the group explicitly to deal with the threat the Necromancer represents, alongside "other white wizards." It's not really surprising that a film adaptation of the Hobbit would delve deeper into what actually happened during that time, though I do think that they ended up handling it poorly.
Sauron wasn't always the Necromancer; in the original version of the book, 'The Necromancer' was just some guy who Gandalf had to look into, a hint that there was always more going on elsewhere in the world, and a reason to have Gandalf absent for some of the story. Nothing more. And in that same original version, Gollum offered the Ring to Bilbo as a prize for their riddle-game, rather than showing the way out. He's lying, and intends to kill Bilbo anyway, but the Gollum we know now wouldn't even toy with the idea of giving the Ring to someone else.
As the Lord of the Rings was developed, Tolkien revised the story of the Hobbit, so that Gollum became more aggressive with Bilbo and instead offers to show Bilbo the way out rather than his Ring; and when Bilbo leaves with the Ring, Gollum curses Bilbo for a thief, swearing to hate him forever. And, retroactively, 'The Necromancer' became Sauron.
These changes are explained in story as the version in which Gollum offers the Ring being Bilbo's original version of the tale, in which Bilbo wanted to make it seem as if he'd earned the Ring and that it was definitely his now. The revised version was the real tale that Gandalf eventually got out of him.
That is not what 'The Hobbit' was about, though, and Tolkien would not have approved of how horribly this was mishandled.
and in the book 3 appendices he straight up says necro is sauron.
@@whodatninja439 I think it is also said in the introduction ot fellowship.
@@Maehedrose Tolkien would not like the LOTR movies either, tho. I do not like this argument. Also he did want to change what the Hobbit was about with making it darker and tying it to LOTR directly but I think his editor convinced him that it was a shit idea and he stopped but we got the info of the council fighting Sauron similiar to the Hobbit movies and Gandalf thinking Smaug will work with Sauron and that being his motivation for helping the dwarfs (the Bree scene in the movie is a short story that Tolkien wrote later to put the two together). The Hobbit movies are still a bad adaptation.
I still remember watching the dwarves sing in the first one and got so excited for what was to come. It was such a cool way to kick it off and I wish they kept that connection between all the dwarves more centered throughout.
The fact we never got the full song was a crime. I still love that first trailer
I knew this Trilogy would be garbage the moment I saw that Thorin didn't have a big white beard, a blue hood, and a silver tassel.
I also read the Hobbit. My favourite fun fact is that in the books, in the final battle, Bilbo just trips and hits his head on a rock with the ring on, sleeping throu the entire battle. I find that hilarious.
I agree with you… mostly. I think that adding the bits with the White Council at Dol Guldur and the Necromancer are great additions, and really help to connect the stories of the hobbit and LOTR together. They may not be in the hook, but they are canon in the universe
I agree. Jackson is trying to give a good reason why Gandalf left the dwarves for a while.
I...would say that they *could* have been great additions, but the execution was terrible. It's way too much high action, way too campy, it comes off as ridiculous to me. The way everybody else feels about Legolas climbing falling rocks (not actually impossible, remember how he can walk on top of soft snow?) is the way I feel watching Saruman go all Ninja Gaiden.
@@ryankwon8785 And it works because that was what actually happened in the same timeline. The Necromancer ordeak was settled the same time as the Dwarves and Hobbit adventure happened.
The thing I hate the most about the Five Armies is how all the dwarves suited up in cool armour, but then they swap to their old outfits for no reason when they are CHARGING FIRST to battle!
The line of eisenfoot was pushed back and the company of Thorin did clearly not think that thorins gonna change his mind so they puttet it off with no hope but I’m the last minute thorin decided to be Party of the battle and they didn’t have enough time to put on the armour as the orcs were chasing
don't forgot the elves jumping over the perfectly solid dwarven phalanx to their own deaths, for no god damn reason
hahaha! I had the same tought when I first watched the movie
Okay, Im not really a regular commenter, but I can’t help but express the tragedy that Del Toro wasn’t able to direct the Hobbit. While officially he “left,” I can’t help but think Del Toro left because of creative differences. (If you watch any interviews where they ask him about it, it really seems like he was sad about leaving too) His care and devotion to children’s tales and the magic in them would have made a wonderful, iconic addition to a beloved series. I imagine that it would have balanced the nostalgia of LOTR while still being its own thing.
Anyways I will always be sad about the lost potential of Del Toro and the Hobbit.
Didn't Del Toro left because of MGM's bankruptcy that caused the movie to be delayed many times? It drove him nuts for that, he was ready to shoot the movie but MGM and WB hadn't gave him a greenlight because of MGM's problem. Del Toro can't wait for another year so he instead left
It would have been good, since they obviously wanted and needed the Hobbit to the lord of the rings to explain more about Gandalfs motivations. He was in the North because he believed Sauron to be the necromancer. He was afraid of a possible alliance between Smaug and Sauron because that would have made the battles in the South almost impossible to win., with Sauron united to a flying fire spewing dragon. The reason for the Orc attack and the battle of the five Armies fromSaurons side was to weaken the North so he could take it basically without resistance. Later he also learned about the ring found by baggins, Shire, ... so Tolkien himself linked the bedtimestory logically and geographically to the lotr. He also got the peace of Lore, why the Sindarin woodelves and the dwarves hated each other into the Hobbit. Even if the story about the Nauglumir and the death of king Thingol belonged in the first age and the Silmarillipn. But part of the story bungle lies in Tolkiens redconning the Hobbit himself in order to make it fit into the wider Legendarium.
Well said.
There are fan cut versions or the movies, where they just left the good bits and reduce it to 1 or 2 movies, really recommend those, makes it waaaay better
As lindsay ellis pointed out in her in-depth review, Evangeline Lilly wanted to be in the movie on the one condition that she wasn't forced into a love-triangle. Which the studio promised they wouldn't do. And then did it anyways. Thanks WB.
Also it's crazy to me that the movies are sitting on a 7.8~ on IMDB.
I watched those videos when they came out but had never seen Lost, but now after watching Billiam's unhinged lost videos I know the context of her being Kate. I can only imagine how infuriating it was for her to get to be in The Hobbit on the stipulation that she not be used for cheap relationship suspense the same way she was all throughout Lost, only to be shoved into it once again by men who love money far more than well-written women.
Yeah for movies which are considered bad by a lot of people, it has a pretty good rating on imdb. Not good as the lotr imdb rating but still good.
In the original video before WB's continuous stupidity and greed got it taken down, what happened to Evangeline Lilly in this movie is what I told someone stuck out to me the most. Of all crappy forced romance subplots in media, that particular subplot still manages to be one of the worst, which is saying *a lot* given how annoyingly commonplace it is. This trilogy basically wasted the talents of everyone it in, but I feel like she got it the worst of basically anyone overall save for maybe Lee Pace.
IMDB's ratings are inflated by fake accounts and those in the industry. It doesn't matter how bad a movie is, everyone involved in the industry will pop in and give it glowing reviews.
Thor: Love and Thunder has a 6.3 and I wouldn't inflict that movie on anyone. While The Hobbit trilogy is a bit of a drawn out mess, they're not bad movies, they're just not very good.
IMDB ratings are always slightly high but compared to other movies 7.8 os fairly accurate. The real crime is that 6.3
29:45 my favorite part is how in this scene they put the Kili/Tauriel love confession immediately after a bunch of shots of Laketown citizens running around screaming and dying and weeping while searching for their lost or dead loved ones. And then during the love confession you can still hear screams of terror in the background
In a good movie that kind of juxtaposition would have meaning. In this movie all it means is a cry for help
@@Lishadra exactly lol
That’s what love sounds like.
Screaming and then silence.
You can almost feel the romance in the air.
I mean, that could work. A love confession after being in a dire situation is a well established trope, it's fine. It just doesn't work for that particular pairing because it's on a fucking speed run. It's like the 3rd time they've met, so a love confession feels... empty? Unearned? There's no emotional response to it.
The thing is, aside from tauriel and a few minor changes, a lot of these storys werent made up.
Azog was real, and he was also the one who killed Thorin.
The war of Kazad-Dum also happened.
The white councel also attacks Dol-Goldur and repels Sauron around the time of the Hobbit.
No. Bolg killed Thorin. Azog Was killed in Moria by Dain.
@@johnrambo5795 Who cares, that’s not enough to shit on a movie bruh
Was sick in bed the other day and decided to watch the extended lotr trilogy and still love it, they really caught lightning in the bottle with them, could not get into the hobbit trilogy just wasn’t the same, I still got chills as I did when I saw it in theaters when gandalf and Eomer rode down the mountain with the massive army at the battle of helms deep fucking awesome, battle of the five armies when Thorin came out of the mountain after coming back to his senses just had me like meh who cares, I actually fell asleep in the theater
Happy to see you were able to get this re-uploaded, I was worried it would stay blocked
Why it was blocked???
@@PanthalassaRo he made a community post about what happened
In four minutes you've got 43 likes. Sure you're not s bot??
@@PanthalassaRo bullshit copyright claim.
UA-cam allows people and companies to file copyright claims against videos and even if the video is clearly fair use UA-cam will still take the video down.
I was so upset when it was taken down cause I got about half way then stopped cause I had to do other things and was depressed I didn't finish it
Glad to see it up
It's a shame that Warner Bros and MGM gave Peter Jackson very short time for preparation after Guillermo Del Toro left the production. It's the main reason why The Hobbit trilogy didn't do well. He had a 2 and a half year of prep for LOTR and then 5 months prep for Hobbit, I can imagine how stressful that was for him. But honestly, I still respect Jackson for doing his best in that short prep time and made the movie that's atleast watchable enough
I love Peter Jackson trilogy and I love the artistic LIBERTY he took in EMBELLISHING THE FUGGIN STORY.
He is a FUGGIN GENIUS 🐸
⚔️
I'm sorry, FIVE MONTHS? hats off to him for even creating something that wasn't as bad as it could have been, that amount of time is outrageous 😭😭😭😭😭
@@KitKat-sv9qp the average pre-production time is typically 8-9 months for ONE film it's absolutely insane that and a testament to his talent that there's any good moments in these films
@@KitKat-sv9qp Yes, May 2010 was when Del Toro left, from June to October, WB was in talks with Jackson to take over, on October he signed on to direct not one but three Hobbit films. He and his team began shooting in March 2011, WB couldn't afford to delay the movie for more time because the money has been spent on the previous production that Del Toro was involved
@@KitKat-sv9qp During filming of what became The Battle of the Five Armies Peter Jackson recalls,
"I got no storyboards. I don't know what the hell I'm doing." Basically no preparation. He also revealed that the scripts were never satisfactory because he needed to create something in less than a year before filming. It also explains the increased, LoTR also had blue/green screen work too, usage of composites in The Hobbit trilogy. Because production was rushed most of the work needed to be done in post.
If Fellowship can cut out Tom Bombadil, the Hobbit could have been one film.
Smartassing: Both the Necromancer as well as Azog the goblin were mentioned in the original book.
The world needed Martin Freeman as Bilbo. The world needed the Bilbo-Gollum scene. The world needed the Bilbo-Smaug scene. The world really didn't need the ~6 additional hours around these things.
WAAAAAmbulance.
smaug was the only good part imo
Kinda feels excessive to me, all these people complaining about the Hobbit movies. I recently rewatched them, and they're not half as bad as everyone claim. I'd rather sit through all of them than watch generic Superhero movie #85.
@deedsofdecapitation7477 me too, i like the two first, but i never rewatch the last one though
The first movie was my introduction in the tolkien verse and I'm liking it still today@@magnusgranskau7487
It's totally mind blowing that it takes LESS time to read the book than watch the trilogy.
Is that a bad thing?
@@sercravenmohead3631 ye sorta, it never takes longer to watch a movie adaptation of a book, just shows how much they milked the f**k outta these movies
Yeah especially since I've read the book multiple times since these were all released, and not once am I like "man, I wish we could see what Alfred's up to during this, I wanna see more unibrow guy"
@@sercravenmohead3631obviously, yes.
It takes the average person much much much longer to read a book than to watch any of these movies. 🤦🏾♀️ Think.
Where can I find an edit of these movies that cuts out all the extraneous bullshit that was added in to pad it out and only has what was in the book?
Great video, btw.
If you like the book and own copies of the Hobbit films, you should look up M4's Hobbit fan edit. He cut out all the stuff that wasn't in the book and what's left is a 4-hour cut that in my opinion, fits in with the LOTR Extended Cuts. It's really professional quality visual and sound and he even digitally altered some shots to fit better. I was really disappointed with 'The Lord of the Rings Prequel Trilogy' too and M4 proved there was a good movie underneath.
Fun fact, in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Orlando Bloom rarely knew what was going on in any given scene, that's why he so often looks goofy and/or lost lol my favorite is actually the scene you make fun of when they're about to fight in front of the Black Gates, he just looks so curious, like "death means nothing, what is Mordor like???" It just screams "immortal being who couldn't give less f*cks if you paid him" 😂
and the colored contac's bothered him so much he wouldnt wear them at one point, its why you see some scenes where his eyes are different.
I kind of always liked his relaxed nature as it gives his Helm's Deep scene more meaning when he was no longer able to hide his emotions. It's also made his scene at the black gates better as Aragorn was right and they survived a hopeless situation, he was probably content dying with his company similarly to how Aragorn would die for his people. Never understood why people would want a 3000 year old being to behave with human emotions to begin with, even though elves mature differently a 50 year old human has to be the equivalent to a elven child emotionally.
He's just a shitty actor
Immortal, not invincible. There's a difference. Elves can and did die from violence and extreme despair. Many died during the first age in the war against Morgoth
@@rykehuss3435 Yeah but death doesn't mean as much when you know you are going to the Halls of Mandos to eventually be reembodied and live in Valinor.
My biggest gripe with the story in this trilogy is the orcs. In the book, Gandalf kills the Goblin King, which causes them to show up multiple times later, including the battle of five armies, to avenge their murdered king. *That makes sense.* Their exclusion from the third movie has always bothered me.
Not to mention the sand worms from Arakis! Aaargh!
But goblins did show up in the battle of the five armies ahead of bolg
I think that what did not help the trilogy is the fact that they did not have a diverse cast of different ethnicity. They should've had black, Asian and Hispanic dwarfs. Bilbo should've had a side story of him struggling with his homosexuality. What really would have improved tolkiens story is if they added a deeper layer of allegory that reflected modern political issues we face today.
@@diaryofanaddict9637 lol
@@diaryofanaddict9637 tolkien would have LOVED this idea!
I would have been perfectly fine with Legolas making a cameo in the battle of the 5 armies. He was probably there in the original story.
I dont know what is more entertaining...that people think the hobbit trilogy is garbage or just the simple fact people get so rabid about it when you tell them that it is actually good.
I have never understood why Azog was the villain of these films because in the books he’s dead
So if they had to have a more definitive villain beyond Smaug I’m not sure why they didn’t just have Bolg (Azog’s son) be the main villain because coming after the Dwarves to avenge your father is more compelling than Azog seeking revenge for having his arm cut off
He probably didn't sound as cool?
that's a really shit reason and an even worse excuse to not follow and deviate from the source material but that is very much on par with the level of rationale that seems to have been used in the making of most of these movies
I always thought that too. It's been a whole since I read The Hobbit but I believe Bolg is in the book. Azog is in the appendices for LOTR. They changed a lot. Bilbo is like 60 in the book. Thorin is even older. And Bilbo is degraded to sidekick in the movies. I do think a lot of this was studio interference but PJ didn't want to do this either. His heart wasn't in it.
@@rivendelldaughter He wanted to do it, but a producer at New Line had beef with him, so said producer wanted to make these movies without PJ at the helm. That's why they got GDT. When GDT backed out because production was taking too long, no other competent director cared to do it except PJ, so New Line had to go with him. Which is probably why he wasn't afforded more time.
thery just should have gave another name to the orc leader
@Motsognir I know all of this actually. He didn't want to do it. But he had to. His heart wasn't in it. And I'm not convinced that's why GDT backed out. The way he was about the project and his passion. I think this was just the Hollywood answer.
You could literally depict the battle of the five armies for 3-5 mins from Bilbo's perspective and it being like a horrific ww1 through the trenches "don't know what the hell is going on" sequence. Would have made it different from LOTR at least and would have Biblo as our perspective character (you know, the title character).
It's almost as if the battle is a metaphor for WW1 and a commentary on how pointless the horrors of war can be, and was portrayed in the source material as such intentionally by a guy who had seen it in person.
OH WAIT
Which was also basically what happened in the book, then he gets knocked out.
Isnt it known that the necromancer in the book was later to be told Sauron all along?
The Hobbit Trilogy: They're owned by Warners Bros...
Amazon: Just you wait.
The funniest thing about these movies is how they actually impacted and changed New Zealand labor unions. No seriously, these movies genuinely affected the unions because of their production.
Lindsay Ellis does a great series of videos about this.
Can I have a very quick note on which way did it go? WHat exactly happened?
@@TheWinjin he had most to all his scenes isolated in green screen and he felt really sad since he wanted to interact with human beings. Like. Seriously, they made him deprived of human interaction, next day they thre a Gandalf appreciation day tho with old props from LOTR and other stuff to make him feel better tho
Lindsay Ellis did a really good deep dive on why these movies ended up the way they did. I’d recommend watching that after this for even more context.
God, I miss her.
@@admiralfrancis8424 She’s on Nebula now. She recently talked about E.T
@@Kicksncoffee1983 the best part is you don't even need a nebula subscription, you just need to be on her patreon for $2 a month, which is something even a broke college student like me can afford. i can't thank her enough for that.
@@Kicksncoffee1983 Thanks, I didn't know she was on Nebula.
@@ariellelyonsnebula subscription is like a dollar a month. It is cheaper and definitely worth it
The mere thought of Ian McKellen having a breakdown is truly soul crushing.
can we give ian mckellen and martin freeman another chance to make this movie. As a fun jovial bedtime story like it should be? I want them to have that happy ending
Warner Bros could have easily split the Hobbit into two movies, with the first movie ending after they are rescued by the eagles, or, alternatively, after they arrive in Erebor, if you want to devote a lot of time to the Battle of Five Armies. Splitting it three just unnecessarily drags the story out. I like Lindsay Ellis's comparison to Bilbo's analogy of feeling like butter stretched too thin over a slice of bread.
It was scripted as a 2 parter, part one ending with the barrel sequence. Jackson wanted the extra film, according to him. While he claimed it worked better that way, I think the truth is that he was so far behind schedule that an extra film and an extra year was desperately needed to finish at all.
@@Henez89 no, Jackson never wanted a third film. He always wanted a Duology, Warner Bros forced him to make a trilogy in an attempt to replicate the success of Lord of the Rings. In fact, the ending of Desolation of Smaug had to rewritten hastily due to this coming late into production, iirc.
@@qzilla5102 Jackson claimed to want a 3rd film when it was announced (by him) and never suggested otherwise. I've never seen anyone say it was a studio decision in the years since. Looking at the production it is clear they were never going to get things done in time. A 3rd film gave them an extra year to finish.
When the media were first talking about The Hobbit, it was 2 movies. There was this whole thing in this time period of making the last installment two movies. We saw it with this, The Hunger Games, Twilight, Harry Potter. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find they are all Warner Bros, but I can't be bothered to look it up. I think Harry Potter started it, and then all these series decided to do the same because it was profitable. I even think they had made most of the first Hobbit movie when it changed from 2 to 3, and you can tell because the first movie just mostly follows the book, even keeping in scenes that would normally be reduced just because they had time to cover it. The second and third movie just have very long action scenes, and some of it is pure CGI (the actors do very little) because it was pasted in to pad out the runtime from 1 movie to 2. You can also tell by how some characters, like Bard, barely interact with the main cast, and instead have their own plot with side characters that the main cast never interact with: all that was added in after the main cast was mostly done.
@@garrick3727 Jackson had to film without any prep time. As the films progress he's basically winging it more and more. The battle stuff wasn't even done in the main shoot. This is why I suspect that Jackson added another part just to play catch-up. I'm sure the studio were more than happy to sell another movie.
Unexpected Journey was originally going to end with the barrel sequence in the 2-film plan, so it no doubt would have been very different. A lot would have been cut to fit all that in.
I feel really bad for Peter Jackson. He and Fran Walsh did such a magnificent job on LotR and made it as true to Tolkien as possible while still making brilliant films. But with The Hobbit, when del Toro dropped out, Peter felt obligated to pick it up, otherwise the films would be moved out of New Zealand. He did the best he could- it was alright. I felt like a lot of the bullshit in it was studio mandated like the inclusion of Tauriel, or her god-awful love story with Kili, as well as the unnecessary inclusion of Legolas just as clear nostalgia-bait. There are fan edits of the films- one makes it into one 4 hour film which works a hell of a lot better, especially for a story from 1 book.
You can see it written all over his face and body language in most of the BTS footage: PJ is absolutely miserable the whole time they're making this. They're literally rewriting scenes the morning they're due to shoot, have no storyboards, props are arriving between takes, everyone is exhausted and they're having to green screen ensembles because the ridiculous deadline the FIVE studios involved have demanded means that half the cast isn't available for chunks of their allotted shooting time. And did I mention THERE WERE NO STORYBOARDS? I don't think Raptor Jesus working alongside Stanley Kubrick himself could have made a watchable movie in those circumstances.
@@EmperorPylades Capitalism ruins art confirmed. No serious art work can have 5 massive money hungry and controlling entities pulling it back and forth trying to make sure it gives them top dollar.
@@EmperorPylades thanks guy, I was about to say the Tauriel + Legolas nonsense and Thorin's actor beard are a bit of a shame but it's the overall production in general that's missing the beat IMO.
If he had integrity then he would have refused to make the film.
Actually, if you look into how Jackson turned his back on New Zealanders actors who wanted to have proper conditions under a union, you may realize it's more complex than what it seems. I think he is a superb director with unique visions when he is given the freedom to, and I'm sure he has his own reasons for all the decisions that he makes, we're all humans after all, but in order to keep the LoTR franchise in NZ sacrifices was made.
I don’t think my dad ever smiled again after coming home from the theatres after seeing the first Hobbit movie. That was not a good day. Ruined my dads whole month it did
the lore with gandalf and the necromancer is all canon and talked about in the lord of the rings book after the hobbit, but the best part about the hobbit is that gandalf just disappears and the characters don't know why since its more whimsical, and you don't find out until you read lord of the rings that that's where he was
Galadriel's smile before she helps pull Frodo up was one of the most beautiful moments of the movie. She didn't have much screen time at all, but her character was so memorable and powerful. That was incredible storytelling.
That is a very brief, but beautiful moment in the LOTR. It really shows Galadriel was with Frodo, in his darkest hour.
And then rings of power happened...
@@dirtnbloodnotherkids Well that show has nothing to do with the PJ movies so it doesn't really ruin THIS Galadriel
Cateblanchett4life
That whole tower sequence with Legolas inspired a sense of wonder. As in, "I wonder how anyone could have thought this nonsense belongs in a major motion picture."
Thanks for watching and commenting text me I have something special for you 🎁🎁
7:12 Terry Pratchett had it right. All dwarves should have luscious beards. Every single one.
is there anywhere i can watch the extended versions with alfred cut
The cast reunion is so great, shows how much they all care for those movies and they where just the right choice.
That brief bit at the end with the actors just chilling in a video call brought me more joy than all 3 of these movies combined.
💯
Gandalf the gay
I wasn’t expecting that and have just been sitting here grinning like an idiot, silently laughing
Literally these movies would be a million times more watchable if they
A: turned down the excessive glow filters and oversaturation
B: cut out all the unnecessary cheese moments like big boy spinning in the barrel scene and homie in the women's clothes. Just like all those scenes throughout each movie
probably the millionth nerd to tell you this but gandalf hunting the necromancer is canonically what he was doing while he was absent in the hobbit and probably would have at least made the director's cut even if this was only one movie.
As a child I asked my mom, who is a die hard Tolkien fan to name all 13 dwarfs. She couldn’t even get to 10. To clarify this is a woman who read the Silmarillion multiple times. Like if she couldn’t remember than how is most of the audience?
Edit: okay I asked her again recently and she got to 11
The only reason I remembered Bofur is because I liked the actor in bbc's Jekyll and out of all the dwarves he had the most face time and lines interacting with the rest, he even started the "Bilbo baggins hates" song.
After reading the book for school (8th Grade?), we had to draw portraits of a dwarf and no one in the class remembered who they got and in what part of the story they were described 😂
Because the dwarves are meant to be comical background noise, not real characters (outside of Thorin). The Hobbit is a lighthearted children's story with a bunch of silly dwarves with rhyming names. It's not LotR or the Silm, with its complex characters and genealogies. The audience and readers aren't supposed to remember all their names because they aren't important to the story.
I only remember their names because of how they are introduced in the animated version. "Thorin and company, at your service. Balin, Dwalin, Fili, Kili, Dori, Nori, and Ori. Oin-sir and Gloin-sir. Call him Bifur and him Bofur." "And Bombur, at your service."
I remembered Dwalin (the bald one) since he's played by Graham McTavish 💀
Wow, I've read the hobbit dozens of times and now that you mention it I tried to recall their names and the most I can remember is 10. Fili, Kili, Oin, Gloin, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur, Dwalin, Balin, and Thorin. So there are 3 I'm missing. I get the distinct impression they all have rhyming names but I can't recall them. Only a few actually matter to be fair.
Legolas being in the hobbit isn't the issue given the fact that they are in elven land and the king of the elf's is his father so it does make sense for him to be there, the issue is that he hogs screentime from characters who really deserve it.
Fucken aye man. There could of been more time developing the dwarfs more but instead they went down the nostalgia shit. Legolas was one of my favorite characters as a kid who I dressed up for Halloween 5 times and always thought he was an absolute badass but in the hobbit, it just felt like they were forcing Legolas in too many scenes to show everyone "hey!! Legolas is back".
Why Legolas is cool, never really felt like characters were robbed of screen time.
They probably thought they could do more justice to his character by giving him the screentime he missed in lotr. But Legolas is a block of wood.
No it doesn't make sense since Legolas was never in the Hobbit, he is only in the movie to sell tickets and move merchandise.
@matthewnathe2049 he is thranduils son. He could have been in the background and just not get mentioned. I don't have an issue with him being in the movie but he didn't need a whole part. Be glad they didn't give us a young aragorn.
I understand why people don’t like the hobbit franchise, it’s no nowhere near lotr. However, I still enjoyed the movies in overall. I don’t think they’re great or terrible, but they’re fun.
Yeah you don’t always have to look at it from a critical aspect. If you enjoy the movie that’s what matters
Sauron was mentioned in the Hobbit though I don't know if they ever specifically name him, as he is just called the Necromancer. Gandalf talks about the Necromancer during the Hobbit and tells them that's why he had to leave (in the book)