To me the most important thing about Tolkien is language. Tolkien uses archaic language to great effect and I think the LOTR movies do a great job mimicking that style. My problem with WOTR is that they recycled so much of the LOTR dialogue (“eye is fixed” is one example). It was like wearing a straight jacket. There are plenty of creative ways to use archaic language but we were denied that by the constant “callback” to LOTR movie dialogue.
The Eagles saved young Huor and Hurin in the Silmarillion once, so I do not think that they completely ignore regular humans. Also, in the Hobbit they say that they steal sheep from humans, so if some human wants to give them meat, they probably will accept it. I'd actually prefer if the the Eagles would play a bigger role in the movie, I pretty liked them.
Haleth falling in Edoras is accurate, Hama reached Hornburg with Helm and was even joining parties gathering provisions for the impending siege but in one of those foraging excursions, his party went missing, including him.
Youre more forgiving than I am. Making nothing of Frealaf, who actually kilked Wulf so should be a major event; putting in the Eagles who never apoear in the source unless I am misremembering; making so much of Hera who was a nameless one-liner; having Heln run from the gates of the Deep and then frozen to desth (which at least is right)... and many more. Thanls gor watching for me 🙂
I mean, it's a trade, he loses his moment of killing Wulf, but he gets to be the one who leads the Rohirrim to defeat the Dunlendings without Gondorian troops.
Mellon Geek: Well, I wasn't inclined to watch this movie. But after watching your review, I'll give it a chance--although, on my income, I'll have to wait till it's online. Excellent, as always, dear Loremaster. Namarie.
I’ve heard from multiple channels (that for context, were critical of the Rings of Power) that WOTRH wasn’t bad, and not nearly as woke or virtue signaling as they feared it might be. I’ll have to see it to make my own opinion. Unlike the live action shows that try to be in the same universe, with animation (and this being a fairly disconnected story) I can always think of this as it’s own thing and it shouldn’t affect any other story going forward. Kinda like how I can acknowledge and still enjoy the Rankin Bass movies (although I think their Hobbit movie was 10 times better than the Peter Jackson version). It’s too bad studios have lost the trust of so many fans, that (with good reason) we approach new films with trepidation rather than excitement. Not just with LOTR, but with other franchises as well.
The movie was • made purely to retain the LotR rights, and • drawn by SIXTY studios mostly in places like Indonesia working for cents per hour because Japan's industry is overworked and too expensive for them. Just by those two metrics I can't justify seeing this, even if it wasn't ugly and looked so choppy like it was 4 frames per second. This is not a movie made for art, or the love of the source material.
I quite enjoyed it. It made quite a few deviations from the source material, but that didn't bother me too much, I have no objection to these things going their own way. Hera is obviously an invention of the writers, but that didn't make me annoyed, because I'm not a tinfoil hat neckbeard who thinks that Marxistfeministwokenazis are trying to take over the world by putting women in films. 6/10, not in a hurry ro rewatch, better than ROP, some good moments.
Saw the extended preview when watching another movie at the theater a couple weeks back. It convinced me that my original decision to pass was absolutely correct. Two things I dislike mashed together: girl bosses and Japanimation. Sprinkle in the desecration of Tolkien and it's easy to skip.
@@Maverick.D. Doesn't matter, these people love their delusional ideologies and will latch onto that rather than the actual nuances and reasons for why something doesn't perform well. Genuine criticisms and notes for improvements will be disregarded by these people on favor of their culture wars. And unfortunately they make that their entire personality oftentimes, so even trying to ignore them won't work as they make it their life's mission to ahove their politics down everyone's throats at any and every opportunity. We are all worse off for their bullshit.
I think that armor of Helm and his sons in the movie is pretty similar (especially considering stylistic differences) to the armor Theoden is wearing in PJ movies (there is a close look of that armor when Theoden is being armored during the battle of Helm's Deep). I am not sure what type of armor this armor supposed to be, but probably so-called "cuir bouilli" - early plate armor made out of hardened leather, or maybe segmented armor akin to Roman lorica segmentata, but covered in leather.
Haven’t seen it yet. Honestly no idea when I’ll go see it. For some reason I’m not super excited and it has nothing to do with hating adaptations. I just don’t have the urge to see it just yet.
I have given up hope for getting any accurate adaptions from Hollywood these days of ANY literary source. Peter Jackson's trilogy the last great adaption as far as I'm concerned and that's sad because I was really excited for this when it was announced. Then I found out what they were doing to it and my excitement vanished.
I didnt see hera as a girl boss. She gets her ass handed to her a couple of times and even was about to consent to marry him. And that her attitude torwards marriage and rulers was stated from the beginning. The line about no stories about hera in the beginning was the move acknowledging the written lore, not taking a swipe at tolkien. If anything I wanted to see why shes later ommitted from the history
Neither did I perceive her as bossy. She seemed strangely unaffected though by all the death and despair and hard to relate to for her presented flawlessness.
Damn is the word I was thinking of. I realize that’s nothing for most people these days but it’s a pretty serious word and some people would rather their kids not start repeating it.
I really don’t understand the whole thing with the Eagles… I mean, it makes sense why Gondor would revere them (being Dúnedain and all), but Tolkien clearly states that the Northmen fear the eagles. This takes place only about 200 years after the founding of Rohan as a kingdom so there should still be fear and mistrust there imo.
I think this is a fair review. I like anime so I enjoyed it more. I've no problem with Hera being the story focus. As a blank canvas, she's a writers dream. This is the story of Helm through the eyes of his daughter. I'd prefer a different name for her however., Hera is not Anglo Saxon enough. Yes, some unnecessary additions such as the Eagles and the Watcher in the Water. Tolkien wrote a 2 page summery with very little detail or characterisation. The film, on a whole, fleshed it out into a good movie narrative. I think your criticisms are valid although I disagree with some. Those not watching it simply because of Hera are missing out sadly
Hera really isn't the issue of the film, I think it should have been shorter - could have edited out 30 minutes or so, and I agree with your other points
I'd agree with that mostly though I think the film would be better if most of what happens between Helm's demise and Wulf's death would have been cut out, the film became rather tiring at that point
@djohnston6856 For the sake of Feminism, ( a hybrid form of Marxism... which is bedfellows of Communism). So, no. No further grip of the issue is needed. You should read more.
@PleaseNThankYou Marxism had existed long before feminism and had only influences on feminism within the USSR (1920s-1990s). Marxism demands a stateless, classless society. Feminism (at the end of the day) supports the equality in opportunity and treatment of the sexes in general. Feminism supported this ideal from the 1890s-1920s when women wanted to vote. You should be the one reading more instead of using culture war language.
How on earth could Helm be the protagonist if he dies before the climax?!? WoTR has as many plot deviations as Jackson's Two Towers?!? Are you mad! Elves at Helms Deep, Theoden choosing to evacuate Edoras and hide in Helms Deep, the warg attack and Aragorn being separated, Eomer's entirely different plot, the entmoot choosing not to go to war, the character assassination of Faramir, no Shelob... The list goes on. The only "D-word" your viewers need to watch out for is you. Pull your head in
Helm calls Freca fat before he asks for Hera to marry Wulf, Frealaf is basically banished, he doesn’t kill Wulf, who doesn’t die at Edoras, Hera is kidnapped, Gondor isn’t invaded, Wulf pulls all the strings rather than opportunistically taking advantage of the invasion by others, a lord in Rohan turns traitor, eagles get involved, Helm gets wounded and mysteriously disappears before his rampage, etc. as I mentioned in my video I’m not comparing characterization differences because there’s nothing about most of the characters in the book for this story, but there are TONS of plot deviations. I didn’t even list them all. So maybe stop making a fool of yourself.
Shhhh!!!! After the book, the Sacred Peter Jackson Trilogy is the most important part of Middle-Earth! It is perfect in every way and will save western civilization from girlbosses! (I agree: this movie was waaaay more faithful/respectful to it's 1 page of source text than the PJ trilogy, which I have never liked).
The name they invented for her was pretty brainless. They seem to have taken the name of the Greek goddess rather than use names derived from Old English as Tolkien did. It's amateurish.
They were not actually intending to reference the Greek goddess, more so trying to create a name that sounded Rohanish. Philippa Boyens gave a pretty good explanation to this in one of the interviews. But I do agree they could’ve done better.
Héra (with an acute, also written as Hēra, with macron, in a more modern spelling) is a reasonable Anglo-Saxon name which is good enough for a princess of Rohan. And it alliterates with the name of her father, according to the naming customs of Rohirrim. It comes either from "hēra", an Anglo-Saxon word that means "follower, servant" or from "hēre", an Anglo-Saxon word that means “dignity, majesty or greatness”.
To be fair (as this was a good point though we don't see it often and it was Tolkien himself who did it) Tolkien also gave the Hobbits some Spanish names which seems uncommon for them, for example BILBO (BILBAO), SANCHO, ETC... But again that was Tolkien who did that...
No. It's Germanic and, in fact, is named after an Icelandic actress. Any resemblance to the Greek word is coincidence that only rings in the ears of those who lack any erudition.
@@TolkienLorePodcast Ok, that is funny, I agree that it is not very Tolkienesce. I wonder though, will you Americans not soon run out of letters for all the words you regard as taboo?
@@TolkienLorePodcast Exposed, hm, like words have a radiant harmfull effect. But to me it seems you are rapidly expanding the number of words that are forbidden
@persallnas5408 stop and think a minute. A lot of Tolkien fans are Catholic, or at least Christian, and from their perspective that word has a very real, very serious meaning and they don’t want their kids using it because of that meaning.
Have not been able to see the movie yet, but it does seem as though it does Fréaláf dirty. 1) He can take charge of the Rohirrim at Dunharrow without being banished first; that seemed unnecessary. 2) He's kinda robbed of what should be his big moment. Am I wrong? I still expect to (mostly) like the film; but I don't know that I'll love it.
In the source material (which, by the way, is less than three pages long) the killing of Wulf does not end the war, and in the movie Fréaláf does save the day. Sure, Héra comes up with the plan, but without Fréaláf, the best that Héra would have accomplished would have been delaying the slaughter of those hiding in the Hornburg. I think the biggest flaw in the movie isn't making Héra the main character, it was not having Fréaláf as the second of dual protagonists. Héra as the main character makes perfect sense for the emotional beats of losing Haleth and Háma - after all, they are her brothers - and then for losing her father Helm. If any three of those men were the main characters, or dual main characters with Fréaláf, it would have either meant a jarring switch when they died, or a weird uneveness jumping from two to just one character. However, so much more could have been done with this movie if Fréaláf had been a dual protagonist along with Héra. If we had seen more of what he did after he was banished - which also would have made so much more sense if he had been a main character - it would have given us a better opportunity to see what Rohan was like, all the stuff we missed out on when Éomer was banished, and it also would have given the film less of a "Two Towers re-run" feel. I liked the film, but didn't necessarily love it. It has some flaws, but overall was enjoyable and isn't as lore-breaking or as woke as a lot of reviewers are saying. A lot of those people have just conditioned themselves into being unable to enjoy any adaptation if it involves 1) a woman, or 2) deviates at all from source material in any way. I don't think they dislike women, I just think they have been so critical (and rightly so) of so many other adaptations and projects, that they can no longer suspend their cynicism in order to enjoy something.
Frealaf comes off well in the movie, I think, he has one line which I REALLY wish he didn't say, but overall ok. His banishment makes sense as it gives a reason that Frealaf was at Dunharrow instead of retreating with them to the Hornberg. Frealaf also still gets his heroic moment where he charges in and defeats the Dunlendings and becomes king. I liked it for the most part, and the people I went with overall liked it, you'll probably like it.
@@S4ltyTar0 Okay, though I don't think that there needs to be any justification for Fréaláf to be at Dunharrow. He and Haleth could just as easily been among the Rohirrim who remained in Edoras (with Haleth serving as his father's steward in his absence). Fréaláf could have simply organized the retreat to Dunharrow.
@@otaku-sempai2197 the people of Edoras retreat to the Hornberg, the Rohirrim from other parts of Meduseld retreated to Dunharrow. The plot needed a reason for Frealath to not be in Edoras when it was invaded which the appendices solved by not mentioning him until the very end which wouldn't work in the movie because you can't have some random dude come Deus Ex Machina the war. Same reason they replaced Erkenbrand with Eomer in The Two Towers.
Honestly, if Hera and Frelaf got married at the end and Hera and him fell in love, it would be perfect. I'd view that as the canon ending with Hera being a proto-Eowyn. I think they didn't do it since they were first cousins. It isn't PC but I say do it anyway. Royals ALWAYS marry their cousins.
@@АнтонОрлов-я1ъ I mean Aragorn and Arwen. Though when Elros is Aragorn's 56th Great Grandfather it's an non issue. Also Celeborn is Galadriel's 2nd cousin. Elrond is their daughter's 5th cousin.
@@balrog262 Pharazôn took the King's daughter Míriel as his wife... against the laws of Númenor which prohibited first cousins from marrying. I am not saying that Rohirrim definitely follow the same customs, but those laws were there for a reason.
I don't really give a rat's behind about the story because there functionally isn't one. It's a something from nothing story, like many unfaithful adaptations. The part I take issue with is a moral one. According to the internet sleuths, a great number of very overworked animation sweatshops put this film together at an inhuman crunch.
I may check out the movie. 🍿 I saw the original cartoon lotr movies. McFarlane’s (the creator of spawn and venom) toy company is making the action figures from this film. It’s $20 each or $65 for the bundle of 4 figures and build a figure.
@MTB214 Nothing will ever beat those original Rankin Bass productions. I will definitely go watch this. There will probably be plenty to complain about but I'm sure I will be able to cherrypick something enjoyable out of it. Anyway the competition has set a woefully low bar so I hope it will prove to be at least a mild success.
I actually liked it. Couple issues with the animation style and questionable cameos... NOT ENOUGH HELM HAMMERHAND!!! But certainly one I look forward to seeing again.
@@ipercalisse579 Hehe ROP was a 1/10 😅 1 point is awarded for good visuals and good music. The rest was unbearable. I hope you enjoy WoTR if you watch it. Not for me though. 😌
I mean just look at the symbolism in Mad Max, Wonder Woman and Rings of Power where you have scenes of incompetent men have to lift the perfect heroine up to save the day... They have it to the point women are replacing men... But the funny thing is, isn't replacing feminine with masculine qualities only admitting they think men are better than women? 😅
it is absolutely wild that you think you're not getting the story of Helm Hammerhand. That is such a bad faith interpretation of this movie. and to be so smug about it as well...
@classyname42 the words came out of my mouth but the context makes clear that what I’m saying is that the story isn’t about him as the main character or even a POV character. Yes, we get as much in the movie about Helm as we get in the book, but the movie is Hera’s story, not Helm’s.
Only the critics is low on RT. The audience is high - the hallmark of "Hollywood hates it, the plebes love it" *based* = *anti* - Woke. Midnight's Edge calls it the most based movie he's seen in a long, long time. If it's good enough for him, then who are you (or anyone else) to say otherwise? Critic-low + audience-high goes on The Score Card as bonus points.
Actual Tolkien fan here. I have pretty much read the books every year for about 25 years. I can quote large segments of The Silmarillion from memory. I absolutely adore Tolkien's work, and the films (not including The Hobbit). And I am of the opinion that the film was... okay. Wouldn't describe it as a travesty, and it is incredibly presumptuous of you to decide that anyone who 'supports' the film isn't a true fan.
@@monkeymox2544You might have read the books 25 times and yet you did not understand them... Tolkien wrote about the nature of good and evil, how evil could not create, only mock. These modern films are trying to blur the lines with shallow nuance... Didn't Helm tell his daughter in the trailer she should rule the world or something to that effect? It's also just mindless entertainment throwing "member"berries to the casual fans who only enjoy Jackson's Films... Its a sin to celebrate mediocrity...
I think when we have the Lord of the rings as a standard, we've grown tired of the straight up mediocrity being pushed into the public for them to just clap their hands like seals... Isn't it sad there was a time when authors like Tolkien and Lewis were alive... Who do we have like that now? Where's our culture gone? Tolkien will literally be the best author of the past two centuries... Perhaps three...
@@squaeman_2644I love Tolkien. He is my favourite author. But it is absurd to say "where has our culture gone", there are so many incredible authors alive today, inside and outside the fantasy genre.
@@monkeymox2544 What? Like the post modernist morally grey degenerate bilge of George R Martin? Ha! No the boi is actually correct. All of modernity is sloppy, and slovenly.
@@monkeymox2544Name one that even holds a candle to the intellectual heavy weight Tolkien... Who? Brandon Sanderson? JK Rowling? George RR Martin? Neil Gaimon? Don't make me laugh... If there is talent it's obscure and not widely popular... In the 20th century we had authors like Tolkien, Lewis, Paul Herbert, Robert E Howard, HP Lovecraft juxtaposed by whatever we have now... That's why I question where our culture has gone because not only was what was in the Public good, it actually taught about the nature of good and evil and humanity while now it's just moral relativism and shallow, baseless nuance...
@@squaeman_2644 Within fantasy: China Meiville, Robin Hobb, Margaret Atwood, Steven Erikson, V. E. Schwab, Madeline Miller, Guy Gavriel Kay... just to name a few of my personal favorites. None of those authors are shallow, they all have exceptional prose, and they all write intelligently, exploring very deep themes. Outside of fantasy (some on this list do also dip into fantasy and Sci Fi), I don't even know where to begin. There are hundreds of critically acclaimed English-language authors, writing amazing works of fiction. Kazuo Ishiguro, Hilary Mantel, Ian McEwan, Sally Rooney, and Maggie O'Farrell are among some of my favorites. Again, it would be bizarre to describe any of these writers as shallow. Tolkien certainly gives a perspective on the nature of good and evil, but he doesn't have the final word on it. I suspect that you're confusing _different_ approaches that you disagree with, with shallowness. Which is a mistake. I think that Tolkien's philosophy, his theology, his whole ontology, is part of what makes his work so incredibly special... but I also disagree with a great deal of it. Which is okay.
The old 90s anime style makes everyone look Japanese to me. The animation looks cheap. Even back in 2000, I thought Boyens and Walsh’s writing to go into the territory of misandry. So I didn’t expect much from this effort to hold onto the license.
The animation was poor, the backgrounds were beautiful for the most part but some of the character art (horse in the beginning for example) was also simply badly drawn. I don't care if they mix different technologies to achieve something pretty, but some CGI effects were distracting because they were so low FPS. Usually when an anime series get a movie, the movie is much better animated than this. Look at Cowboy Bebop the series vs the movie for a classic example. Trying not to spoil anything, but another issue is that you have a medium where you draw things. If you draw something that is of size X, that thing can be anything. So why are so many things small in scope. Very small groups, few individuals involved (and not because they are so powerful, I'm talking non-descript soldiers and so on). You can in most scenes count everyone fighting on screen. This feels so weird in contrast with other LotR media depicting similar events. The voice acting and/or script was really weak at points. If you watch it again, count how many scenes end with a generic one-liner. Some character says a statement or asks a question, and they get a stoic, cheesy reply you've heard in a million movies and shows before and the scene ends. Best case it feels like a genre parody, worst case it just feels uninspired and derivative. THE MOVIE IS WAY TOO LONG FOR ITS PLOT! I like slow moving, simple animes like what Studio Ghibli typically offers, but there were points I almost struggled to stay awake because a slow moving anime needs beautiful art and animation, good musical support and more emotive voice acting than live action. They should almost chew the scenery verbally to make the drawn scenes come to life. The movie could easily be cut down by an hour, at least 45 minutes, and that's coming from someone who likes watching extended edition LotR. The added references were for the most part contrived and clear winks at the audience, breaking the fourth wall almost. It was unnecessary, contributed nothing to the film and just padded runtime for no reason. Some references were very natural and fit with the story, but if you watch the movie you'll know the ones I'm talking about. I usually go see fantasy movies twice in the theater just because I enjoy them so much but this one will actually be the first time in a long time that one time is enough. Maybe I'll watch it again because there are parts worth seeing in this, but I might hold out for a fan edit like the wonderful 4 hour edit of the Hobbit trilogy.
The film had a pretty clever answer regarding the rumours that Helm ate manflesh 🧟♂️
To me the most important thing about Tolkien is language. Tolkien uses archaic language to great effect and I think the LOTR movies do a great job mimicking that style. My problem with WOTR is that they recycled so much of the LOTR dialogue (“eye is fixed” is one example). It was like wearing a straight jacket. There are plenty of creative ways to use archaic language but we were denied that by the constant “callback” to LOTR movie dialogue.
The dialogue was unfortunately often wooden and out of place, lost in different callbacks
The Eagles saved young Huor and Hurin in the Silmarillion once, so I do not think that they completely ignore regular humans. Also, in the Hobbit they say that they steal sheep from humans, so if some human wants to give them meat, they probably will accept it. I'd actually prefer if the the Eagles would play a bigger role in the movie, I pretty liked them.
Haleth falling in Edoras is accurate, Hama reached Hornburg with Helm and was even joining parties gathering provisions for the impending siege but in one of those foraging excursions, his party went missing, including him.
Jackson Crawford is reading LOTR and doing a series on it. I think both of you would be a great colab.
Been waiting for your review! 😁
Youre more forgiving than I am.
Making nothing of Frealaf, who actually kilked Wulf so should be a major event; putting in the Eagles who never apoear in the source unless I am misremembering; making so much of Hera who was a nameless one-liner; having Heln run from the gates of the Deep and then frozen to desth (which at least is right)... and many more.
Thanls gor watching for me 🙂
I mean, it's a trade, he loses his moment of killing Wulf, but he gets to be the one who leads the Rohirrim to defeat the Dunlendings without Gondorian troops.
Freilef never kills Wolf in this. However, he still has a massive moment at the end. Basically saves everyone. So I don’t really give af
Mellon Geek: Well, I wasn't inclined to watch this movie. But after watching your review, I'll give it a chance--although, on my income, I'll have to wait till it's online. Excellent, as always, dear Loremaster. Namarie.
There should be a movie ticket below $15.
I’ve heard from multiple channels (that for context, were critical of the Rings of Power) that WOTRH wasn’t bad, and not nearly as woke or virtue signaling as they feared it might be. I’ll have to see it to make my own opinion.
Unlike the live action shows that try to be in the same universe, with animation (and this being a fairly disconnected story) I can always think of this as it’s own thing and it shouldn’t affect any other story going forward. Kinda like how I can acknowledge and still enjoy the Rankin Bass movies (although I think their Hobbit movie was 10 times better than the Peter Jackson version).
It’s too bad studios have lost the trust of so many fans, that (with good reason) we approach new films with trepidation rather than excitement. Not just with LOTR, but with other franchises as well.
I saw it yesterday
It's real good
Not woke or virtue signalling at all
Biggest criticism for me is its too long
It's not obnoxious but there are still feminist undertones throughout.
@@Hero_Of_OldWhich work fine as long as they fit within the rest of the structure of the story.
@@Hero_Of_Old agreed. And that’s a no go for me.
@SirBoggins EoWYn wAS a feMINisT 🤦♂️
The movie was
• made purely to retain the LotR rights, and
• drawn by SIXTY studios mostly in places like Indonesia working for cents per hour because Japan's industry is overworked and too expensive for them.
Just by those two metrics I can't justify seeing this, even if it wasn't ugly and looked so choppy like it was 4 frames per second. This is not a movie made for art, or the love of the source material.
Remember the Rankin Bass Hobbit? That illustration actually used an old British cartoon style that totally fit... Anime... Not so much...
@@squaeman_2644Bakshi made the animated The Lord of the Rings film. The Hobbit was Rankin/Bass.
@mysteryroach42 Rankin/Bass did make The Return of the King which might be what he’s referring to.
I quite enjoyed it. It made quite a few deviations from the source material, but that didn't bother me too much, I have no objection to these things going their own way. Hera is obviously an invention of the writers, but that didn't make me annoyed, because I'm not a tinfoil hat neckbeard who thinks that Marxistfeministwokenazis are trying to take over the world by putting women in films.
6/10, not in a hurry ro rewatch, better than ROP, some good moments.
Saw the extended preview when watching another movie at the theater a couple weeks back. It convinced me that my original decision to pass was absolutely correct. Two things I dislike mashed together: girl bosses and Japanimation. Sprinkle in the desecration of Tolkien and it's easy to skip.
Neither of those things were the problem with the movie, though...The story, uneven soundtrack and pacing were...
@@Maverick.D. Doesn't matter, these people love their delusional ideologies and will latch onto that rather than the actual nuances and reasons for why something doesn't perform well. Genuine criticisms and notes for improvements will be disregarded by these people on favor of their culture wars. And unfortunately they make that their entire personality oftentimes, so even trying to ignore them won't work as they make it their life's mission to ahove their politics down everyone's throats at any and every opportunity. We are all worse off for their bullshit.
I think that armor of Helm and his sons in the movie is pretty similar (especially considering stylistic differences) to the armor Theoden is wearing in PJ movies (there is a close look of that armor when Theoden is being armored during the battle of Helm's Deep). I am not sure what type of armor this armor supposed to be, but probably so-called "cuir bouilli" - early plate armor made out of hardened leather, or maybe segmented armor akin to Roman lorica segmentata, but covered in leather.
Thank you for the honest review. I watched it and enjoyed it. The points you made about some of your dislikes - I get it. Thanks again!
Probably will make several comments but your review is really good so far.
I enjoyed the movie. Telling the story of Helm from the perspective of the unnamed daughter is not a bad idea. I thought it worked well enough.
Haven’t seen it yet. Honestly no idea when I’ll go see it. For some reason I’m not super excited and it has nothing to do with hating adaptations. I just don’t have the urge to see it just yet.
I have given up hope for getting any accurate adaptions from Hollywood these days of ANY literary source. Peter Jackson's trilogy the last great adaption as far as I'm concerned and that's sad because I was really excited for this when it was announced. Then I found out what they were doing to it and my excitement vanished.
What is the D word?
Damn
Digger
@@TolkienLorePodcast Are you serious? THAT needs a warning?
Absurd!
Thank you! I was looking for this comment wondering "What the hell did he mean by D word?"
3:24 D word?
Damn!
Could also be dick, I haven't seen it yet
The eagles are looking for a ringbearer to carry to Mordor and finish the thing early but all they got was a stake...
I didnt see hera as a girl boss. She gets her ass handed to her a couple of times and even was about to consent to marry him. And that her attitude torwards marriage and rulers was stated from the beginning. The line about no stories about hera in the beginning was the move acknowledging the written lore, not taking a swipe at tolkien. If anything I wanted to see why shes later ommitted from the history
Because someone other knew why Helm died?
Neither did I perceive her as bossy. She seemed strangely unaffected though by all the death and despair and hard to relate to for her presented flawlessness.
Did the mahouts in Middle Earth carry an ankus? I can't remember from PJ's movies, but that would have been an interesting detail...
I have no idea what you mean "the D word"? ''Dwarf' in the context of LOTR can't be considered a slur. Sop what, the nickname for Richard?
LOL what is the D word? Damn? This is hilarious.
Damn is the word I was thinking of. I realize that’s nothing for most people these days but it’s a pretty serious word and some people would rather their kids not start repeating it.
@@TolkienLorePodcast Fair enough - I've seen very religious parents get upset at their kids saying things even lesser than that.
@@TolkienLorePodcast Are. You. Serious??? I've never in my life heard anyone refer to damn as the D word 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 omg think of the children!
@@sststr I wouldn't say "Fair enough". I'd say "Get some real problems"
I really don’t understand the whole thing with the Eagles… I mean, it makes sense why Gondor would revere them (being Dúnedain and all), but Tolkien clearly states that the Northmen fear the eagles.
This takes place only about 200 years after the founding of Rohan as a kingdom so there should still be fear and mistrust there imo.
Thankful for your review since I doubt I will watch it. I want to remember the Eorlingas, not the Bossgirlingas.
You're doing orcs work
Care to elaborate? Don’t like freedom of speech?
@neildaly2635 Do you not like his freedom of speech?
Yeah. Which is why Eowyn killing the Witch King sucks so much too, I guess?
WTF is the D word?
Damn
I think this is a fair review.
I like anime so I enjoyed it more.
I've no problem with Hera being the story focus. As a blank canvas, she's a writers dream.
This is the story of Helm through the eyes of his daughter.
I'd prefer a different name for her however., Hera is not Anglo Saxon enough.
Yes, some unnecessary additions such as the Eagles and the Watcher in the Water.
Tolkien wrote a 2 page summery with very little detail or characterisation. The film, on a whole, fleshed it out into a good movie narrative.
I think your criticisms are valid although I disagree with some.
Those not watching it simply because of Hera are missing out sadly
Hera really isn't the issue of the film, I think it should have been shorter - could have edited out 30 minutes or so, and I agree with your other points
Hera is actually a word in old English, problem is, it’s not a name but a job title.
It translates into modern English as the term manservant.
Solid analysis.
I enjoyed the movie despite the deviations, and despite the weird shit.
I give it a 7.5 out of 10 myself. I'd watch it again for sure.
I'd agree with that mostly though I think the film would be better if most of what happens between Helm's demise and Wulf's death would have been cut out, the film became rather tiring at that point
I have disdain for a script that focuses on a character of little value, for the sake of Feminism.
Get a grip.
Tell us your an incel without saying it
@djohnston6856 For the sake of Feminism, ( a hybrid form of Marxism... which is bedfellows of Communism). So, no. No further grip of the issue is needed. You should read more.
@PleaseNThankYou Marxism had existed long before feminism and had only influences on feminism within the USSR (1920s-1990s). Marxism demands a stateless, classless society. Feminism (at the end of the day) supports the equality in opportunity and treatment of the sexes in general. Feminism supported this ideal from the 1890s-1920s when women wanted to vote. You should be the one reading more instead of using culture war language.
@SirBoggins it's you, Sir, who are not keeping up.
what is the D word??
How on earth could Helm be the protagonist if he dies before the climax?!?
WoTR has as many plot deviations as Jackson's Two Towers?!? Are you mad! Elves at Helms Deep, Theoden choosing to evacuate Edoras and hide in Helms Deep, the warg attack and Aragorn being separated, Eomer's entirely different plot, the entmoot choosing not to go to war, the character assassination of Faramir, no Shelob... The list goes on.
The only "D-word" your viewers need to watch out for is you. Pull your head in
Helm calls Freca fat before he asks for Hera to marry Wulf, Frealaf is basically banished, he doesn’t kill Wulf, who doesn’t die at Edoras, Hera is kidnapped, Gondor isn’t invaded, Wulf pulls all the strings rather than opportunistically taking advantage of the invasion by others, a lord in Rohan turns traitor, eagles get involved, Helm gets wounded and mysteriously disappears before his rampage, etc. as I mentioned in my video I’m not comparing characterization differences because there’s nothing about most of the characters in the book for this story, but there are TONS of plot deviations. I didn’t even list them all. So maybe stop making a fool of yourself.
Shhhh!!!! After the book, the Sacred Peter Jackson Trilogy is the most important part of Middle-Earth! It is perfect in every way and will save western civilization from girlbosses! (I agree: this movie was waaaay more faithful/respectful to it's 1 page of source text than the PJ trilogy, which I have never liked).
The LOTR trilogy is a masterpiece of film making.I doubt War of the Rohirrim is even close to the quality of those films.
The name they invented for her was pretty brainless. They seem to have taken the name of the Greek goddess rather than use names derived from Old English as Tolkien did. It's amateurish.
They were not actually intending to reference the Greek goddess, more so trying to create a name that sounded Rohanish. Philippa Boyens gave a pretty good explanation to this in one of the interviews.
But I do agree they could’ve done better.
The crew at least explain their reasoning here in this interview with Nerd of the Rings
ua-cam.com/video/0hDQFo32WE0/v-deo.html&si=bc2DlBOQvXShX1bo
Héra (with an acute, also written as Hēra, with macron, in a more modern spelling) is a reasonable Anglo-Saxon name which is good enough for a princess of Rohan. And it alliterates with the name of her father, according to the naming customs of Rohirrim. It comes either from "hēra", an Anglo-Saxon word that means "follower, servant" or from "hēre", an Anglo-Saxon word that means “dignity, majesty or greatness”.
To be fair (as this was a good point though we don't see it often and it was Tolkien himself who did it) Tolkien also gave the Hobbits some Spanish names which seems uncommon for them, for example BILBO (BILBAO), SANCHO, ETC... But again that was Tolkien who did that...
No. It's Germanic and, in fact, is named after an Icelandic actress. Any resemblance to the Greek word is coincidence that only rings in the ears of those who lack any erudition.
What is the "d" word?
Damn
@@TolkienLorePodcast Ok, that is funny, I agree that it is not very Tolkienesce. I wonder though, will you Americans not soon run out of letters for all the words you regard as taboo?
@persallnas5408 most Americans don’t consider it taboo any more. But there are parents who might not want their kids exposed to it.
@@TolkienLorePodcast Exposed, hm, like words have a radiant harmfull effect. But to me it seems you are rapidly expanding the number of words that are forbidden
@persallnas5408 stop and think a minute. A lot of Tolkien fans are Catholic, or at least Christian, and from their perspective that word has a very real, very serious meaning and they don’t want their kids using it because of that meaning.
Megovanen!
Rankin Bass is anime.
I watched it in Hungarian twice but I cannot recall anyone swearing or referencing a dingo. Who and where? Maybe the dub was censored.
The word I was referring to is “damn”
Have not been able to see the movie yet, but it does seem as though it does Fréaláf dirty. 1) He can take charge of the Rohirrim at Dunharrow without being banished first; that seemed unnecessary. 2) He's kinda robbed of what should be his big moment. Am I wrong?
I still expect to (mostly) like the film; but I don't know that I'll love it.
In the source material (which, by the way, is less than three pages long) the killing of Wulf does not end the war, and in the movie Fréaláf does save the day. Sure, Héra comes up with the plan, but without Fréaláf, the best that Héra would have accomplished would have been delaying the slaughter of those hiding in the Hornburg. I think the biggest flaw in the movie isn't making Héra the main character, it was not having Fréaláf as the second of dual protagonists. Héra as the main character makes perfect sense for the emotional beats of losing Haleth and Háma - after all, they are her brothers - and then for losing her father Helm. If any three of those men were the main characters, or dual main characters with Fréaláf, it would have either meant a jarring switch when they died, or a weird uneveness jumping from two to just one character. However, so much more could have been done with this movie if Fréaláf had been a dual protagonist along with Héra. If we had seen more of what he did after he was banished - which also would have made so much more sense if he had been a main character - it would have given us a better opportunity to see what Rohan was like, all the stuff we missed out on when Éomer was banished, and it also would have given the film less of a "Two Towers re-run" feel.
I liked the film, but didn't necessarily love it. It has some flaws, but overall was enjoyable and isn't as lore-breaking or as woke as a lot of reviewers are saying. A lot of those people have just conditioned themselves into being unable to enjoy any adaptation if it involves 1) a woman, or 2) deviates at all from source material in any way. I don't think they dislike women, I just think they have been so critical (and rightly so) of so many other adaptations and projects, that they can no longer suspend their cynicism in order to enjoy something.
Frealaf comes off well in the movie, I think, he has one line which I REALLY wish he didn't say, but overall ok. His banishment makes sense as it gives a reason that Frealaf was at Dunharrow instead of retreating with them to the Hornberg.
Frealaf also still gets his heroic moment where he charges in and defeats the Dunlendings and becomes king.
I liked it for the most part, and the people I went with overall liked it, you'll probably like it.
@@S4ltyTar0 Okay, though I don't think that there needs to be any justification for Fréaláf to be at Dunharrow. He and Haleth could just as easily been among the Rohirrim who remained in Edoras (with Haleth serving as his father's steward in his absence). Fréaláf could have simply organized the retreat to Dunharrow.
@ Yeah, I think I know the line you mean. And I agree. The one at the very end of the film right?
@@otaku-sempai2197 the people of Edoras retreat to the Hornberg, the Rohirrim from other parts of Meduseld retreated to Dunharrow. The plot needed a reason for Frealath to not be in Edoras when it was invaded which the appendices solved by not mentioning him until the very end which wouldn't work in the movie because you can't have some random dude come Deus Ex Machina the war. Same reason they replaced Erkenbrand with Eomer in The Two Towers.
Honestly, if Hera and Frelaf got married at the end and Hera and him fell in love, it would be perfect. I'd view that as the canon ending with Hera being a proto-Eowyn. I think they didn't do it since they were first cousins.
It isn't PC but I say do it anyway. Royals ALWAYS marry their cousins.
That’s to faithful Tolkien
Tolkien clearly did not support marriage between cousins, though.
@@АнтонОрлов-я1ъ I mean Aragorn and Arwen.
Though when Elros is Aragorn's 56th Great Grandfather it's an non issue.
Also Celeborn is Galadriel's 2nd cousin.
Elrond is their daughter's 5th cousin.
@@balrog262 Pharazôn took the King's daughter Míriel as his wife... against the laws of Númenor which prohibited first cousins from marrying.
I am not saying that Rohirrim definitely follow the same customs, but those laws were there for a reason.
@@АнтонОрлов-я1ъ Yes, the Church bans that without a dispensation.
Releasing a movie this long this late in the year is bothersome.
Okay so what is “the D word”???
It's not anime lol, it's a cartoon.
I don't really give a rat's behind about the story because there functionally isn't one. It's a something from nothing story, like many unfaithful adaptations. The part I take issue with is a moral one. According to the internet sleuths, a great number of very overworked animation sweatshops put this film together at an inhuman crunch.
Going into this, I'm expecting it to suck. And for there to be a strong, powerful woman who may be a lesbian
How people are saying she might be a lesbian from the fact that she didn't want to be married off is an incredible heap of logic.
Hey its not 1 am. What gives?
My thoughts exactly I feel betrayed !!!
Gotta strike while the iron is hot lol
I may check out the movie. 🍿 I saw the original cartoon lotr movies.
McFarlane’s (the creator of spawn and venom) toy company is making the action figures from this film. It’s $20 each or $65 for the bundle of 4 figures and build a figure.
@MTB214 Nothing will ever beat those original Rankin Bass productions. I will definitely go watch this. There will probably be plenty to complain about but I'm sure I will be able to cherrypick something enjoyable out of it. Anyway the competition has set a woefully low bar so I hope it will prove to be at least a mild success.
@@TolkienLorePodcastI'm in a different timezone than usual and it was actually midnight when it dropped 😂 Authentic experience
I actually liked it. Couple issues with the animation style and questionable cameos... NOT ENOUGH HELM HAMMERHAND!!! But certainly one I look forward to seeing again.
Thanks for your review! Liked and subbed.
Personally I was dreadfully disappointed! 😢
5/10, which for a lotr movie is unacceptable in my book.
Now Im curious about how Rings of Power scored for you... for me it was unqualified😂 I didn't watch WoTR yet
@@ipercalisse579 Hehe ROP was a 1/10 😅
1 point is awarded for good visuals and good music. The rest was unbearable. I hope you enjoy WoTR if you watch it. Not for me though. 😌
I will never watch another Girl boss movie the rest of my life, Hollywood has burned that bridge. TY for your review.
I mean just look at the symbolism in Mad Max, Wonder Woman and Rings of Power where you have scenes of incompetent men have to lift the perfect heroine up to save the day... They have it to the point women are replacing men... But the funny thing is, isn't replacing feminine with masculine qualities only admitting they think men are better than women? 😅
Seven out of 10 seems very high considering how unimpressed you sound LOL
Rings of Power is at best a 5 out 10 show.
This movie sounds like a s**t show. Glad I didn’t make plans to watch it.
it is absolutely wild that you think you're not getting the story of Helm Hammerhand. That is such a bad faith interpretation of this movie. and to be so smug about it as well...
I didn’t say that, so….
@@TolkienLorePodcast @21:05 you say those words explicitly
@classyname42 the words came out of my mouth but the context makes clear that what I’m saying is that the story isn’t about him as the main character or even a POV character. Yes, we get as much in the movie about Helm as we get in the book, but the movie is Hera’s story, not Helm’s.
Glad this is flopping :) stop bastardizing Tolkien
Only the critics is low on RT. The audience is high - the hallmark of "Hollywood hates it, the plebes love it" *based* = *anti* - Woke. Midnight's Edge calls it the most based movie he's seen in a long, long time. If it's good enough for him, then who are you (or anyone else) to say otherwise? Critic-low + audience-high goes on The Score Card as bonus points.
No actual Tolkien fan would ever support this travesty.
Actual Tolkien fan here. I have pretty much read the books every year for about 25 years. I can quote large segments of The Silmarillion from memory. I absolutely adore Tolkien's work, and the films (not including The Hobbit). And I am of the opinion that the film was... okay. Wouldn't describe it as a travesty, and it is incredibly presumptuous of you to decide that anyone who 'supports' the film isn't a true fan.
@@monkeymox2544You might have read the books 25 times and yet you did not understand them... Tolkien wrote about the nature of good and evil, how evil could not create, only mock. These modern films are trying to blur the lines with shallow nuance... Didn't Helm tell his daughter in the trailer she should rule the world or something to that effect? It's also just mindless entertainment throwing "member"berries to the casual fans who only enjoy Jackson's Films... Its a sin to celebrate mediocrity...
That's not your call to make. Sit down.
From what I understand, New Line had to release something within 10 years of the last Hobbit film (12-17-14) in order to retain the LOTR film rights
This show sucked. Even if it weren't insufferably woke, it'd still be terrible. Boo! Booo! Ooooo!
I think when we have the Lord of the rings as a standard, we've grown tired of the straight up mediocrity being pushed into the public for them to just clap their hands like seals... Isn't it sad there was a time when authors like Tolkien and Lewis were alive... Who do we have like that now? Where's our culture gone? Tolkien will literally be the best author of the past two centuries... Perhaps three...
@@squaeman_2644I love Tolkien. He is my favourite author. But it is absurd to say "where has our culture gone", there are so many incredible authors alive today, inside and outside the fantasy genre.
@@monkeymox2544 What? Like the post modernist morally grey degenerate bilge of George R Martin? Ha! No the boi is actually correct. All of modernity is sloppy, and slovenly.
@@monkeymox2544Name one that even holds a candle to the intellectual heavy weight Tolkien... Who? Brandon Sanderson? JK Rowling? George RR Martin? Neil Gaimon? Don't make me laugh... If there is talent it's obscure and not widely popular... In the 20th century we had authors like Tolkien, Lewis, Paul Herbert, Robert E Howard, HP Lovecraft juxtaposed by whatever we have now... That's why I question where our culture has gone because not only was what was in the Public good, it actually taught about the nature of good and evil and humanity while now it's just moral relativism and shallow, baseless nuance...
@@squaeman_2644 Within fantasy: China Meiville, Robin Hobb, Margaret Atwood, Steven Erikson, V. E. Schwab, Madeline Miller, Guy Gavriel Kay... just to name a few of my personal favorites. None of those authors are shallow, they all have exceptional prose, and they all write intelligently, exploring very deep themes.
Outside of fantasy (some on this list do also dip into fantasy and Sci Fi), I don't even know where to begin. There are hundreds of critically acclaimed English-language authors, writing amazing works of fiction. Kazuo Ishiguro, Hilary Mantel, Ian McEwan, Sally Rooney, and Maggie O'Farrell are among some of my favorites. Again, it would be bizarre to describe any of these writers as shallow.
Tolkien certainly gives a perspective on the nature of good and evil, but he doesn't have the final word on it. I suspect that you're confusing _different_ approaches that you disagree with, with shallowness. Which is a mistake. I think that Tolkien's philosophy, his theology, his whole ontology, is part of what makes his work so incredibly special... but I also disagree with a great deal of it. Which is okay.
Box office flop and B cinemascore
The old 90s anime style makes everyone look Japanese to me. The animation looks cheap.
Even back in 2000, I thought Boyens and Walsh’s writing to go into the territory of misandry. So I didn’t expect much from this effort to hold onto the license.
The animation was poor, the backgrounds were beautiful for the most part but some of the character art (horse in the beginning for example) was also simply badly drawn. I don't care if they mix different technologies to achieve something pretty, but some CGI effects were distracting because they were so low FPS. Usually when an anime series get a movie, the movie is much better animated than this. Look at Cowboy Bebop the series vs the movie for a classic example.
Trying not to spoil anything, but another issue is that you have a medium where you draw things. If you draw something that is of size X, that thing can be anything. So why are so many things small in scope. Very small groups, few individuals involved (and not because they are so powerful, I'm talking non-descript soldiers and so on). You can in most scenes count everyone fighting on screen. This feels so weird in contrast with other LotR media depicting similar events.
The voice acting and/or script was really weak at points. If you watch it again, count how many scenes end with a generic one-liner. Some character says a statement or asks a question, and they get a stoic, cheesy reply you've heard in a million movies and shows before and the scene ends. Best case it feels like a genre parody, worst case it just feels uninspired and derivative.
THE MOVIE IS WAY TOO LONG FOR ITS PLOT! I like slow moving, simple animes like what Studio Ghibli typically offers, but there were points I almost struggled to stay awake because a slow moving anime needs beautiful art and animation, good musical support and more emotive voice acting than live action. They should almost chew the scenery verbally to make the drawn scenes come to life. The movie could easily be cut down by an hour, at least 45 minutes, and that's coming from someone who likes watching extended edition LotR.
The added references were for the most part contrived and clear winks at the audience, breaking the fourth wall almost. It was unnecessary, contributed nothing to the film and just padded runtime for no reason. Some references were very natural and fit with the story, but if you watch the movie you'll know the ones I'm talking about.
I usually go see fantasy movies twice in the theater just because I enjoy them so much but this one will actually be the first time in a long time that one time is enough. Maybe I'll watch it again because there are parts worth seeing in this, but I might hold out for a fan edit like the wonderful 4 hour edit of the Hobbit trilogy.
But girlboss, man. Patriarchy and such.
I don't like anime aesthetically, and I don't like girl boss story lines, so not keen to be honest.
Whole movie was “Girl Power” was a let down some cool Helm stuff