We appreciate you guys, for all your support, so don't forget to hit that subscribe button, it really motivates us to keep up the content. And of course if you are interested in the full reaction, you can find us here : www.patreon.com/takeaticket (You can find the latest uploads of the shows we are watching and much more) Much love Rob and Trin
The Goblin King was done by Barry Humphries, a really great Australian comedian, who passed on recently. Sylvester McCoy is Radagast, and was once Dr. Who.
I'm so glad you're reacting to the Hobbit movies. A lot of folks didn't like them. But I loved these movies. Can't wait for the next one. Love your reactions. I break the whole Hobbit trilogy and Lord of the Rings trilogy every other year to watch
It's interesting to note that although the Hobbit was filmed as a prequel, it was deliberately done so that you can watch it before LOTR, and the six movies will form a single, continuous story. Whenever I watch the Middle Earth movies, I always start with the Hobbit.
Just to let you know, if you didn't catch on. Balin is the dwarf that gimli was upset when seeing his tomb in the mines of Moria in the lord of the rings. 😊
I really enjoyed watching this reaction with you two - your enthusiasm is so infectious. And, you are right, Rob: the tone is different because Tolkien wrote it as a children's book whereas LotR was written for adults. Because PJ knew that people were expecting another LotR, he had the difficult task of blending the two stories together. Even Tolkien considered rewriting TH to make it more like LotR but never had the time. Some people roll their eyes at the wrong things: for instance, many who haven't read the book are scornful of the songs and say that PJ has turned it into a second-rate musical. Others can't imagine how one slim volume was expanded into three films: but PJ and his writers didn't make it all up - instead, they scoured all of Tolkien's writings to fill in some of the gaps and they often found an answer - like where did Gandalf go when he left the dwarves in the book? Or, who is the mysterious Necromancer? Could he be.... Sauron? LotR describes every rock and stone of the journey - unnecessary in a film - but TH often passes over even important moments very quickly - sometimes in a few paragraphs or even a couple of sentences. And, for a visual medium like film, we want to see such things in detail. This accounts for some of the expansion. Bear with Thorin: he is a complex character. He has two main aims - to fulfil his quest and to protect his men. Bilbo seems like a dangerous burden, someone who nearly gets them killed twice in the first part of the story. He stirs up the trolls and yet Thorin throws down his sword to save him; and he manages to fall off the cliff - again, Thorin risks his life to save him. Bilbo owes Thorin and Thorin is 'dwarf' enough to admit his mistake. I once read TH with a class of 12 year olds. Their favourite bits were the meeting with the trolls - who do, indeed, have cockney accents - the confrontation with Smaug and the chapter called Riddles in the Dark when Gollum and Bilbo have their riddling contest. I'm surprised you don't remember the latter incident because PJ has kept pretty close to the book. Tolkien was a professor of Anglo-Saxon - a people who loved riddles. Here's one of them: 'What's green and has four wheels? Answer: Grass. I lied about the wheels.' You are right about Thorin's voice and that of Sean Bean, LOL. The dwarven princes - Thorin, Fili and Kili, plus a few of the other dwarves - have Yorkshire accents, like SB. I think the Yorkshire accent was meant to portray them as gritty and tough - honest and reliable too. Looking forward to your take on the other two films.
Totally agree on the soundtrack. LotR had such an amazing soundtrack, and IMO the soundtrack in the Hobbit movies really lives up to that. Also, on the topic of sound, I just heard a Wilhelm scream in the fight in Goblin-town that I never noticed before...
Rings of Power isn’t unwatchable. It just doesn’t line up with the levels of care and dedication given by Jackson. Jackson took liberties with the source material, and so does Amazon. But people are more upset about it because it’s also just a little lower quality. But it still 1) looks amazing, and 2) feels like middle earth. I, personally, like it better than the hobbit with the exception of some of the performances, like Martin Freeman as Bilbo which is AMAZING. If you want more Middle Earth, watch it. But I’d you don’t want to risk upsetting people, just watch it on your own 😂
Dol Goldur portions are from the appendices. I recall reading The Hobbit & wondering where Gandalf would wander off to. Or where Radagast had been - so it was good to see that added for context. It’s the same with the council in Rivendell. The specifics weren’t mentioned in the book since it was following Bilbo
Those are Goblins. Goblins are basically smaller Orcs. Although Tolkien seemed to use the terms interchangeably. They are all part of the same race. So you have Gundabad Orcs, you have Saruman's Uruk Hai Orcs, you have Orcs from Mordor and you have the Goblins of the Misty Mountains and Moria. 😅 I think most fans enjoyed the dwarvish chant at Bilbo's home. The Goblintown number... not so much...lol 🤣
In the first edition of the book, the ring was a novelty. It could make you invisible, and that was pretty much it. Later editions of the book retconned the ring origin story from LoTR into the Hobbit.
So glad to see this. I liked the Hobbit even if the cgi is a bit over done at times. It's got so much beauty and special moments and of course the music.
It was pretty amazing when these movies were finally made. The studio and fans were begging for a Hobbit prequel as soon as Return of the King was released, but Peter Jackson did not want to spend his entire life directing Middle Earth films and decided he would help produce such a film but would not direct. His next project was the remake of the classic King Kong (also starring Andy Serkis - the king of motion capture!). There was talk of several other directors (including Spielberg) stepping in, and for a time Benicio Del Toro was signed to write and direct the project - and had it proceeded under Del Toro it was likely the known characters would have been completely re-cast, different composer, different production design. After several years, the project never moved forward past pre-production and Del Toro dropped out to pursue other projects. The studio still pressed to have The Hobbit made, and finally Peter Jackson returned when he realized just about any other director they hired would never rise to the same standards he wanted if the film was going to be a prequel to his LOTR films. So of course once he came back, the majority of the cast and crew also returned. Hobbiton and the Shire was rebuilt in New Zealand (it was cleared after the LOTR films were completed) and is now a tourist attraction. My biggest issue with these films is how much stuff they had to cram into them. Each of the LOTR movies was based (for the most part) on a single book, though some liberties were taken moving plot points around to better suit the film plot or cut entirely (Tom Bombadil). Jackson originally intended to do the same with The Hobbit - one book-one film - but was convinced he could tell the story better if split into two films (as a lot of fantasy films were doing at the time, like the last Harry Potter book/films). Then the studio got greedy and said, "Why not make it a trilogy!" ($Cha-Ching$$) The Hobbit was originally written as a pure children's fantasy book that Tolkien told his kids chapter by chapter at bed time. It was not supposed to be a terribly complicated plot. But by splitting a single book into three 2+ hour films there needed to be SO much filler, stuff that either came from other Tolkien novels or created just for the films (the Dwarf/Elf Romance Plot of the second film was one of the made-up-on-the-spot fillers) that just stretched the films out almost to the point of being boring. The Hobbit would have been better served as only a 2 part film. It would have been more concise and integrated and I think would have worked much better as a book-end (no pun intended) to Jackson's masterpiece LOTR films.
I remember playing Lotro and running around Goblin Town with my kin...brings back fond memories. Dol Guldur was an expansion later added in Lotro, that was some good times indeed!
Hello Rob & Trin ! I've been watching your movies reactions for a while now. And I must say I've really liked them very much. Absolutely loved this one too. Loved your envolvement in it and your emotions. I must apologize for not subscribing sooner, cause you guys definitely deserve it. Now it's done. Whishing you guys all the best on your channel. Cheers from France.
I have watched many Hobbit trilogy reactions and I would say yours is one of my few favorites! Totally enjoyed watching your reactions and agree with your views at the end. Looking forward to seeing your reactions to the other 2!
I do not like the overuse of CGI in the Hobbit movies but overall they´re still very good - change my mind! Lucky you feel the same and can overlook some flaws it has! The Peter Jackson movies give me a special vibe that feels like it is real and not a story or movie at all. The detail in the movies is insane (even tho they changed some things both in LotR and Hobbit to make it more movie compatible)
@Rob & Trin: Glad (and pleasantly surprised) that you liked this one as much as you did. Most would say this is the best of the three, and that it really jumps the shark going forward, and I agree as well. But you guys are great about keeping an open mind and finding things to enjoy, so I'm looking forward to seeing what you think. Personally, as a LOTR fan, I was disappointed in what Jackson and co. did with The Hobbit. I think it's obvious that he bowed to the studio pressures and that this wasn't nearly the labor of love for him that the LOTR films were. But still a fun watch. As for Rings of Power, I actually enjoyed it, and you might as well. They took a LOT of liberties with the lore, and changed a lot of things. But that didn't bother me, as I'm not overly attached to the LOTR lore outside of the proper Hobbit and LOTR trilogy, and I didn't overly mind the changes in things they did that actually do contradict. Even if you don't want to react to it, if you enjoy this universe by the end of this trilogy, I would recommend just watching it on your own. You might like it.
I love Hobbit. ❤I like a lot LoTR too but I actually like Hobbit more. All dwarves, especially Thorin, Bilbo (over Frodo), Gollum scenes were best here, Azog (the best orc ever), Bolg, Smaug, story, ...this are my of my the most fav movies. ❤
Hey Rob and Trin, I think you should give Rings of Power a go. Yes, there are many flaws with their creative choices, but if you like to get wrapped up with the emotion of relationships, brilliant acting, sweeping landscapes and sets, phenomenal scores, amazing action and gaming, I think you're up for enjoying the adventure. You have already shown a far greater appreciation for the hobbit than many fans, so I don't think you'll be disappointed.
Really sad there are selfish people who use their bias to tell reactors not to watch something just because they didn't like it instead of letting people decide for themselves if they like something 😔🙄
@@bensenzo you are absolutely right! People thinking other reactors shouldn’t watch something because they personally didn’t like it makes no sense at all! Selfishness at its finest.
orcs and goblins in Tolkien writing intertwined, nowadays the conclusion is that goblins are orcs that are bred and grown in mountains, that is why they are smaller
Tolkien seemed to waffle back and forth between the words Goblin and Orc. The word Orc does not appear in The Hobbit, but they are referred to almost exclusively as Orcs in LOTR. Most people agree that the small ones are Goblins and the big ones are Orcs, but then there's the Goblin King...
@@jonathonfrazier6622 That tracks because Uruk is Black Speech, which is a twisted form of Elvish. I don't remember the word Orc being used in The Hobbit, but I'll take your word for it, as I haven't read it in many years.
I read the Hobbit back in 1he late 60s when I was a teen. But I read one of the LotR books first it was Two Towers, that I bought at a school book faire. Later I saw the Return of the King on sale then sone after, The Hobbit. I made it my mission to get the Fellowship of the Ring and then read them all in order! Several times through the years actually! I too played LotRO back when the had just added the new lands Rivendell and soon after the lands of Moria. When they raised the level cap. My internet was pathetic so I had to stop. I may pick it up again.
The fleshing out of the Hobbit movies was Jackson trying to appeal to the LotR fans (not necessarily the books fans) who needed the tie-in to how this is relevant. He was took this opportunity to add more of the lore that he couldn't fit into even the extended version of LotR. I also think that since Gandalf and Elrond were mostly supporting characters in The Hobbit book, it would have been a harder sell to bring Ian McKellen and Hugo Weaving back for basically cameos. There was probably no need to make another trilogy, since LotR was an actual trilogy, but, as you mentioned, The Hobbit was not. But there was a ton of lore added by Tolkien in The Silmarillion and other books and short stories. Jackson scratches the surface where it is still relevant to the main plot, but it might still be well served in two movies max. Everyone's familiarity with Gandalf and Bilbo would help return audiences, but it was going to take time to care about the dwarves in the same way we did the Fellowship. As such, Jackson added a lot of story to flesh out minor characters that wasn't in any of the books, which at times can feel drawn out, or light-hearted. I just did the same you did, and enjoyed it in the spirit of the original children's story; while I didn't read the book until I was an adult, my first exposure was the animated The Hobbit shown to us in 5th grade - very much presented as a children's story (and a single volume).
@jonathonfrazier6622 Gandalf disappears while the company is in the Misty Mountains and gets captured by the Goblins. He helps free them, and gets them to Mirkwood, but then leaves them again to be lost, then captured by the Wood Elves, where they are kept for weeks. He doesn't turn up again until after the dwarves escape to Laketown, Smaug destroys it, is killed by Bard, and the Battle of Five Armies begins. That's a lot of story with Gandalf absent. The movies filled that time with him helping Radagast investigate Dol Guldur and the High Fells - and all that extra lore is why it became three movies instead of just 1 or 2.
Thanks for this. A lot of people seem to have forgotten that this was originally designed by Tolkien to be a children's fairy tale - Jackson did a decent job over three films when two would have sufficed - but the greedy studios ........ jeez. Pity Galadriel wasn't with them when the eagles showed up - it would have been the perfect conduit for them to break into Witchy Woman. (I'll get my coat).
It was so good to see the book dealt with this way. Reading the original story went so fast. The movies went into so much detail and stretched out a very good tale.
You guys are correct when comparing the 2 trilogies. Peter Jackson had plenty of time to prepare for the production of the 1st and much less for the 2nd resulting in the use/overuse of CGI for the 2nd.
Exactly. Originally, the movie was supposed to be directed by Guillermo del Toro and PJ only wanted to produce it, but GdT left after a lot of the preproduction was done and PJ made them start from scratch to make the style of the Hobbit match the style of LotR. I think that way they lost 18 months amd shooting was delayed. Also, the Hobbit was supposed to be two movies, but the studio wanted to have a three movie deal to make money. This evolved into a fully-blown argument and at that time, PJ got into Hospital due to a perforated stomach ulcer and almost died so that filming was delayed again until he recovered. That's why, I think, they said in the making ofs, that they made the last movie almost entirely without having a drafted out storyboard because they couldn't afford to lose any more time. And also, at onr time during the shooting, Martin Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch left for two months to shoot Sherlock. That was also in the making ofs, when Peter Jackson is saying goodbye to "Doctor Watson" 😄
Don't shy away from Rings of Power. It's not that bad, sure as a Tolkien nerd it's missing a lot of stuff and took some... unsavory directions... They played a bit too long with guessing who Sauron is and it just took away from a lot. However, the CG is amazing, the music is great, and some of the Dwarven stuff they do is top notch. I think you guys would like it if you liked this as much as you did.
People saying RoP isn’t worth watching don’t know hee haw. It’s been one season which I enjoyed and will be a slow build I think. People are just annoyed that it doesn’t look exactly like the PJ world but there are heavy influences
Exploring the Lord of the Rings is a series and podcast of Signum University, where Dr. Corey Olsen, known on the internet as the Tolkien Professor, goes through phrase by phrase of the Lord of the Rings books, and ends each episode with a community stroll through LotrO to see how the game has interpreted the books and notes of Tolkien. I strongly recommend it. Also Dr Olsen together with Dr Maggie Parke have Other Minds and Hands where they go through discussion of adaptation of Tolkien's work, and a seperate channel for Rings of Power series analysis. I enjoyed the Amazon series, like one who knows Marvel comics and can still appreciate the movies as a different timeline. They had to adapt centuries of stories of the Second Age into a series, including Men lives that die out quicker than the Elf storylines, so I do give them some slack.
Rob, you are not losing it. There is going to be LOTS in this series that you will not remember, because it wasn't in the book. They did a LOT of padding to turn a short book into 3 long movies. That is a major complaint for some. PLUS, people are wanting to naturally compare it to LOTR. That's not really fair. LOTR is Tolkien's masterwork. Should one compare Da Vinci's early work to the Mona Lisa? These films are fun and with the right mind set you will enjoy them. BTW, yes there definitely is a lot more CGI in this series. Also, in old English a drake is a serpent monster...aka a dragon 😁
Orcs and Goblins in the world of Tolkien is the same beings. Orcs/Goblins can look different pending on where they come from and how they live. Ergo you can recognize a orcs nationality from how they look and act.
Firstly let me say how much I enjoy your reactions & emotional investment in these films & Tolkien's world. FYI I'd like to outline what I believe are the issues with these movies compared to the LOTR trilogy & perhaps why they didn't go down so well with many of the fans. Originally the Hobbit was to made in 2 parts, produced by Peter Jackson but directed by Guillerm del Toro. However, there were multiple holdups & interference from the studio resulting in del Toro dropping out in favour of other commitments. The studio, wishing to cash in on LOTR's success, wanted another trilogy, but this only served to put greater pressure on the crew already hampered by existing time constraints. Jackson took up the directing helm again & was forced to pad out the story with his usual cinematic embelishments, & excerpts drawn from other Tolkien works, mainly, The Silmarillion & Unfinished Tales. For instance, Sauron is never mentioned in The Hobbit. The Necromancer is mentioned by Gandalf to the company & is the reason he leaves them at the entrance to Mirkwood, but that is the only reference in the book. In The Silmarillion & Unfinished Tales, Saruman, Gandalf, Elrond & Galadriel are known as The White Council & they do have dealings with Sauron at Dol Guldur (Hill of Sorcery) but that is not in The Hobbit. Radagast the Brown is not in The Hobbit either. In fact he has a brief but important part in The Fellowship of the Ring. Gandalf meets him on his way to see Saruman. At Saruman's bidding, but in all innocence, he urges Gandalf to seek Saruman's council. Gandalf asks Radagast to get all of his bird & beast friends to send news to him at Isengard. That is how Gandalf escapes Isengard in the book: Gwarhir, Lord of the Eagles comes to find Gandalf imprisoned atop the tower & carries him away. Though Thranduil is in the book, he is never referred to by name, being just called The Elf King. Legolas never appeared in The Hobbit & his inclusion seems little more than fan service. Though the attempt to retake Moria by the Dwarves & the wounding of Azog by Thorin is in the appendices to LOTR, again it is not mentioned in the Hobbit. Neither is Azog & his inclusion in the film is another cinematic embellishment to pad out the films & increase the jeopardy. Finally, & perhaps the one that galls the fans the most, is the inclusion of the character, Tauriel. She is an invention of the screen writers & her inclusion & subsequent involvement with Kili serves little purpose, other than a pointless sub-plot. All of this "padding" put more pressure on filming deadlines. What we are left with are films that, though passable as fantasy adventure, appear bloated with unnecessary subplots & an over-reliance on CGI, rather than time consuming practical effects. I believe these movies are further hampered by the fact that The Hobbit was a story for children (Tolkien's own children), whereas The LOTR was an adult sequel. This resulted in the apparent contradictory tone of many of the scenes, e.g. the comic nature of The Goblin King & his song, or the comic personalities of the trolls. These are just my thoughts on the situation & why The Hobbit movies are not so beloved by the fans.
I guess I'm one of the few people that liked Rings of Power. I hear that they're going a bit of a different way with the lore and how certain characters act but at the very least I found it entertaining for what it is. Maybe if I knew the lore like the back of my hand then I'd have a bigger issue with it. I will say that it's a bit more adult themed than the movies.
@@anni.68 Yeah, I'm only guessing from what I've heard others say. They seemed to have a bigger problem with Amazon making stuff than the actual content. Well, except for non-white Dwarves and Elves with short hair. A group of people seemed to have a big problem with that.
@@jonathonfrazier6622 Do you have difficulties answering a simple question? I said PROVIDE evidence of this "Everyone" and this so called "truth" and you haven't And I don't think you know what "self evident" means😅
@@jonathonfrazier6622 I think you need to look up the meaning of the word “Literally” my dude and stop making a habit out taking YOUR opinion and saying its “everybody’s opinion”… Rings of Power LITERALLY has a better score than all of the Hobbit films both on Rotten Tomatoes and on Metacritic, also a 7.0 from IMDB… So yeah, no idea what you mean by “everybody” hating it. It seems like you hated it, which is fine, haters hate, its what they do! Just please realize that you are actually part of a “hating minority”, and no, your opinion is actually not shared by the majority of fans. Check yo' self before you wreck yo' self. :)
The people who hate rings of power are the super fans who know all the lore. That’s what you tend to get with adaptations of books but general fans like myself really enjoyed it.
If you want more Middle Earth after the books, that's literally what D&D was invented for (despite pleadings against lawsuits brought by the Tolkien estate).
Talking of other forays into middle earth have you guys seen the old Ralph Bakshi (part animated, part live action) LOTRs? its sadly only one part but its great as an early foray. also the animated film Wizards, not Middle earth but still great.
spoiler! . . . . bilbo ducking and hiding and not being seen is a special power of the small folk. in the og trilogy frodo uses it a few times, the rock cloak wasnt just the cloak is just helped, and i know at least one other time but cant remember exactly. its not stealth exactly, more like can just leave the memory lol making them blind to them in their mind? its a weird one.
i dont really do reading of books i cant hold my attention. i got the audiobook of this read by Andy Serkis... i waited and waited then he does Golum. :O
Heya. Really enjoyed the reactions. if you enjoyed LOR online you should really try The game war in the north. its a older LOR game but single player and co op exploration of another perspective of the war of the ring. I'm binging on this series, so thank you for that.
Looked at in isolation these three films are objectively great but the reason for them being seen as inferior to LOTR is easy. They crammed The Hobbit full of extra content to stretch it out to a trilogy and connect it to LOTR. Undoubtedly due to financial/studio pressure but in making a three movie prequel to LOTR they lost the essence of The Hobbit. To steal a phrase from Bilbo it felt like butter scraped over too much bread
From what I recall it was because initially the plan was for Guillermo del Toro to direct _The Hobbit_ with Peter Jackson and his writers advising, but then Pacific Rim came up and del Toro dropped out to focus on that, at which point Jackson decided to just take over as director, but the studio didn't give him more prep time to make the film 100% the way he wanted. The knock on effect of this is that he was pretty much laying out track in front of himself, which started to run out by the time he got to the climax of the book and he had no idea how wrap the films up. so he bought more time to figure it out by splitting what was supposed to be two movies into three, giving him enough time to plot out the ending and film it (On top of all this health issues brought on by the stress of the project, including a heart attack) The studio gladly took on the idea of a third movie cause it meant more potential revenue for them, but it was hardly a mandate from them.
@@bustedsim It was an incredibly messy production but the really disgusting thing was how the studio treated the majority of the dwarves. The international dwarf actors were invited to the premier but the New Zealand based dwarves weren't until people kicked up a stink about it. Much like LOTR the behind the scenes info for these films is fascinating but not entirely positive.
I like this film a lot. It is not as good as the Lord of the Rings. Some of the action etc. is a bit more OTT and too obviously GCI. However, it is still very enjoyable and compares very well to virtually any other films. You are right in saying that the Hobbit book is for kids (and pretty short too!). The tone was VERY different and, as you say, the Ring gave invisibity to its wearer but that is it. Only later did Tolkien develop the idea of the Ring being Sauron's and effectively made the Hobbit a prequel. Jackson therefore had to decide how to go about adapting it. Keep the tone of the book (more childish and comic) or the later Lord of the Rings? On the whole, I think he did a pretty good job and struck a good balance. He has added a hell of a lot to the book and got flak for it. I think he has gone over the top and made up too much stuff (more so in the next two instalments). However, a lot of what he has added was not in the book but it was still taken from Tolkien's writing: some of the Lords of the RIngs books, a lot from the appendices to the Lord of the Rings and other writings (such as Unfinished Tales). I really enjoy those aspects. So, it is a good trilogy and I am really looking forward to your reaction to the next two.
Dont get me wrong these movies dont quite make the mark that lord of the rings did, but then again not many movies meet lotr period, so even as the lesser trilogy these films are incredible, and yes, an attempt to combine a childrens book to an adult trilogy that werent originallu even set in the same world
I would say, don't shy away from rings of power. Yes, there are so many naysayers for that series out there, but in my opinion they are people who don't resonate with Middle Earth as much as others do. It's really for people who want to delve deeply, along with other writings of Tolkein, into the lore of Middle Earth. Is totally a personal thing. It has its problems I grant you, but there's a lot to be taken from it. And the music is phenomenal, done by Bear McCreary who did the music for Walking Dead
meh, give it a year or two more and ppl will warm up to RoP, i'd like to remind ya'll that there was similar narration/reaction to the hobbit trilly when it was released :] i bet half of the ppl hating it didn't even watch it, never trust the hate, always check it out and make your own mind. it is so popular to hate on stuff these days... and visuals in RoP are amazing, worth watching imo, dunno if worth making videos out of it, because money, but i'd watch it. 🖖
@@decanaba Yes! I was going to respond with something of the kind, but I couldn't be bothered with something that would make no difference to people who feel that way. I kind of wonder why people who say that things are bastardizations of Tolkien actually were watching Rob and Trin react to this trilogy. I love Middle Earth so I watched all three movies in the theater when they came out, but, I certainly was smacking my forehead repeatedly with the major changes from the book. But, it is an interpretation made by Peter Jackson and I trust him with Middle Earth.
@@JustKelso1993 because the show was produced by Amazon, and Amazon didn't have the rights to the Silmarillion, they *only* could pull from the appendices. There was no book that covered the material like with Lord of the rings and The Hobbit.
Rings of power was perfectly fine. Lots of people didn't like that the cast included lots of dark skin 🙄 others I think complained about the comparison with the source material? The source material was just some excess lore Tolkien created and I don't read that so i had no judgement there. It explains a lot of the origins of mordor the rings and the elves. There's plot twists and beautiful scenery. I say try a few episodes and see what you think. They played down the enjoyabialty of the hobbit and the incredible hulk too
Exactly Really sad there are selfish people who use their bias to tell reactors not to watch something just because they didn't like it instead of letting people decide for themselves if they like something 😔🙄
I'm really conflicted about these movies. Tolkien's Middle Earth is treasured mythology to me and the way they butchered it offends me. But these aren't terrible fantasy stories in their own right, in fact, they're better than average. But that's largely due to the leveraging of props, sets, and cast from the LotR movies. As well, the picking and choosing of aspects of Tolkien's works, certainly helped. Then with pandering to audiences, they had a sure money maker, but a real bastardization of something I hold dear. Like the way televangelists co-opt religion to their own ends, that is largely what I feel here. No matter how moved I feel by the spirit, I'm still sad and a bit angry. If they hadn't co-opted Tolkien, these movies would be nothing but fun.
I happen to love Rings of Power, it's a shame so many people hate it and shout it down to reactors. Make your own decision on if you want to watch it or not. Though I have a feeling your thoughts on it will be predetermined by hearing so much negativity about it ahead of time.
Yeah Really sad there are selfish people who use their bias to tell reactors not to watch something just because they didn't like it instead of letting people decide for themselves if they like something 😔🙄
Watch Rings of Power. People are being crybabies about the whole thing. You enjoy amazing visuals, callbacks and incredible music, you will atleast enjoy watching it once.
Ah, The Rings of Power isn't that bad. The vision of the Fall of Númenor alone is well worth watching the whole thing for, and come on, you've got Lenny Henry as a stage oirish proto-hobbit. You can't miss that!
I agree. RoP to me was pretty good. It's not even close to LOTR good (what is?)but it has some good moments. My favorite is the opposite of Numenor's fall...it was seeing the genesis of Mordor and Mt. Doom 😁
I am aware that this opinion might not be popular. But as someone who loved the LoTR trilogy as much as you both did, I think you should definitely give Rings of Power a chance. I might not be up to the standards of OG Peter Jackson (what is? if we’re being honest), but I just know you will both find several things to love about it! Like I said, manage your expectations, but just enjoy going back to Middle Earth and watching some of the Tolkien stories we never thought we’d see in live action. I for one would love watching you react to it. Just my honest opinion.
please watch rings of power when you can. the complaints people had for it are the same ones people had for the hobbit movies and you seem to like them so far
Stretching a short children's book into a movie trilogy means there will be a lot of creative liberties being taken. The Hobbit does have a lighter tone to it than LOTR - as it is meant to be. I don't mind the cartoonish silly scenarios - like when the dwarves escaped the Goblin King. I just told myself that some of it is Gandalf's doing. Since Gandalf is not allowed to directly use his powers - He is magically helping the dwarves to escape 'indirectly'. As for Amazon's Rings of Power - The production team fired anyone who had actual passion for LOTR source material. They replaced them with WOKE activists. I knew this was going to be bad news for the series. I won't tell anyone not to watch it. I will say to watch with discretion knowing that passion for LOTR was not the series intent. Instead, passion for "the message" was the primary goal. Nostalgia is again being used to push an agenda.
Really sad there are selfish people who use their bias to tell reactors not to watch something just because they didn't like it instead of letting people decide for themselves if they like something 😔🙄
Rings of Power is not that good but I liked it. It's different and has lore issues (like colored Elves and Dwarf womens without beards). That were the only things I disliked about the serie, cause it is not what Tolkien would've wanted. But it's not Amazons fault, they didn't become all the filming rights to stay true to the lore. I recommend u guys to watch it, just to see what ur opinion is to this serie. I would enjoy watching ur reaction to this serie, but if you're not I'm fine with it too 🫠😂
We appreciate you guys, for all your support, so don't forget to hit that subscribe button, it really motivates us to keep up the content.
And of course if you are interested in the full reaction, you can find us here : www.patreon.com/takeaticket (You can find the latest uploads of the shows we are watching and much more)
Much love
Rob and Trin
The Goblin King was done by Barry Humphries, a really great Australian comedian, who passed on recently. Sylvester McCoy is Radagast, and was once Dr. Who.
I'm so glad you're reacting to the Hobbit movies. A lot of folks didn't like them. But I loved these movies. Can't wait for the next one.
Love your reactions. I break the whole Hobbit trilogy and Lord of the Rings trilogy every other year to watch
It's interesting to note that although the Hobbit was filmed as a prequel, it was deliberately done so that you can watch it before LOTR, and the six movies will form a single, continuous story. Whenever I watch the Middle Earth movies, I always start with the Hobbit.
Just to let you know, if you didn't catch on. Balin is the dwarf that gimli was upset when seeing his tomb in the mines of Moria in the lord of the rings. 😊
also the journal Gandalf was reading from with the 'story' of their last stand was Ori's
I really enjoyed watching this reaction with you two - your enthusiasm is so infectious. And, you are right, Rob: the tone is different because Tolkien wrote it as a children's book whereas LotR was written for adults. Because PJ knew that people were expecting another LotR, he had the difficult task of blending the two stories together. Even Tolkien considered rewriting TH to make it more like LotR but never had the time.
Some people roll their eyes at the wrong things: for instance, many who haven't read the book are scornful of the songs and say that PJ has turned it into a second-rate musical. Others can't imagine how one slim volume was expanded into three films: but PJ and his writers didn't make it all up - instead, they scoured all of Tolkien's writings to fill in some of the gaps and they often found an answer - like where did Gandalf go when he left the dwarves in the book? Or, who is the mysterious Necromancer? Could he be.... Sauron? LotR describes every rock and stone of the journey - unnecessary in a film - but TH often passes over even important moments very quickly - sometimes in a few paragraphs or even a couple of sentences. And, for a visual medium like film, we want to see such things in detail. This accounts for some of the expansion.
Bear with Thorin: he is a complex character. He has two main aims - to fulfil his quest and to protect his men. Bilbo seems like a dangerous burden, someone who nearly gets them killed twice in the first part of the story. He stirs up the trolls and yet Thorin throws down his sword to save him; and he manages to fall off the cliff - again, Thorin risks his life to save him. Bilbo owes Thorin and Thorin is 'dwarf' enough to admit his mistake.
I once read TH with a class of 12 year olds. Their favourite bits were the meeting with the trolls - who do, indeed, have cockney accents - the confrontation with Smaug and the chapter called Riddles in the Dark when Gollum and Bilbo have their riddling contest. I'm surprised you don't remember the latter incident because PJ has kept pretty close to the book. Tolkien was a professor of Anglo-Saxon - a people who loved riddles. Here's one of them: 'What's green and has four wheels? Answer: Grass. I lied about the wheels.'
You are right about Thorin's voice and that of Sean Bean, LOL. The dwarven princes - Thorin, Fili and Kili, plus a few of the other dwarves - have Yorkshire accents, like SB. I think the Yorkshire accent was meant to portray them as gritty and tough - honest and reliable too.
Looking forward to your take on the other two films.
Extended Editions are almost required with The Hobbit. Theatrical version fall a bit short.
Are they watching the extended ones? I don't remember as it's been a while since I last rewatched the extended.
Yes we watched the extended versions.
Totally agree on the soundtrack. LotR had such an amazing soundtrack, and IMO the soundtrack in the Hobbit movies really lives up to that. Also, on the topic of sound, I just heard a Wilhelm scream in the fight in Goblin-town that I never noticed before...
Rings of Power isn’t unwatchable. It just doesn’t line up with the levels of care and dedication given by Jackson. Jackson took liberties with the source material, and so does Amazon. But people are more upset about it because it’s also just a little lower quality. But it still 1) looks amazing, and 2) feels like middle earth. I, personally, like it better than the hobbit with the exception of some of the performances, like Martin Freeman as Bilbo which is AMAZING. If you want more Middle Earth, watch it. But I’d you don’t want to risk upsetting people, just watch it on your own 😂
Dol Goldur portions are from the appendices. I recall reading The Hobbit & wondering where Gandalf would wander off to. Or where Radagast had been - so it was good to see that added for context.
It’s the same with the council in Rivendell. The specifics weren’t mentioned in the book since it was following Bilbo
All Goblins are Orcs but not all Orcs are Goblins, that's why Sting glows in the presence of both.
Those are Goblins. Goblins are basically smaller Orcs. Although Tolkien seemed to use the terms interchangeably. They are all part of the same race. So you have Gundabad Orcs, you have Saruman's Uruk Hai Orcs, you have Orcs from Mordor and you have the Goblins of the Misty Mountains and Moria. 😅
I think most fans enjoyed the dwarvish chant at Bilbo's home. The Goblintown number... not so much...lol 🤣
19:19 You are so right. It's the small moments like this that just really hit the nail on why the Middle-Earth film saga is so wonderful.
In the first edition of the book, the ring was a novelty. It could make you invisible, and that was pretty much it. Later editions of the book retconned the ring origin story from LoTR into the Hobbit.
Next The Hobbit Extended Edition Of The Desolation Of Smaug Extended Edition
Azog the Defiler is not a CGI character. He was portrayed by New Zealand actor by the name of Jonathan Manu Bennett.
The fan-made edits that reduce this trilogy of films down to one are much better to watch.
So glad to see this. I liked the Hobbit even if the cgi is a bit over done at times. It's got so much beauty and special moments and of course the music.
Im so happy you upload all the parts on the same day.. most other channels ive seen do 1 part a week which is annoying
It was pretty amazing when these movies were finally made. The studio and fans were begging for a Hobbit prequel as soon as Return of the King was released, but Peter Jackson did not want to spend his entire life directing Middle Earth films and decided he would help produce such a film but would not direct. His next project was the remake of the classic King Kong (also starring Andy Serkis - the king of motion capture!).
There was talk of several other directors (including Spielberg) stepping in, and for a time Benicio Del Toro was signed to write and direct the project - and had it proceeded under Del Toro it was likely the known characters would have been completely re-cast, different composer, different production design. After several years, the project never moved forward past pre-production and Del Toro dropped out to pursue other projects.
The studio still pressed to have The Hobbit made, and finally Peter Jackson returned when he realized just about any other director they hired would never rise to the same standards he wanted if the film was going to be a prequel to his LOTR films. So of course once he came back, the majority of the cast and crew also returned. Hobbiton and the Shire was rebuilt in New Zealand (it was cleared after the LOTR films were completed) and is now a tourist attraction.
My biggest issue with these films is how much stuff they had to cram into them. Each of the LOTR movies was based (for the most part) on a single book, though some liberties were taken moving plot points around to better suit the film plot or cut entirely (Tom Bombadil). Jackson originally intended to do the same with The Hobbit - one book-one film - but was convinced he could tell the story better if split into two films (as a lot of fantasy films were doing at the time, like the last Harry Potter book/films). Then the studio got greedy and said, "Why not make it a trilogy!" ($Cha-Ching$$)
The Hobbit was originally written as a pure children's fantasy book that Tolkien told his kids chapter by chapter at bed time. It was not supposed to be a terribly complicated plot. But by splitting a single book into three 2+ hour films there needed to be SO much filler, stuff that either came from other Tolkien novels or created just for the films (the Dwarf/Elf Romance Plot of the second film was one of the made-up-on-the-spot fillers) that just stretched the films out almost to the point of being boring.
The Hobbit would have been better served as only a 2 part film. It would have been more concise and integrated and I think would have worked much better as a book-end (no pun intended) to Jackson's masterpiece LOTR films.
He’s got the ring on. He’s feelin himself when he spears the orc
I remember playing Lotro and running around Goblin Town with my kin...brings back fond memories. Dol Guldur was an expansion later added in Lotro, that was some good times indeed!
Hello Rob & Trin ! I've been watching your movies reactions for a while now. And I must say I've really liked them very much. Absolutely loved this one too. Loved your envolvement in it and your emotions.
I must apologize for not subscribing sooner, cause you guys definitely deserve it. Now it's done.
Whishing you guys all the best on your channel.
Cheers from France.
I have watched many Hobbit trilogy reactions and I would say yours is one of my few favorites! Totally enjoyed watching your reactions and agree with your views at the end. Looking forward to seeing your reactions to the other 2!
5:28 I love how Trin says Goblinses 😆
I do not like the overuse of CGI in the Hobbit movies but overall they´re still very good - change my mind! Lucky you feel the same and can overlook some flaws it has! The Peter Jackson movies give me a special vibe that feels like it is real and not a story or movie at all. The detail in the movies is insane (even tho they changed some things both in LotR and Hobbit to make it more movie compatible)
@Rob & Trin: Glad (and pleasantly surprised) that you liked this one as much as you did. Most would say this is the best of the three, and that it really jumps the shark going forward, and I agree as well. But you guys are great about keeping an open mind and finding things to enjoy, so I'm looking forward to seeing what you think. Personally, as a LOTR fan, I was disappointed in what Jackson and co. did with The Hobbit. I think it's obvious that he bowed to the studio pressures and that this wasn't nearly the labor of love for him that the LOTR films were. But still a fun watch.
As for Rings of Power, I actually enjoyed it, and you might as well. They took a LOT of liberties with the lore, and changed a lot of things. But that didn't bother me, as I'm not overly attached to the LOTR lore outside of the proper Hobbit and LOTR trilogy, and I didn't overly mind the changes in things they did that actually do contradict. Even if you don't want to react to it, if you enjoy this universe by the end of this trilogy, I would recommend just watching it on your own. You might like it.
“Pity? It was pity that stayed Bilbo’s hand…..”
I love Hobbit. ❤I like a lot LoTR too but I actually like Hobbit more. All dwarves, especially Thorin, Bilbo (over Frodo), Gollum scenes were best here, Azog (the best orc ever), Bolg, Smaug, story, ...this are my of my the most fav movies. ❤
BTW, you know who provided the Great Goblin, he was voiced by the late great Barry Humphries, better known as Dame Edna Everidge!
---- a very pleasant journey --- Thank you guys.
Can't wait for you to see The Desolation of Smaug, it's my favourite of the three due to Smaug himself
Azog was CG enhanced, but it was Manu Bennett who played him, lovely gigantic New Zealand actor.
Hey Rob and Trin, I think you should give Rings of Power a go. Yes, there are many flaws with their creative choices, but if you like to get wrapped up with the emotion of relationships, brilliant acting, sweeping landscapes and sets, phenomenal scores, amazing action and gaming, I think you're up for enjoying the adventure. You have already shown a far greater appreciation for the hobbit than many fans, so I don't think you'll be disappointed.
Rings of Power has nothing to do with Tolkien, bar some names and places. It is a desecration of Tolkien's legendarium, written by Hollywood clowns.
Really sad there are selfish people who use their bias to tell reactors not to watch something just because they didn't like it instead of letting people decide for themselves if they like something 😔🙄
@@bensenzo you are absolutely right! People thinking other reactors shouldn’t watch something because they personally didn’t like it makes no sense at all! Selfishness at its finest.
orcs and goblins in Tolkien writing intertwined, nowadays the conclusion is that goblins are orcs that are bred and grown in mountains, that is why they are smaller
Tolkien seemed to waffle back and forth between the words Goblin and Orc.
The word Orc does not appear in The Hobbit, but they are referred to almost exclusively as Orcs in LOTR.
Most people agree that the small ones are Goblins and the big ones are Orcs, but then there's the Goblin King...
@@jonathonfrazier6622 That tracks because Uruk is Black Speech, which is a twisted form of Elvish.
I don't remember the word Orc being used in The Hobbit, but I'll take your word for it, as I haven't read it in many years.
I read the Hobbit back in 1he late 60s when I was a teen. But I read one of the LotR books first it was Two Towers, that I bought at a school book faire. Later I saw the Return of the King on sale then sone after, The Hobbit. I made it my mission to get the Fellowship of the Ring and then read them all in order! Several times through the years actually!
I too played LotRO back when the had just added the new lands Rivendell and soon after the lands of Moria. When they raised the level cap. My internet was pathetic so I had to stop. I may pick it up again.
The fleshing out of the Hobbit movies was Jackson trying to appeal to the LotR fans (not necessarily the books fans) who needed the tie-in to how this is relevant. He was took this opportunity to add more of the lore that he couldn't fit into even the extended version of LotR. I also think that since Gandalf and Elrond were mostly supporting characters in The Hobbit book, it would have been a harder sell to bring Ian McKellen and Hugo Weaving back for basically cameos. There was probably no need to make another trilogy, since LotR was an actual trilogy, but, as you mentioned, The Hobbit was not. But there was a ton of lore added by Tolkien in The Silmarillion and other books and short stories. Jackson scratches the surface where it is still relevant to the main plot, but it might still be well served in two movies max. Everyone's familiarity with Gandalf and Bilbo would help return audiences, but it was going to take time to care about the dwarves in the same way we did the Fellowship. As such, Jackson added a lot of story to flesh out minor characters that wasn't in any of the books, which at times can feel drawn out, or light-hearted. I just did the same you did, and enjoyed it in the spirit of the original children's story; while I didn't read the book until I was an adult, my first exposure was the animated The Hobbit shown to us in 5th grade - very much presented as a children's story (and a single volume).
@jonathonfrazier6622 Gandalf disappears while the company is in the Misty Mountains and gets captured by the Goblins. He helps free them, and gets them to Mirkwood, but then leaves them again to be lost, then captured by the Wood Elves, where they are kept for weeks. He doesn't turn up again until after the dwarves escape to Laketown, Smaug destroys it, is killed by Bard, and the Battle of Five Armies begins. That's a lot of story with Gandalf absent. The movies filled that time with him helping Radagast investigate Dol Guldur and the High Fells - and all that extra lore is why it became three movies instead of just 1 or 2.
Thanks for this. A lot of people seem to have forgotten that this was originally designed by Tolkien to be a children's fairy tale - Jackson did a decent job over three films when two would have sufficed - but the greedy studios ........ jeez. Pity Galadriel wasn't with them when the eagles showed up - it would have been the perfect conduit for them to break into Witchy Woman. (I'll get my coat).
It was so good to see the book dealt with this way. Reading the original story went so fast. The movies went into so much detail and stretched out a very good tale.
You guys are correct when comparing the 2 trilogies. Peter Jackson had plenty of time to prepare for the production of the 1st and much less for the 2nd resulting in the use/overuse of CGI for the 2nd.
Exactly. Originally, the movie was supposed to be directed by Guillermo del Toro and PJ only wanted to produce it, but GdT left after a lot of the preproduction was done and PJ made them start from scratch to make the style of the Hobbit match the style of LotR. I think that way they lost 18 months amd shooting was delayed. Also, the Hobbit was supposed to be two movies, but the studio wanted to have a three movie deal to make money. This evolved into a fully-blown argument and at that time, PJ got into Hospital due to a perforated stomach ulcer and almost died so that filming was delayed again until he recovered.
That's why, I think, they said in the making ofs, that they made the last movie almost entirely without having a drafted out storyboard because they couldn't afford to lose any more time.
And also, at onr time during the shooting, Martin Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch left for two months to shoot Sherlock. That was also in the making ofs, when Peter Jackson is saying goodbye to "Doctor Watson" 😄
Don't shy away from Rings of Power. It's not that bad, sure as a Tolkien nerd it's missing a lot of stuff and took some... unsavory directions... They played a bit too long with guessing who Sauron is and it just took away from a lot. However, the CG is amazing, the music is great, and some of the Dwarven stuff they do is top notch. I think you guys would like it if you liked this as much as you did.
Great reaction / review. The only thing left to say is; prepare yourselves.
As we say in Texas; y'all be safe.
People saying RoP isn’t worth watching don’t know hee haw. It’s been one season which I enjoyed and will be a slow build I think. People are just annoyed that it doesn’t look exactly like the PJ world but there are heavy influences
It's selfish gits. If you didn't like the show fine, but why are they telling other people not to watch it?
Exploring the Lord of the Rings is a series and podcast of Signum University, where Dr. Corey Olsen, known on the internet as the Tolkien Professor, goes through phrase by phrase of the Lord of the Rings books, and ends each episode with a community stroll through LotrO to see how the game has interpreted the books and notes of Tolkien. I strongly recommend it.
Also Dr Olsen together with Dr Maggie Parke have Other Minds and Hands where they go through discussion of adaptation of Tolkien's work, and a seperate channel for Rings of Power series analysis. I enjoyed the Amazon series, like one who knows Marvel comics and can still appreciate the movies as a different timeline. They had to adapt centuries of stories of the Second Age into a series, including Men lives that die out quicker than the Elf storylines, so I do give them some slack.
Variety has said that Peter Jackson is in talks to do more movies. Possibly exploring 4th age stuff from the appendices of Lord of the Rings...
i would honestly watch you rewatch the whole lotr stuff... more than once
Rob, you are not losing it. There is going to be LOTS in this series that you will not remember, because it wasn't in the book. They did a LOT of padding to turn a short book into 3 long movies. That is a major complaint for some. PLUS, people are wanting to naturally compare it to LOTR. That's not really fair. LOTR is Tolkien's masterwork. Should one compare Da Vinci's early work to the Mona Lisa?
These films are fun and with the right mind set you will enjoy them.
BTW, yes there definitely is a lot more CGI in this series. Also, in old English a drake is a serpent monster...aka a dragon 😁
Orcs and Goblins in the world of Tolkien is the same beings. Orcs/Goblins can look different pending on where they come from and how they live. Ergo you can recognize a orcs nationality from how they look and act.
Firstly let me say how much I enjoy your reactions & emotional investment in these films & Tolkien's world.
FYI I'd like to outline what I believe are the issues with these movies compared to the LOTR trilogy & perhaps why they didn't go down so well with many of the fans.
Originally the Hobbit was to made in 2 parts, produced by Peter Jackson but directed by Guillerm del Toro. However, there were multiple holdups & interference from the studio resulting in del Toro dropping out in favour of other commitments.
The studio, wishing to cash in on LOTR's success, wanted another trilogy, but this only served to put greater pressure on the crew already hampered by existing time constraints. Jackson took up the directing helm again & was forced to pad out the story with his usual cinematic embelishments, & excerpts drawn from other Tolkien works, mainly, The Silmarillion & Unfinished Tales.
For instance, Sauron is never mentioned in The Hobbit. The Necromancer is mentioned by Gandalf to the company & is the reason he leaves them at the entrance to Mirkwood, but that is the only reference in the book. In The Silmarillion & Unfinished Tales, Saruman, Gandalf, Elrond & Galadriel are known as The White Council & they do have dealings with Sauron at Dol Guldur (Hill of Sorcery) but that is not in The Hobbit.
Radagast the Brown is not in The Hobbit either. In fact he has a brief but important part in The Fellowship of the Ring. Gandalf meets him on his way to see Saruman. At Saruman's bidding, but in all innocence, he urges Gandalf to seek Saruman's council. Gandalf asks Radagast to get all of his bird & beast friends to send news to him at Isengard. That is how Gandalf escapes Isengard in the book: Gwarhir, Lord of the Eagles comes to find Gandalf imprisoned atop the tower & carries him away.
Though Thranduil is in the book, he is never referred to by name, being just called The Elf King. Legolas never appeared in The Hobbit & his inclusion seems little more than fan service.
Though the attempt to retake Moria by the Dwarves & the wounding of Azog by Thorin is in the appendices to LOTR, again it is not mentioned in the Hobbit. Neither is Azog & his inclusion in the film is another cinematic embellishment to pad out the films & increase the jeopardy.
Finally, & perhaps the one that galls the fans the most, is the inclusion of the character, Tauriel. She is an invention of the screen writers & her inclusion & subsequent involvement with Kili serves little purpose, other than a pointless sub-plot.
All of this "padding" put more pressure on filming deadlines. What we are left with are films that, though passable as fantasy adventure, appear bloated with unnecessary subplots & an over-reliance on CGI, rather than time consuming practical effects.
I believe these movies are further hampered by the fact that The Hobbit was a story for children (Tolkien's own children), whereas The LOTR was an adult sequel. This resulted in the apparent contradictory tone of many of the scenes, e.g. the comic nature of The Goblin King & his song, or the comic personalities of the trolls.
These are just my thoughts on the situation & why The Hobbit movies are not so beloved by the fans.
I guess I'm one of the few people that liked Rings of Power. I hear that they're going a bit of a different way with the lore and how certain characters act but at the very least I found it entertaining for what it is. Maybe if I knew the lore like the back of my hand then I'd have a bigger issue with it. I will say that it's a bit more adult themed than the movies.
@@anni.68 Yeah, I'm only guessing from what I've heard others say. They seemed to have a bigger problem with Amazon making stuff than the actual content. Well, except for non-white Dwarves and Elves with short hair. A group of people seemed to have a big problem with that.
@@jonathonfrazier6622
Who's this everybody you're referring to?
@@jonathonfrazier6622 who's this literally everybody? You're not answering the question. And I suppose you have evidence of this delusional claim?
@@jonathonfrazier6622
Do you have difficulties answering a simple question? I said PROVIDE evidence of this "Everyone" and this so called "truth" and you haven't
And I don't think you know what "self evident" means😅
@@jonathonfrazier6622 I think you need to look up the meaning of the word “Literally” my dude and stop making a habit out taking YOUR opinion and saying its “everybody’s opinion”… Rings of Power LITERALLY has a better score than all of the Hobbit films both on Rotten Tomatoes and on Metacritic, also a 7.0 from IMDB… So yeah, no idea what you mean by “everybody” hating it. It seems like you hated it, which is fine, haters hate, its what they do! Just please realize that you are actually part of a “hating minority”, and no, your opinion is actually not shared by the majority of fans. Check yo' self before you wreck yo' self. :)
The people who hate rings of power are the super fans who know all the lore. That’s what you tend to get with adaptations of books but general fans like myself really enjoyed it.
Or just racists who have a problem with characters being made black even though they're literally fictional characters 🙄
If you want more Middle Earth after the books, that's literally what D&D was invented for (despite pleadings against lawsuits brought by the Tolkien estate).
Talking of other forays into middle earth have you guys seen the old Ralph Bakshi (part animated, part live action) LOTRs? its sadly only one part but its great as an early foray. also the animated film Wizards, not Middle earth but still great.
Oh thank you we will check it out!
I don't think 'chill out' is in Azog's vocabulary. XD
spoiler!
.
.
.
.
bilbo ducking and hiding and not being seen is a special power of the small folk. in the og trilogy frodo uses it a few times, the rock cloak wasnt just the cloak is just helped, and i know at least one other time but cant remember exactly. its not stealth exactly, more like can just leave the memory lol making them blind to them in their mind? its a weird one.
The Amazon series, "Rings of power," I think it's called was actually pretty good. Would be cool to see how you like it.
gandalf the wizard of shao lin! swings the wand well doesn't he? 😊
i dont really do reading of books i cant hold my attention. i got the audiobook of this read by Andy Serkis... i waited and waited then he does Golum. :O
Heya. Really enjoyed the reactions. if you enjoyed LOR online you should really try The game war in the north. its a older LOR game but single player and co op exploration of another perspective of the war of the ring. I'm binging on this series, so thank you for that.
Thank you so much for your comment, and thank you for the suggestion! will check it out.
A feral midget! Hahaha brilliant!
🙈
Looked at in isolation these three films are objectively great but the reason for them being seen as inferior to LOTR is easy.
They crammed The Hobbit full of extra content to stretch it out to a trilogy and connect it to LOTR.
Undoubtedly due to financial/studio pressure but in making a three movie prequel to LOTR they lost the essence of The Hobbit.
To steal a phrase from Bilbo it felt like butter scraped over too much bread
From what I recall it was because initially the plan was for Guillermo del Toro to direct _The Hobbit_ with Peter Jackson and his writers advising, but then Pacific Rim came up and del Toro dropped out to focus on that, at which point Jackson decided to just take over as director, but the studio didn't give him more prep time to make the film 100% the way he wanted. The knock on effect of this is that he was pretty much laying out track in front of himself, which started to run out by the time he got to the climax of the book and he had no idea how wrap the films up. so he bought more time to figure it out by splitting what was supposed to be two movies into three, giving him enough time to plot out the ending and film it (On top of all this health issues brought on by the stress of the project, including a heart attack) The studio gladly took on the idea of a third movie cause it meant more potential revenue for them, but it was hardly a mandate from them.
@@bustedsim
It was an incredibly messy production but the really disgusting thing was how the studio treated the majority of the dwarves.
The international dwarf actors were invited to the premier but the New Zealand based dwarves weren't until people kicked up a stink about it.
Much like LOTR the behind the scenes info for these films is fascinating but not entirely positive.
I like this film a lot. It is not as good as the Lord of the Rings. Some of the action etc. is a bit more OTT and too obviously GCI. However, it is still very enjoyable and compares very well to virtually any other films. You are right in saying that the Hobbit book is for kids (and pretty short too!). The tone was VERY different and, as you say, the Ring gave invisibity to its wearer but that is it. Only later did Tolkien develop the idea of the Ring being Sauron's and effectively made the Hobbit a prequel. Jackson therefore had to decide how to go about adapting it. Keep the tone of the book (more childish and comic) or the later Lord of the Rings? On the whole, I think he did a pretty good job and struck a good balance. He has added a hell of a lot to the book and got flak for it. I think he has gone over the top and made up too much stuff (more so in the next two instalments). However, a lot of what he has added was not in the book but it was still taken from Tolkien's writing: some of the Lords of the RIngs books, a lot from the appendices to the Lord of the Rings and other writings (such as Unfinished Tales). I really enjoy those aspects. So, it is a good trilogy and I am really looking forward to your reaction to the next two.
Dont get me wrong these movies dont quite make the mark that lord of the rings did, but then again not many movies meet lotr period, so even as the lesser trilogy these films are incredible, and yes, an attempt to combine a childrens book to an adult trilogy that werent originallu even set in the same world
Just think if Bilbo had killed Gollum in the cave.
I would say, don't shy away from rings of power. Yes, there are so many naysayers for that series out there, but in my opinion they are people who don't resonate with Middle Earth as much as others do. It's really for people who want to delve deeply, along with other writings of Tolkein, into the lore of Middle Earth. Is totally a personal thing. It has its problems I grant you, but there's a lot to be taken from it. And the music is phenomenal, done by Bear McCreary who did the music for Walking Dead
I learned quite a bit from that series. Definitely worth them watching.
Rings of Power has nothing to do with Tolkien, bar some names and places. It is a desecration of Tolkien's legendarium, written by Hollywood clowns.
meh, give it a year or two more and ppl will warm up to RoP, i'd like to remind ya'll that there was similar narration/reaction to the hobbit trilly when it was released :] i bet half of the ppl hating it didn't even watch it, never trust the hate, always check it out and make your own mind. it is so popular to hate on stuff these days...
and visuals in RoP are amazing, worth watching imo, dunno if worth making videos out of it, because money, but i'd watch it. 🖖
@@decanaba Yes! I was going to respond with something of the kind, but I couldn't be bothered with something that would make no difference to people who feel that way. I kind of wonder why people who say that things are bastardizations of Tolkien actually were watching Rob and Trin react to this trilogy. I love Middle Earth so I watched all three movies in the theater when they came out, but, I certainly was smacking my forehead repeatedly with the major changes from the book. But, it is an interpretation made by Peter Jackson and I trust him with Middle Earth.
@@JustKelso1993 because the show was produced by Amazon, and Amazon didn't have the rights to the Silmarillion, they *only* could pull from the appendices. There was no book that covered the material like with Lord of the rings and The Hobbit.
⚒❤⚔
Rings of power was perfectly fine. Lots of people didn't like that the cast included lots of dark skin 🙄 others I think complained about the comparison with the source material? The source material was just some excess lore Tolkien created and I don't read that so i had no judgement there. It explains a lot of the origins of mordor the rings and the elves. There's plot twists and beautiful scenery. I say try a few episodes and see what you think. They played down the enjoyabialty of the hobbit and the incredible hulk too
Exactly
Really sad there are selfish people who use their bias to tell reactors not to watch something just because they didn't like it instead of letting people decide for themselves if they like something 😔🙄
Goblins are a sub species of orcs the orcs in Moria were goblins Legolas said as much
Hey Rob, do you live in the US as a Brit? I can’t work it out 😂
100% UK 😅
❤❤❤❤❤
awesome reaction, as always!
Have you stopped Wandavision??
MCU content is on Saturdays.
I'm really conflicted about these movies. Tolkien's Middle Earth is treasured mythology to me and the way they butchered it offends me. But these aren't terrible fantasy stories in their own right, in fact, they're better than average. But that's largely due to the leveraging of props, sets, and cast from the LotR movies. As well, the picking and choosing of aspects of Tolkien's works, certainly helped. Then with pandering to audiences, they had a sure money maker, but a real bastardization of something I hold dear. Like the way televangelists co-opt religion to their own ends, that is largely what I feel here. No matter how moved I feel by the spirit, I'm still sad and a bit angry. If they hadn't co-opted Tolkien, these movies would be nothing but fun.
Love the Scrooge McDuck reference.
I happen to love Rings of Power, it's a shame so many people hate it and shout it down to reactors. Make your own decision on if you want to watch it or not. Though I have a feeling your thoughts on it will be predetermined by hearing so much negativity about it ahead of time.
Yeah
Really sad there are selfish people who use their bias to tell reactors not to watch something just because they didn't like it instead of letting people decide for themselves if they like something 😔🙄
Watch Rings of Power.
People are being crybabies about the whole thing.
You enjoy amazing visuals, callbacks and incredible music, you will atleast enjoy watching it once.
Ah, The Rings of Power isn't that bad. The vision of the Fall of Númenor alone is well worth watching the whole thing for, and come on, you've got Lenny Henry as a stage oirish proto-hobbit. You can't miss that!
I agree. RoP to me was pretty good. It's not even close to LOTR good (what is?)but it has some good moments. My favorite is the opposite of Numenor's fall...it was seeing the genesis of Mordor and Mt. Doom 😁
they ,made golum much cuter here
I am aware that this opinion might not be popular. But as someone who loved the LoTR trilogy as much as you both did, I think you should definitely give Rings of Power a chance. I might not be up to the standards of OG Peter Jackson (what is? if we’re being honest), but I just know you will both find several things to love about it! Like I said, manage your expectations, but just enjoy going back to Middle Earth and watching some of the Tolkien stories we never thought we’d see in live action. I for one would love watching you react to it. Just my honest opinion.
please watch rings of power when you can. the complaints people had for it are the same ones people had for the hobbit movies and you seem to like them so far
Hold on ! It was not the right soundtrack when the eagles arrive. Where was Hotel California? 😁
😂😂
Stretching a short children's book into a movie trilogy means there will be a lot of creative liberties being taken. The Hobbit does have a lighter tone to it than LOTR - as it is meant to be.
I don't mind the cartoonish silly scenarios - like when the dwarves escaped the Goblin King. I just told myself that some of it is Gandalf's doing. Since Gandalf is not allowed to directly use his powers - He is magically helping the dwarves to escape 'indirectly'.
As for Amazon's Rings of Power - The production team fired anyone who had actual passion for LOTR source material. They replaced them with WOKE activists. I knew this was going to be bad news for the series. I won't tell anyone not to watch it. I will say to watch with discretion knowing that passion for LOTR was not the series intent. Instead, passion for "the message" was the primary goal. Nostalgia is again being used to push an agenda.
Really sad there are selfish people who use their bias to tell reactors not to watch something just because they didn't like it instead of letting people decide for themselves if they like something 😔🙄
Yup stay away from the rings of power. Imo it was a smack in the face to Tolkien
Stop being a selfish git and let people watch something and decide for themselves if they like it🙄
Rings of Power is not that good but I liked it. It's different and has lore issues (like colored Elves and Dwarf womens without beards). That were the only things I disliked about the serie, cause it is not what Tolkien would've wanted. But it's not Amazons fault, they didn't become all the filming rights to stay true to the lore. I recommend u guys to watch it, just to see what ur opinion is to this serie. I would enjoy watching ur reaction to this serie, but if you're not I'm fine with it too 🫠😂