The Missed Opportunities of the Battle of the Five Armies
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 07. 2018
- Here I break down the components that lead to clear and exciting battles and how the Hobbit, well... isn't.
Support this channel at: / filmsandstuff
Also Follow me on Twitter at: / jburd22
Other Great videos on the hobbit:
Lindsay Ellis: • The Hobbit: A Long-Exp...
Just Write: • Why The Hobbit Sucks P...
CInefix: • 5 Brilliant Moments of... - Krátké a kreslené filmy
I feel sorry for Jackson. They gave him almost no planning time, a direct contrast to LotR
I do not, in the slightest bit. There was no need to make the battle of the five armies such a huge set piece. In the book the battle is skipped over almost entirely. He wanted yet another opportunity to show his skills off and this time he missed the mark quite badly. This video doesn't even touch upon Jackson just deciding that the basic laws of physics do not apply any more if he doesn't want them to. Who decided that an extended chariot chase scene across a frozen river was going to be a great idea ?
To be honest I think Jackson was tied down by the studio and was bogged down by many interference and problems on the set.
I feel the same... and you can see it in his eyes every time you see him in an interview or making off scene- he know it's not good... of better not as good as LotR.
@Luke Daniels There was such a need as soon as they decided there would be 3 movies. And I'm pretty sure Peter Jackson didn't decide that.
@Brad BradBradBrad money will not give happiness
Peter Jackson had a mental breakdown during the making of the film and it was the battle itself that was getting to him the most all because he had little to no time at all to set up the pieces perfectly. In the end Andy Serkis who was still learning about directing took over during his breakdown just to finalize the film. You are right there is a lot of deep thought put into Battle of the Five armies especially around theme and theme is the biggest pro of Lord of the Rings and why it's such a fantastic film series But it's main issue was the lack of time and the high stress that had the entire film team scattered and the battle scenes do speak of the horrible state of the crew members who were working hard but working in circles.
I was so upset at how many people hated Peter Jackson simply because he made this film, they said he was like George Lucas saying he 'sold out' or he was being lazy when it was clear he was trying really hard and was just in too much of a bad state.
I personally liked the film, the only downside of it are the scenes where shield wall is up the fukng elves jumps over it, i mean WTF? small shared screen time between THorin and Bilbo , from the time of Thorin's death there was little of meanng of it and lastly Beorn highlights it should have been like Gandalf arrived timely to save the day at Rohan's defence of Helm's deep. Also, orcs were breed for war but defeated easily by mob of peasants
czcams.com/video/SQkygZdZ_Vk/video.html This video explains it perfectly!
Ken G How long did they give him?
Well said
George Lucas didn’t do any of those things either!
When you were talking about the battle of minas tirith and Pelennor fields I got chills THINKING about theoden's speech
Child of Fire by far in my opinion one of the best movie scenes in film
Reading your comment about theodens speech gave me chills
Same! It's SO GOOD!
Same!
"Smay-oog"
"Thrandrill."
@@DoubleADwarf Chmavg
tharandill lord of the pickle elves
I wondered how far I would have to scroll down to see this comment , turns out no far lmao
"So in this two part series..." I look forward to Part Three.
I see what you did there.
Great comment, but I must ask, it's been over a year an where is part 2?
George Linford :/
So... part 2... has that been released anywhere or is that still in production or...?
Here still waiting for part 2
I should add PJ wanted this to be 2 movies and didnt want the love triangle. Warner pushed both of those. Also the pre production for these movies was very short compared to lotr. And a lot of the actual battle was filmed on the go and they had to take a break so some of the lead people could give the battle a direction. They did well enough for what they were given.
Seriously, why did the studio put the love triangle in the films?
Master Penguin love, sex and drama sells. Who cares about ingenious good things anymore? It’s all about the money sadly
@@masterpenguin8472 to throw a bone at all the women who were dragged into the theatres by their significant other or children. It's not just The Hobbit, they literally do this for every movie now.
Jackson didn't even want to be the director. It seems that del Toro was forced out of the role, and Jackson had to take the gig to keep the production in NZ and protect the jobs of lots of people at Weta. Lindsay Ellis' videos get into this as well as the general problems of the films.
@@RSMVreviewer Ironically I've yet to meet a woman who was thrilled about there being a forced love story. (thinks) Except for the Reylo crowd.
0:54
Smay-oog.
Smay-oog?
SMAY-OOG?!
Tolkien stated in notes it is pronounced "Smog" with the og being au (ow). He did this because of how it was pronounced in old Norman. Which he used much in Hobbit and Lord of Rings.
Or if you're Peter Jackson: SHMAOWG.
@NorthernLight Nope, Old Norman is where he got it. Norman and Norse are not same. Since he came from a Norman background it stands to reason, he'd use it. And I had name correct.
Old Norman, also called Old Northern French or Old Norman French, was one of many langues d'oïl (Old French) dialects. It was spoken throughout the region of what is now called Normandy and spread into England, Southern Italy, Sicily and the Levant. It is the ancestor of modern Norman, including the insular dialects (such as Jèrriais), as well as Anglo-Norman. Old Norman was an important language of the Principality of Antioch during Crusader rule in the Levant.
Old Norse
the North Germanic (Scandinavian) language of medieval Norway, Iceland, Denmark, and Sweden up to the 14th century, from which the modern Scandinavian languages are derived.
Tolkien though used Old Norman and we know this because he said he did, in his notes and letters. Most people confuse these, so I dont blame you if you didnt know. It's a common mistake.
@@StacieMMeier smaug it's actually from Old English, same as Smeagol and Smial. Tolkien created the word from a germanic root, itshould be the past tense of "smugan": to creep, to crawl, to move gradually.
You can either pronounce it in a modern british fashion or in the Old English way, it's not that important.
So it could rime with smoke or with town.
Tolkien himself often pronounced "Smeagol" the british way instead of the way it's supposed to be pronounced in Old English.
@@StacieMMeier also this thing about Tolkien and old norman is incorrect. You are either talking about Old English or Old Icelandic.
14:57 Can i be the one to say it should have been Balin talking to Thorin in the throne room when he tells him that he would kill dwalin. It would have had a bigger emotional effect as Balin and Thorin have clearly had the closest relationship the entire trilogy. Dwalin and Thorin have barely even spoken to each other it was stupid that moment had both of them all of a sudden and it supposed to mean something. Now if under the influence of dragon sickness thorin said to BALIN that he would kill him and Balin shed the tears saying "you cannot see what you have become". That moment would have resonated so much more.
Nah, I disagree. I think it's good that we have been shown that both Balin and Dwalin continue to care about Thorin's wellbeing and the situation. Dwalin is said to be Thorin's right hand man and a close friend so of course he would do that. Balin could have also done it, I don't disagree on that.
guitarman0365 I don’t get why it isn’t dealing as he obviously have the most chemistry and he’s seen as the wise old one and this is illustrated even more by the fact he becomes the king when thorin is dead as we see in FOTH
@@Sipu97 Except to the audience, that was a shallow scene. People didn't even remember Dwalin's name. It was Balin who was established as the voice of reason among a bunch of petty, foolish dwarves.
Both Dwalin and Balin have been very close to Thorin during the entire trilogy. However, when Thorin is consumed by greed, both react very differently. We see Balin's reaction in his conversation with Bilbo - Balin knows about Dragon sickness and doubts that anything could change Thorin's mind at that point. Dwalin does not realise this, which is why he goes to see Thorin.
@@tiaaaron3278 Well I can only speak for myself but I remembered Thorin, Balin, Dwalin, Fili, Kili, Bofur and Bombur after my first viewing
i hate when the lighting is so perfect and the picture is so sharp that everything starts to look unreal or hyper real or i don't know, just not good. lotr just looks like real life in many of the scenes, so grounded and beautiful
I know its only a minor thing for some people, but the CGI in The Hobbit really confused me. It was almost like they intentionally made it look completely unrealistic which immediately severs what little immersion you had in the weak story beats. How can a Giant CGI Elephant from 2003 look better than a small CGI humanoid dwarf from 2014? I honestly sit and wonder what their thought process was when making some of these decisions. "Look at what we've made! We can make this dwarf do a backflip and kick 3 ocs while landing in a barrel floating down a river of broken dreams. It looks like a video game cutscene from 2004 but it costs money and is (arguably) visually appealing."
"...You've hit gold."
The dwarves are not CGI though. They're real actors, just like for the hobbits.
@@MarkHogan994
A. They were referring to the actions in the barrel scene, during which they are most definitely CGI.
B. Billy Connolly's Dain Ironfoot was 100% CGI. Along with the rest of that Dwarven army.
David Turner and too little smaug
@@MarkHogan994 ...
I think they really meant to make the cgi more unrealistic or as i say "videogame-ish"
and i like it tho, nah really i know i am about to get some shitload of hate but i like the hobbit's cgi way more than lotr's it makes middle-earth look unreal and fantastic and not realistic it makes it look like another world i mean.....wtf would you expect a world of elves and dwarves and dragons will look like ffs, let me tell you
O.T.H.E.R.W.O.R.L.D.Y
Its one of the things that i really loved about the hobbit and i still don't get it why people hate it
“I miss my books, and my armchair, and my garden. See, that’s where I belong, that’s home. That’s why I came back, cause you don’t have one, a home. It was taken from you. But I will help you take it back if I can.” -Bilbo Baggins
Apollo X Sins that shit made me cry
DADDY the first two was actually really good
@@ikoandreas5085 First was great, second was worse but still good imo.
@@beaverones41 the 3d one?
@@ikoandreas5085 Bad, not unenjoyable but bad.
I found it fascinating how the actual Battle in the book only a few pages is.
The book didn't give much detail because it didn't last long and because the teller of the story wasn't really part of Battle. Since we know that Bilbo didn't tell the whole truth in "There and Back Again", we must doubt how the battle really happened.
Dankiel I kind of wander what it would be like if it was more like the book
Are you Yoda
That’s mostly because the whole of The Hobbit is how Bilbo perceives events, and since he gets knocked out right at the beginning, it basically just describes what people tell him. This is also part of the reason none of the stuff Gandalf does when he disappears for a while shows up in the book.
The book have a bad ass Beorn, who solve the battle in lines, in the film is just an other character
Very enlightening. A great explanation why I never cared about what was happening to any of the characters in Five Armies. My brain understood the stakes, understood the different forces, understood the scale of the battle, but never cared about any of it. I thought it might be too much CGI was killing my suspension of disbelief, or that it was dragging on so I was getting bored. The point you made about the women joining the battle really opened my eyes. If we never see the build-up to a 'moment' and we never see a resolution for that 'moment', then the moment was hollow. That's why none of it mattered. Because narratively, it didn't really. It was all leading to a predictible finale with predictible beats that didn't offer anything new.
Honestly I like the movie due to the "cool" factor, the only points in the movie that actually made me think anything other then "Cool" was when Fili, Kili and Thorin died.
The most common complaint about the film is too much CGI and too much Alfred and Legolas. But these are complaints made by people that know something is missing but they don't know what so they go with the more obvious elements that annoy them, however what they don't realise is that it's a more complicated element of storytelling that you've explained really well: purpose/reason for action set piece , character and theme. Everyone says The Hobbit's bad because of the CGI and Alfred and other things that make it bad but their existence covers up what's missing and it's the missing parts that makes it unsuccessful for the most part
Bingo!
Don't get me wrong, I love them. I enjoy them as a bit of fun and adventure and I feel like they captured the essence of the book quite well as a children's story, especially AUJ
Good point. Also, there's actually far LESS CGI in The Hobbit than people think. Because of very weird lighting, orcs in costumes and practical sets manage to look as if they're computer generated. Very strange.
What a patronising comment.
I mean... Alfred WAS terrible in this film. He was okay in Desolation, but... so out of place in this film. So was Legolas, to be honest - although slightly better than Alfred...
"Theme and character always come first, in every story you will ever see."
I don't know why but this made me really happy to hear. Thanks.
When the Hobbit first came out I actually really liked it but on repeat viewings, it just didn't hold up. My biggest complaint about BOTFA is that Bilbo was just a minor supporting character.
W-James He was in the book also though, and for the battle itself he was unconscious
But remember, the battle was just one part of a much larger story with Bilbo as the lead.
@The Revanite And the reason for this is that Jackson split one book into three movies. Not to mention that BOTFA is like 1/50 of the book, because Hobbit does completely nothing during battle, because he's a coward. The Hobbit is more of a quest, not a battle, it's about the wit, not about physical strength. Therefore, Bilbo is not a leader, he is the one who breaks the rules.
@@mishynaofficial it wasnt Jackson's fault, it was the studios'
Well, to be fair ... in the original novel he was unconscious during the entire battle while wearing the ring. He was literally invisible.
Its last minute business decisions and years of preparation not given that made Hobbit what it was. Honestly it could have been much worse
The battle of the five armies took the worst of it, they where doing pre production and production at the same time...
The Hobbit is a prime example of what can go wrong if studios interfere way to much... Like deciding it would be 3 movies after finishing the first. The desolation of smaug was never meant to be there, it would be An Unexpected Journey and There and Back Again. He made a great first movie and somehow a great second movie and good third movie. Hell The Battle of the Five armies has a 7.4 on IMDB which is a very respectable score. (1 & 2 where both a 7.9, which I would consider great scores)
czcams.com/video/20vA9U7J2qQ/video.html
Hey at least it was better than the 1960s version of the Hobbit ^^
Fellowship: 9.7/10
Towers: 9.8/10
Return: 10/10
Journey: 7.4/10
Desolation: 6.7/10
Battle: 3.8/10
yea pretty much, the first two even thou had flaws very really enjoyalble but the battle of the 5 armies made no sense at all
I would swap the scores of TTT and ROTK, otherwise we agree.
suniis the first 3 are all fucking amazing so whatever
The Hobbit started off following the books precisely off the page, then it just went off the rails!
Just because it follows the book doesn't mean that it's automatically good. I actually like it when movie adaptations of books stray away from the source material because at least you get something new.
@@avidfather1864 Or you get Game of Thrones Season 7 and 8.... ugh..
@@avidfather1864 Of course, it always depends on the source material and medium that you adapt into. If you tried to exactly copy the LotR books into movie format, you'd fail miserably. That's why tons of cuts and changes were made, but the themes, the main characters and motivations were kept intact, and the core story beats were followed faithfully. Wherever they strayed, like in the removal of the Scouring of the Shire, those changes were always made to service the themes and character arcs. That's how you turn even a supposedly un-adaptable story into a cinematic marvel that is loved by old and new fans alike and will be for many years to come.
The story of the Hobbit is very simple, and as opposed to many other books, would overall actually be rather easy to adapt into movie format. Of course there would always be changes made, and I don't mind unnecessary changes as long as they serve a purpose and can stand on their own as a good storytelling decision. But the Hobbit movies do none of that. They not only fuck up almost everything that was good about the book, they also fuck up pretty much all of their original material too.
I will say that Peter Jackson has a certain style with his films, he doesn't necessarily always follow the source material all the way through. Peter Jackson likes to add his own flavor to the films he makes and that's perfectly fine, that's what a lot of people say when they're criticizing The Hobbit.
Ok, I just wanted to say this because it has been bugging me how many people seem to dislike the Hobbit trilogy. I feel like a lot of times disliking something becomes popular on the Internet and therefor people forget all the positive sides to that thing. It seems to be the case with the Hobbit, because I personally feel like these movies offer something amazing, the feeling of adventure and voyage you get from the books, the music, the visuals, the camerawork, all fit together to create an amazing piece of art. Yes, I consider it to be art. If you need more convincing, go listen to ''The World is Ahead'', it encapsulates the whole Hobbit spirit, the feeling of going on an epic quest.
Best comment, bravo!
Agreed!
The first hour or so of the first movie was fantastic, I was so excited to keep watching. Especially the way they introduce the dwarves. But then the movie slowly starts to get stale and you just feel like your jumping from scene to scene trying to reflect on what just happened. This is just my opinion though. All in all I really liked the series and like you said the feeling of adventure is immense in The Hobbit, thats my favorite part of the whole series. "Home is now behind you, the world is ahead"
For me it’s ok to hate on something if the negatives out way the positives
exactly. People call Cumberbatch sauron "awful" LOL
Another thing that Lotr did better was making an intimidating enemy, the uruk-hai of Helm’s deep and the Haradrim and Orcs of Pelenor fields are dangerous, Skilled, and competent enemies, in the battle of the 5 armies, the orcs are just a faceless sea of cgi punching bags, they try to set up them as these orcs trained from birth to fight, but then they have poor and starving townspeople cut through them easily, and elves and dwarves carve through them like hot knives through butter
@Britannic hayyomatt funny because the hobbit has very little in common with the movies
+ there was supposed to have goblins in the army since the goblin king was killed
@Britannic hayyomatt too much? They didn't really.
@Britannic hayyomatt The tone of The Hobbit movies was unnecessarily gritty. Nothing like a children's story.
Children's stories can be dark, but they should not be gritty. All that gory killing was unnecessary
The Unexpected Journey was the best of the three movies and actually a good film. It felt like the book and it definitely felt like it took place in the same Middle Earth as the LOTR trilogy. It was the movie with the least cgi and the most practical effects, and most importantly, Bilbo was the star of the story. This movie seems to be the only movie Peter Jackson actually had a plan for lol.
The last two movies were really boring and the tone was so different from the first. The way the story unfolded was terrible and the bad CGI just took me out of the film.Both Desolation and the Battle of the five armies had zero charm. They were just really bad movies. What a shame. Things could have been really good if they would have stuck to two films and if Peter Jackson would have gotten pre production time.
First half of desolation felt like the book as well.
It's still missing Smaug, so it's missing the best part of the entire trilogy.
Andrew Vincent I definitely agree. It captured that "children books" adventure feel really well, but 3specially in the Battle of Five Armies it to totally lost that.
desolation is the best IMO
I have a feeling that originally in The Hobbit novel, Tolkien conveniently dropped Bilbo out of the main action of The Battle of the Five Armies so as not to lock the reader into having to experience the epic battle and essential storytelling crescendo of the book through Bilbo’s quite honestly limited perspective of the events. By muting his protagonist’s narrative perspective this way, the reader can be allowed to take a much more omniscient view of events.
Also, I personally commend Peter Jackson when it comes to his use of Gandalf as a character. PJ had to follow Tolkien’s lead in having to be so resolutely careful when wielding the character of Gandalf through the action and events of the movies. As a character, in both the books and the movies, Gandalf knows that to a great degree he has to remain on the outside of the events he is clearly having a huge hand in shepherding. Even though he is obviously a character of epic scope, wisdom, and power, he is very rarely utilized as Deus Ex Machina (and yes, I submit that the eagles are COMPLETELY used as Deus Ex Machina to a ubiquitously absurd degree but then again I guess this is all high fantasy we are talking about and maybe by dissecting it, we are missing the point...)
I don’t know, sue me, but I LOVE The Hobbit movies. And LOTR in book form as well as film form holds just about the most special place imaginable in my heart. I think these films are an embarrassment of riches as far as adaptations go. I think as an audience, and as fans of the books and legacy, we got very, very lucky having PJ and WETA’s extraordinary vision driving the movies. Truly, imho we don’t really have much to complain about. I am just so happy we have so much Middle Earth to wallow around in, for good and for bad. And hey, the books are NOWHERE near true literary masterworks either, but they will ALWAYS endure. I think the movies will too.
Either way, sorry to ramble. THIS WAS SUCH A GREAT VIDEO! I loved it and can’t wait for part 2!
😀
Hold up. The books aren't literary masterworks? In what universe? The same alternate universe where Africa colonized Europe?
Max B. lol agree
I disagree *slightly* on the Thorin/Azog fight. THAT subplot centers entirely on theme of vengeance and how it escalates. Azog kills Thorin's grandfather, Thorin maims and disfigures Azog, Azog kills Thorin's effective heirs Kili and Fili, Thorin kills Azog, Thorin dies. It's a very "Tolkien" theme and arc, it's just a little weird that it's placed front and center when the *central* theme of the piece of supposed to be about valuing home over gold.
But it's bullshit, poorly-choreographed bullshit and adds nothing to Thorin's character. He remained a selfish douche bag till the end. And he was not redeemed.
In the book, he became selfless and united three races with his heroism. Thorin died like a hero with Fíli and Kíli by his side. Moreover, he *earned* the forgiveness of men and elves. His funeral was a grand event where an elf-king and a human lord paid homage to him. That was a beautiful redemption arc.
@@tiaaaron3278 Fair enough the fighting choreographing isn't very good. But do you not remember Thorin's last lines to Bilbo where he had finally changed his mind because that was a pretty big deal to his character arc. Also the whole point of Thorins character after getting back Erebor was to then kill Azog because he had murdered most of his race and killed his grandfather, Azog was a big threat towards Thorin and he wanted his revenge.
I know that's your opinion and that's fine but I think there was a bit more meaning in his death.
Fantastic video. I honestly can’t believe that both of these trilogies were made by the same director. Say what you will for the Hobbit being rushed or the studio interference or whatever, but it feels like there’s something much deeper missing. You have to wonder if Peter Jackson knew even as he was calling action that one day a million different CZcamsrs would make video essays comparing the films against one another.
LotR was Jackson's first movie adaption. It had a lot of material to adapt, and a lot that needed cutting. I imagine Jackson was much less confident in making large changes at this point in time.
Years later, he's working on the Hobbit. At this stage, people liked his changes in LotR (mostly), and he feels more confident. He's done some other films, like King Kong, which are big and a bit crazy. The Hobbit leaves a lot of stuff to the imagination (Seriously, the only description of the dwarves is what colour robe they wear, and which instrument they carry). So he's forced to add stuff instead of cutting stuff. He's more confident that he's right this time, and so are the producers - and they both feel that they need to top LotR, when really they needed to match it. So they go bigger, more fantastical... less sensible... and you end up with BotfA
tbh the base material is quite different. Hobbit is a child's tale and LOTR is an epic novel. The themes are different as well.
The corruptibility of power/greed is probably the most prescient theme through the series, so I'd disagree with you there.
I meant the books.
Idk, when you see how he looks behind the scenes of the Hobbit, in all three films, he looks so worn down and tired and depressed, it started off horrible as he said "we had a YEAR before filming even began for LOTR to plant Hobbiton, to screen write, etc, this time we had no time at all", he took on the project way late in the game, bc he didn't want to see someone who didn't know Tolkien and the series and appreciate it as much as he knew he did, but studios have a way of being big fucking bullies, and I think it just really wore him down, he had to make all these split second decisions that he shouldve had way more time with, and honestly I think the only reason the Hobbit became a trilogy is bc Jackson was trying to buy himself as much time as he possibly could, it just still wasn't enough....
I ove the moment when Thranduil cuts Tauriels bow. First you see the back of her head and only him, thinking and then he swings his sword and there is a super fast cut, so when her hair is out of the way, his angry face is there, looking super intense. It was an amazing cut.
there was a cut scene such as about the Gem of Lasgalen the importance of it for Thranduil and others cutscenes that would be thematically beautiful
Me leading the charge at helms deep was way more epic the Theodens at the white city
sure Gandalf, get some rest.
Gandalf the white DEEEEEEATH!
Too much pipeweed again Gandalf?
GANDALF!!!!!!!!
Yeah, except in real life horses would have fallen and there would have been this enormous giant pile of dead and dying men at the foot of the hill for the orcs to impale at their leisure.
Battle of the five armies felt like a warhammer fantasy fan film, which isn't necessarily a bad thing but doesn't really fit with middle earth
jakob farrell warhammer fantasy is WAY too dark to be compared to this honestly
Warhammer fantasy is always dark af.
Absolutely LOVE the comparison of Helms Deep & Minas Tirith to the Battle of the Five Armies. BoTFA was epic in scale but watching it didn't really get me pumped like the other two battles I mentioned. I can't wait to watch part 2 of this.
Well done!
I would want to say that I am happy this channel uploaded a new video...aaaand....I hope this video will have two unnecessary sequels. You know...for fun...there is so much more to tell about this films..right??
Sorry to say I won't be pulling a Lindsay Ellis, a third video would kill me.
Films&Stuff Not even for the money??.......I mean...for the love to the source material??
If I wanted money I would have made a 10 part series on how Disney is 'ruining' star wars or some bullshit like that.
Films&Stuff jajaja looking forward to that. Good luck.
Yeah, Ellis already did the perfect version of that joke by making 2 parts but surprise-splitting the 2nd into a 3rd part. The joke’s already perfected.
Extremely unpopular opinion : I know everyone hates Battle of the Five Armies, but I personally like it.... a lot. In fact it's by far my favorite Hobbit movie. Obviously none of the Hobbit movies come close to LotR, but they are nowhere near as bad as most people make them out to be. I went in with no expectations, watched all three movies back to back about a year after BotFA came out, and enjoyed it quite a bit. And when you look into the difficult circumstances Peter Jackson had to contend with, you realize that it's extremely impressive that these movies are as good as they are.
The Appendices on the Hobbit trilogy Blu-Ray are really enjoyable, well put together, very interesting, and give a tremendous amount of insight into the creative process. They help you understand why certain decision were made. Even if you disagree, or even if you don't like the execution, you really understand the reasoning and why they did what they did.
I think anyone who hates the trilogy should check out those bonus features. It might give them a slightly different perspective. Just my two cents.
It lacks the emotional weight of the LotR battles until the very closing moments of itself.
I still prefer Del Toro's version than the Warner's/Jackson's version, sorry.
The first movie was the best one imo. It captured the cheerful spirit of the book and combined it with the more serious tone of the LotR trilogy. It just had that atmosphere that Tolkien wanted out of it. Adventure, adventure!
Ale Nightshade Yeah. Originally there were going to be only 2 movies and that could’ve been much better overall.
Mark Hogan I think Unexpected Journey was worse despite the performances, but still doesn't quite beat Desolation
Imagine of Helms Deep was spread over a three hour movie. There's your first problem there the second is Helms Deep is actually a longer part of LOTR than the entire battle of five armies in the novel of the Hobbit.
Wow. He’s leaving us on a cliff hanger...
The video is so awesome and well crafted. Major respect. Keep up the great work.
Fantastic video! It really helped me understand structure for battle scenes. Having a sort of "tangible" goal to anchor the fighting allows the scene to cultivate real tension, progress, and even character development. Thank you for the clarity, this was awesome.
This was brilliant!
Amazing how you were able to break it down to find out what was actually done wrong or what was missing without being just generally opposed to it! And being able to see what really worked and why it worked.
One of my favorite videos so far! Keep up the great work!
When you went on to pendulum swings, I LOVE how you used the oliphant swinging his tusks like a pendulum before smashing into the rohirrim riders.
Man, seeing scenes from the two different trilogies side-by-side makes it really obvious how cartoony the action is in Hobbit. And you pointing out how the individual fights and actions during the battle could happen in any order kind of put into words something I didn't realise I was noticing.
The Hobbit should've been more like Indiana Jones than Lord of the Rings.
I'll admit, as much as I agree that the Lord of the Rings films are cinematic masterpieces, I have never viewed them in the same light as most others. I don't have a strong emotional connection to them the same way I do for say, Harry Potter or Star Wars. Maybe it's cause I watched them all fully at a late age. I actually enjoyed the first 2 Hobbit films despite their issues but I agree that they have no reason to be an entire trilogy of 3 hour films. That being said, I would still take these films over any of the boring Hunger Games, Divergent, Maze Runner, etc book to film adaptations. Great video as always.
I had the same experience but instead of Lord of the Rings, it was with Harry Potter. I saw the first couple when i was really, really young so i didn't remember a lot about them. I then watched them last year and just didn't get it at all. I just found them pretty mediocre and i found out that a couple of my friends that like them don't really find them that good as films also but mainly like them because of the nostalgia-factor. It's of course just an opinion so don't get offended that my opinion differs from yours.
Harry Potter movies just kinda falls apart once you put thought into them. And they aren't particularly cinematic or well-acted (aside from Alan Rickman and a few others) so there is nothing particularly artistic about them. Except the score. The main theme is amazing.
Star Wars is kinda the same. The only one that deserves moderate respect is the original three films but even then they are just combination of far superior material like Akira Kurosawa films, John Ford westerns, Dune and so many more. Even its success was accidental and it was Lucas's wife who edited his filmed material properly and made a storg out of it. And aside from Alec Guinness, no acting job was memorable. Like HP, the score is fantastic.
Meanwhile Lord of the Rings is timeless and will remain so. They are labour of love. So many people dedicated themselves to that project for years and their efforts were not in vain. Everything about those films is beautiful. There are masterful acting jobs throughout, from Ian McKallen's Gandalf to Cate Blanchett's Galadriel and Christopher Lee's Saruman.
This was so fkn good dude, cannot wait for part 2.
I can't wait for Part 2! You have an impeccable explanation of storytelling :)
What an incredible video. Can't wait for part two!
I'm glad you're back man. I've been missing your content for what feels like forever
I’m a year late to this fellowship but I have to say, I’m happy I stumbled upon your content. On behalf of all my kin, I thank you for your time and effort in putting these videos together. You seem to have found the perfect balance of being knowledgeable without sounding overly narcissistic. A skill few on CZcams have successfully acquired during the process of making video content. I bid you a fond farewell with a like & subscribe.
I liked the movies, and I honestly think Jackson did a great job on them all!!! Despite popular opinion on how things could of, should of or would of, they were great films.
Good night....
Love your work dude. Huge things for u in the future. Im loving the up and coming lotr/hobbit analysis coming out from youtube. There are plenty of things to dissect from Tolkein. :)
Finally someone who can breakdown the mistakes by carefully argumenting why. That's what makes this so good. Really nice.
Good to see you back.
Great to see a new video! Loved it!
the poblem is they used all the content in the first 2 movies, the battle was only 1 chapter in the book and gets cut of when Bilbo is knocked unconcious, it was never meant as a bearing component only an ending, thus it was a mistake to make it into a movie like 300 vs orcs or something. They try to add some random elements with the love story of Elf and Dwarf and some other random stuff which simply don't cut it. One of the more disapointing movies I've seen, but had to see the 3rd after the first 2 I guess.
Since "The Hobbit" is such a simplistic story, I would have loved if they ACTUALLY pulled more from the ROTK appendices as they initially said they would and added something about the Rangers of the North putting the Shire under surveillance, and actually something about Gollum being captured by Aragorn and brought by the Elves (and possibly released and then captured again by Sauron).
Thanks for bringing this analysis up. I admired how you constructed it. It’s simple and consequential. I think it earns my decision to pledge.
I honestly thought i was the only one that thought they didn't quite hit the spot. you are spot on man keep it up
EXCELLENT video man. I love your channel.
This is a truly excellent video. Can't wait for the second one! I just subscribed so I wouldn't miss it.
now i understand why we havent seen you in a while! :)
great video can't wait for nr.2
Welcome back man! Good to see you again
Excellent analysis, really gave some insight on the battles and how to construct a scene like that.
I could never completely identify what it was beneath the, what I feel obvious glaring issues, yet you have absolutely put this into words. Thank you and well done. 😁
That was one of the most interesting videos I’ve watched in a long time!
Great video! Thank you for the time putting this together. That being said, I cannot find the second part!
This is brilliant! Thank YOU!
More please, your video are fantastic!
Thanks for breaking that down so well!
This was very well written. Thank you for making this
Great editing and analysis. 10/10 would see again.
great video! can't wait for part 2
The movies were amazing, I loved them!
I am definitely going to utilize the wisdom in what makes a great battle work when I write battle sequences for my epic dinosaur fantasy series. This is a great video.
The second part of this series unexpectedly needs to turn into the middle of three parts for no discernible reason. Good video!
Looking forward to part 2! The fact that in the book Bilbo is unconscious throughout the battle (and has it recounted to him afterwards) meant that the filmmakers had to invent a lot of the specific beats themselves. Unfortunately, despite creating an entire third film to give themselves the space to figure out a plan, it still wasn't enough.
You're back! Missed you a lot, and hope you're well!
Love your videos man!
It’s the lack of practical effects I think
Apollo X Sins partially
Thanks for the video, I definitely learned from it.
Lovely video. Thanks for this.
I watched the Battle of the Five Armies extended version recently ( well I watched all three films in extended version recently ) and my attitude towards it had softened. I still think it felt lacking, and this video did an excellent job of putting that feeling into a series of valid criticisms.
However, in terms of things I did like, I felt as though the dwarves, whilst still be portrayed as comical, were also shown to be inventive and a great team. In LotR, Gimli is often just used for comic relief. Yes, there are moments where his loyalty is shown to be perhaps the greatest of all in the fellowship, and he has moments where he is shown to be a skilled warrior, but Legolas and Aragorn are given most of the big moments.
Because we have a group of dwarves ( Thorin's company ) and then the army, we see how they work together, and the opening sequence where the elves fire upon them with arrows sparks a novel idea where some dwarves machinery wipes the arrows out in mid-air.
This was actually stuff added in by Jackson which worked, unlike elves at Helm's Deep ( which just made every Tolkien fan ask 'why' and those who had never read the books shrug their shoulders at the lame attempt of a meaningful death when Haldir dies ) or Faramir's character being redesigned. Sadly, there was too much action and not enough interaction and plot. Not as bad as I used to think, but it does drag a little and it isn't as good as the first film which I loved.
the elves jumping infront of the dwarves phalanx ruined me
Very well done video! Just watching it reminded me so many things from Hobbit I thoroughly despised.
As someone who loves Lord of the Rings, and an aspiring filmmaker who really really wants to stage a big battle one day, this video was amazing! Your analysis is spot on! The to and fro of the Pelenor fields cements it in your memory, and of course getting a reaction from your key players, getting a sense of consequence and humanity is essential for making a battle stand out and mean something. I also agree that theme is extremely important for a battle, and that the plot should service theme, not vice versa. Anyhow I’ll stop rambling. This was an amazing video, buzzing for the next one!
Great video well done.
Great work on your side
Amazing video! Cannot wait for part 2. Eta when it might be completed? Thanks for all the hard work. Cannot wait to watch more of your videos.
This is one of the few videos that actually go more in depth while analyzing some of the mistakes in The Hobbit, not just repeating the common complaints like Alfred, Legolas, and CGI. This was actually really informative and thought provoking. You should check out JustWrite’s 5 part “why The Hobbit sucks” series. Great Job, can’t wait for part 2!
This video is just best... you got new sub
I see what you did there. Leaving us on a cliffhanger. God damn storytellers. You get me every time!
I love all three of the Hobbit films.
They did a brilliant job of making the book enjoyable for a film audience.
It's easy to find fault and slag anything off if you're that way inclined.
Nice joke
“Or the now iconic take on Smyaughg”
I hope you continue this
Thanks for providing a thoughtful commentary why Helm's Deep works and BotFA doesn't. What is quite irksome is that almost everything you said on how to organize the battle can be found in The Hobbit (the book):
1) There is a clear geographical location, Erebor. Everything happens in the valley outside the gate and the slopes of the mountain delineating it.
2) The humans, elves and dwarves unite against the orcs and take positions on the slopes of the mountain.
3) Pendulum swings: the dwarves arriving and almost starting the battle, the orcs arriving and driving the previously warring factions to unite, the initial attack against the orcs is successful (defenders winning), but the orcs are too numerous and the pendulum swings as the orcs start outflanking the defenders (orcs winning), Thorin & company charge out of the mountain and inspire the defenders including elves and men (swing to defenders' benefit), Thorin & company are surrounded (swing to orcs' benefit), The Eagles arrive and stat clearing the orcs from the slopes (swing to defenders'), Thorin falls (swing to orcs'), Beorn arrives and picks up Thorin before returning and killing Bolg (swing to defenders' and orcs rout, battle won).
It was there, all along. All they had to do was to film it. :(
well this was pretty amazing
Good video essay - I agree with pretty much everything. The stuff about Obstacle -> Action -> Reaction was particularly interesting and was something on this list that I hadn't really considered before.
I think with regards to theme, one of the things that disappointed me was the music played when Thorin & Co. left the mountain. It wasn't the "far over the misty mountains" theme, which would have made it a lot more poignant.
I think the one thing I would have added as a section is that in BoftA, Jackson overdid it on the fantastical/unbelievable elements. You briefly touched on Legolas' choreography, which is a great example - in Helms Deep and Pelennor Fields he basically gets one crazy stunt in each, and they aren't THAT crazy: Sliding down some steps on a shield, and climbing up an elephant. But in BoftA, he gets an extended sequence of craziness, fighting a super-orc Bolg (which, to steal your phrase: We Don't Care), while he flies around on a bat and defies gravity to run up a falling tower. I think BoftA took the "Wow, legolas is cool" from LotR, and took it to "Oh come on, that's ridiculous".
And this also applies to other elements of the battle as well. IT starts with the were-worms (Uh, what?), who suddenly materialise an entire army. There's the weird blind trolls, troll/catapults, Dwarven Chariot, Giant Bats in general, etc. The Helm's Deep battle didn't really have any unbelievable aspects, and any battle-changing surprises (such as the bomb, or rohirrim arrival) were generally forshadowed well. Minas Tirith/ Pelennor did have some more crazy stuff, such as Grond, the Witch-King, the Mumakil and finally the Army of the Dead, but they were generally well foreshadowed, and generally had meaningful consequences.
BoftA had a sort of "How extreme can we get?" feel to it, and also a "Surprise! We're doing this now" feel, which just helped confuse and disconnected the audience...
Helms Deep and Minas Tirith were siege battles, with clear a structure, while this is more or less an open field battle, with chaos.
Erebor is hardly attacked, and Dale is already in ruins and "open", with no clear defense lines like in the LoTR battles. Hence, it appears to me as a mess.
I agree I would love to have seen Thranduil make the decision to lead his army into battle
I actually really disagree with this. I understand and agree with this video's point that we did need to see a more direct connection between Thranduill and his army's actions, but I don't think that would have been the best way to do it. That scene functions on the element of surprise - Thranduill is a passive character who has turned away from his allies in the past and insists that "other lands are not our concern", so when the elves actually do come the dwarves' aid and jump over the front lines, it's especially rousing because it's an unexpected turn. Showing his decision would have taken the impact away.
What would have improved it greatly and better connected the action to Thranduill is if he was shown leading his army, leaping over the dwarves before the rest follow.
Love your vids
The speech and charge of the Rohirrim never leaves me without goosebumps or tears.
these videos are actually fucking fantstic, seriously some of the best analysis ive seen
filmmakers should really consult this man and pay him a lot .. great video