Everything Wrong With The Hobbit: The Battle Of The Five Armies
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- I don't think you can put us in the camp of folks that like this movie.
10% off a killer website! squarespace.com...
Jeremy wrote a book: theablesbook.com
Thursday, super sins.
Remember, no movie is without sin. Which movie's sins do YOU want to see recounted?
Tweet us: / cinemasins
Tumble us: / cinema-sins
Call us: 405-459-7466
Reddit with us: / cinemasins Merch: teespring.com/...
![The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies [ strategies and tactics in the book ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rq-aT7PaGfI/mqdefault.jpg)
14:04 Actually, in the books, Tolkien mentions how Hobbits are unnaturally gifted at stone-throwing. Like, he even says specifically that a Hobbit with a stone can take out an Orc as fast as an Elf with a bow, or a Dwarf with a hammer.
And how he says the whole falling bridge thing with Legolas is so fake he can't stand it. Elves are supposed to be SUPER light, which is why Legolas could stay on top of the snow on the mountain (before going through Moria) in Lord of the Rings, so though it still definitely looks weird, it explains how elves can somewhat defy physics.
Also when legolas is jumping on the falling bricks it even shows in the LOTR Movies and probably explains in the books that he is light enough to stand on snow. So him being able to jump up something like that makes a little more sense.
This is a fantastic point I fully agree with, but Cinema Sin clearly states that they doesn’t care about the books
Yea I do remember that. The book is way better.
@@Cosmicfury100, it makes no sense because he's not even supposed to be there 😂
The death of Smaug is total bullshit. He's a fucking dragon, his heart should be the size of a goddamn mini-van, and yet they kill him with a single arrow. He doesn't even bleed out or anything, he's just like "Oh no, I am slain" *Death noise*
I'm okay with it because of the "special weapon" explanation and all that. David-Goliath set up. What really bothers me is that he dies less than 15 minutes into a 3-hour movies, after all that buildup! Smaug doesn't even count as one of the five armies!
arbrow96 In the last movie he was like "The Big Villain Shit" And then died like a fucking pussy, great villain guys, great just... great
arbrow96 David didn't have a special weapon. He nailed Goliath in the side of a head with a rock he threw from his regular-ass sling.
Part of the problem is how huge they made Smaug in the movie. I LOVE him. The size is great and he feels like something Sauron might actually fear. But making him this huge means I don't believe one arrow can possibly even reach his heart.
XenuLies and now i am the dead, blah
th-cam.com/video/Uo5Rhn8zuPA/w-d-xo.html
XenuLies because that's how he dies in the books....
The Fellowship did imply they knew each other. Remember the council of Elrond? Legolas goes on a speech about who Aragorn is when Boromir disses him, and Aragorn says, "Sit down, Legolas."
From the way they were both addressing and talking to each other, it would appear that they did know each other already.
Smaug doesn’t kill Bard right away because he thinks that he is invincible and is toying with him.
And monologuing
Like every arrogant villain ever.
He is a breathing Giant oven on wings. And Bard's ancestor had better equipment and still lost.
The first two replies here are why this scene got a sin. The third one should have been a sin especially since he stuck each broken half of his bow into the conveniently carved out holes in the wood.
Because it is smaug nature.. thats why bilbo got the arkenstone in the first place... by talking with smauh
I am one of the most loyal fans of Peter Jackson's LOTR trilogy and this last film pissed me the hell off! A stupid love story, an invented dragon sickness, a Wormtongue wannabe that takes more screen time than the other 12 dwarves COMBINED, a mess of a final battle, unglorious deaths for Kili and Fili and way too many saved at the last second moments!!! I TRUSTED YOU, PJ!!! ARRRRGGGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!
N Slater Dragon sickness was actually mentioned in the Hobbit, I finished rereading it today. It is when Thorin becomes obsessed with the Arkenstone and the treasure.
N Slater The returning characters are what angered me. Not Gandalf and Bilbo, obviously, but Legolas? Galadriel? A Gimli/Aragorn mention? PJ, we aren't babies, we can mentally connect these trilogies without being spoon-fed trite, improbable character connections.
I was extremely saddened and frustrated in every Legolas/Thranduil/Tauriel/White Council scene, knowing that all of this was time being taken away from the dwarf fellowship (i.e, THIS trilogy's characters!). It's amazing how a trilogy that's so bloated can still completely fail to give most of its members screen time.
I respected the once great Peter but now he's a piece of crap in my book.
EresirThe1st More like the films were true to the book by not having them have any character either.
***** The biggest shame is that the book manages to explain things like that. Why couldn't the film have added a few lines to fill plot holes?
Lord of the rings was a masterpiece. The Hobbit was an attempt to milk money, and you saw that in how bad they were compared to lord of the rings.
Like, I could not name more then 3 dwarfs at the end of the third movie. They were so forgettable.
Lord of the rings were great character based movies. The hobbit were poor theme ride adventures without much content.
maggru91 I can name 'em, but that's because of Tolkien, not Jackson
maggru91 That's the funniest thing though. I really didn't like Lotr.. Yet The Hobbit - all three movies - are easily my favorite. Not sure why though. Oh well.
Sawtje2 They have an InternetTroll!
I agree. All the dwarfs could have been named "Jarjar Binx" and I would be none the wiser.
maggru91 Considering at the end of the book you couldn't name more than 3 either, I don't see how that's a movie flaw.
And seriously, saying they are bad solely because they are worst than TLOTR is stupid, you know what other movie are worst than LOTR??? almost all of them!!! you know which book was worst than TLOTR trilogy??? The Hobbit book!!!
The difference of quality between both trilogies is exactly the same as between both books, I know Tolkien fans love to talk about The Hobbit as some kind of literary masterpiece, and it is a good book, but the characters have 0 development or depth, things happen either ridiculously slow or fast and the ending is anticlimactic as fuck, so no, I don't think The Hobbit movies are bad, not even bad adaptations, could they have been better??? yep, absolutely, but still good...
That awkward moment when you realize this was only one chapter in the book
Three or four, I think. But still.
+smst777 well the majority of the movie (the actual battle itself) was one chapter
smst777 most of that was set-up. The death of Smaug, the Seige of Erebor, etc. The battle itself took a single chapter.
CrazyCreeps9182 Yeah. But the movie is based on the setup chapters as well, as you may have noticed.;)
Yes, but look how fast it's over. Smaug gets killed, Bard demands gold, I'm not sure if Erebor is even besieged, and that's done and over in about an hour, if I remember. Not even half of the movie.
14:49 "Yay we won"
This is the best way ive ever heard anyone say anytime
You should have given sins off for Smaug's voice work. That's Benedict Cumberbatch man! And he sent chills down my back with every word!
Early reports were that Leonard Nimoy would get the role of Smaug, so I was really disappointed. Benaffleck Cucumberpunch did a good job, but I prefer Richard Boone.
WITH motion capture! So not only Benedict doing great voice work, but also crawling around on the floor trying to act like a dragon. 😆
Words are scary
He also voiced Sauron, as the credits show
Taje sins off for EVERYTHING related to Smaug. He is the single best character ive seen in a movie
No one is going to address the bullshit mapping the movie gives? Gundabad is close? Mount Gundabad is the northern most mountain in the misty mountains, the entire of mirkwood away. Erebor gateway to Angmar? Bullshit Angmar is a few hundred miles north of the shire which is even further away than Gundabad. I mean shit Peter Jackson every LOTR book has a damn map in the front
Morgan McCown The worst part is that Jackson screwed up the perfectly coherent information Tolkien provided in the books (LotR appendices to be precise): Sauron's plan was a three-way strike from Mordor and Harad against Gondor, from Dol Guldur against Lothlorien and Mirkwood, and from Rhun against Erebor and Dale; this third army would have then marched westward, crossing the Misty Mountains at Mount Gundabad and flowing into Eriador. In fact, Gandalf's point in rebuilding the Dwarven kingdom in Erebor (and the human one in Dale as well) was to make sure Sauron's armies couldn't just walk by...
Morgan McCown well, tbh, that part didn't bother me much, after all, if you control Erebor you control the whole North east of the Misty Mountains; an orc-infested Erebor-Gundabad could easily cross the mountains and reclaim Angmar, and then Eriador would be seriously threatened again; what matters to me is that both in the book and the movie, Sauron's options in the North are wasted by the time the battle of 5A ended...thus the Isengard + Mordor alliance as the only real option left (since it was clear that Rhur was just not strong enough to conquer Lothlorien+Black Forest and Esgaroth-Dale-Erebor-Iron Hills)
Morgan McCown well it was considered the gateway because Sauron's main base was in Dol Guldur, where passing through mirkwood would be a bad plan because he thought the elves would fuck him up. and Erebor is just a bit north east of mirkwood, meaning he can deliver armies without elven harrassment. Which is why i think it was called the "Gateway to angmar" because it was the best place to launch attacks and coordinate armies under the circumstances.
+Bearclaw95 "You can't just walk in from Mordor..."
... Sorry, I feel like that needed to be said.
Tenaar Feiri, that magnificently summaries the whole point.
"Goblin mercenaries! No more than a hundred. We'll take care of them..."
This line really sticks out in my memory because it shows how absolutely stupid and bereft of suspense these movies became. It's such a foregone conclusion they're going to win a 100-to-2 battle without a scratch that they don't even show it.
It's very difficult to care about "danger" when the characters have proved, dozens of times over, that they're invincible.
ur partially right, 100vs 2 is stupid, but, in the book (silmarrillion) the goblins are smaller and weaker than average human, and elves and dwarfs are tougher, so if 1 trainned human can kill2-3 goblins, 1 trainned elven or dwarf easy can kill 10- or more goblins, plus goblins are know for his low moral, so if 100 attacks and 2 kills 20 without a big effort, thats a big morale hit, so they dont have to kill the 100 goblins just a few and chase away the rest.
The silmarrillion is a great source to analize the dwarf and elven military capabilities in tolkien books, there morgoth sends hundreds of thousand orcs vs the elven kingdoms and the elve-dwarfs most of the times crushed them in open field, most of the morgoth achievements in the middle earth comes from treachery and or magic.
How about you don't analize them? You do realize that dwarfs and orcs and elves aren't real, right? Is this really the optimal use of your limited time on Earth?
And trolling comments is how you spend yours?
Oh, and learn to spend analyze.
Mike Brannon Trolling? Did I write something unreasonable?
Precisely the moment when i thought, welp, time to search "everything wrong with The Hobbit".
15:00 Legolas is explained in the books to be so light he doesn't sink in soft snow. They even reference this in the LOTR triology when the company is cutting through snow and Legolas is just there standing... so while looking fake the falling rock jumping scene is in theory possible for him.
2 year old comment, Ik, but it is sort of silly he shows up at all
@@Shoobywoobey it is indeed
@@pipeborrero Would like to chime in here, idk if you've changed your mind here,given it has been 2 years, but it doesn't matter how light legolas is. Any force he exerts onto the falling stones will just push them down, its the equivalent of kicking a soccer ball and getting pushed backwards.
@@maxthomas-bland4842 hi Max. I do maintain my opinion. And yes, every action has an equal and opposite reaction, but here the force legolas needs to apply is little due to his low weight, hence the effect on the rock is also very little. Should we see a bit more movement from the rocks? Maybe.
I didn know serious movie can become a joking lol
I bet someone's already mentioned this, but Aragorn's 87 when Lord of the Rings takes place
THANK YOU! Somebody had to say it
And, judging from Legolas' and Aragorns interactions, they did know each other before.
Rockyblack smith Yeah BUT, the events of The Hobbit take place 60 years before Bilbo's party and between Bilbo's 111 birthday and Frodo setting out on his quest 17 years passes. Meaning The Hobbit takes place about 77 years before the events in The Two Towers where Aragorn says that he is 87 years old. The battle of the five armies took place in the year of 2941 and Aragorn was born in 2931... meaning he was 10 years old living with Elrond in Rivendell under the name "Estel" having no idea who he really was at that time... So it still doesn't work.
Hanna Hagberg
The timelines between the books and movies are not the same. The 17 year gap between bilbo leaving and frodo taking off seems to be skipped in the movies,making Aragorn around 27 at the battle of the five armies. You can't really base this on the books timelines. The fact that the movies diverge from the book's timing is worth criticising, but within the movies, this is reasonably coherent.
yes exactly, remember that the movie shortened the time between Bilbo's and Frodo's departures considerably, Frodo was clearly still a very young adult at the time he left the Shire, and yes I am considering the fact that hobbits age more slowly than humans, but Frodo should have been more solidly a mature adult if he was supposed to be 50. If 33 to a hobbit is like 18-21 (coming-of-age) to a human, than 50 should be in the early 30s range
There have been discussions about this for some time actually. Here is a link that helps explain some of the differences in the timeline :
lotr.wikia.com/wiki/File:LOTRtimeline.jpg
What pissed me off the most was the fucking glow. Jesus, made it look like a fucking fairytale compared to the gritty original trilogy
popopboom the cgi really sucked balls
popopboom Well that's how the book is written. We're LOTR was more grown up and realistic, The Hobbit was meant to be more of a classic fairy tale for children.
popopboom I KNOW RIGHT! That stupid bloom filter gave everything an unnatural shine and somehow made the green-screen very noticeable!
popopboom Didn't read the Hobbit book then? It was a Children's Book.
Haven't seen these films then? They're not children's films.
Don't tell me you're going to show your 6-year old these kind of movies with brutal beheadings, mass murder and all sorts of violent expositions.
You'd be surprised at how easily a parent can pick out their kids voice in the middle of a hectic orc battle
Sin 1 is inaccurate. He isn't pissed at only the dwarves, he's pissed at Bilbo. Since Bilbo claimed to be from lake-town, Smaug decided to take it out on Bilbo's hometown.
THANK YOU! Finally, someone noticed
I love criticizing "everything wrong with" videos because they get as many counts as possible, no matter how inaccurate.
Mustafa Mian
Watch the " Everything Wrong with Cinema Sins "
Pretty sure that's the reason.
Mustafa Mian Did he claim to be from lake town in the movie? In the book, Smaug mistakes him from being from Lake town due to the mention of barrels, then attacks the town when he can't find Bilbo. In the movie I don't recall anyone claiming to be from anywhere, or any comments being made about where people were from -- just a fight scene where Smaug was chased off.
+Jensaw101 Yes Bilbo calls himself "barrel rider", smaug deduces that he is "one of those miserable tub thumping lake men" and so he goes to burn lake town.
Bilbo never missed while throwing rocks because Hobbits have exceptional accuracy (seemingly magical), even in LOTR merry and pippin are fighting using rocks a couple of times
Was Crocodile Dundee a Hobbit then? Because he was good at throwing rocks as well
I read Tolkien growing up, and love his work, but I still thought that was dumb as $#!+
its actually fact it is stated somewhere i don't remember the citation off of the top of my head. but the quote is "a hobbit armed with a rock is a truly dangerous foe"
He expected bilbo to fight goblins twice his size face to face with sword.......and finds sins in movies.....things people do in youtube
do they also have some sort of hyper-strength that will knock out the beasts with a single stone?
Aragorn is actually in his 80s by the time the LotR trilogy rolled around. He's a descendent of the kings of Numenor. They founded Arnor and Gondor, and their line begins with Elros, the twin brother of Elrond, who chose to live a human life that was very extended because of his half elven heritage.
Thanks for the Info, that bugged me a lot. But shoudldn´t he be even older? Hobbits seem to have a lifespan similar to humans, since Bilbos 111th Birthday is deemed very old. In the Hobbit, Bilbo looks like he´s in his thirties. So roughly 80 years already passed until Lotr. But Aragorn is described as "a young ranger" at the end of the Hobbit. Probably in his twenties then. Sooo.... 100+?
@@AndiNordsee Bilbo has the ring and that's why he lives so long.
@@AndiNordsee In the book, Biblo is 50 when he goes his adventure. Aragorn was 10 during the events of the Hobbit (because in the fellowship of the ring book, Frodo doesn't start right away after the party, and instead waits 17 years)
@@AndiNordsee If I remember correctly, Numenourians libe around 300 years
@@ilikenougat8892 i thin aragorn was 240 years old wheb he died
That “yay we won” caught me so off gaurd. That was the most unenthusiastic cheer ever!
yeywewon
444 likes noice
Sounds like me
I couldn't describe this comment better
In The Lord of the Rings the Orks were so realistic they truly scared the shit out of me!!! In The Hobbit the Orks were so CGIed & shown so much that they completely lost their fear factor.
They were better, although still almost entirely useless in a fight for creatures having been "bred for war". There's Azog and Bolg, and then there's big, bad teeth guy with a bow shooting Boromir, big, inept but still sort of scary guy who tries to kill Merry and Pippin, Olympic Torch guy from Helm's Deep and limp, crippled guy from the battle for Minas Tirith. Every other orc in the entire movie series is utterly useless, which makes it very hard for me to take them seriously. And of the six not quite so useless orcs, only Azog, the guy with a bow and the torch guy actually achieve anything of note whatsoever, albeit in miserable defeat. And even that only happens for plot purposes. Boromir and Thorin were done, redeemed and had to be killed off, and the wall at Helm's Deep had to be breached to make the King's morning rally more poignant. Conglaturations! You are now The Eagles! Also, no, Bolg killing Romeo the Love-Dwarf doesn't count because Franny Walsh made that up. It isn't in any book ever written by Tolkien.
Let's face it: orcs are a completely pathetic enemy. So are the Nazgul obviously. Another scary enemy that all told achieves absolutely nothing worthwhile in six straight movies. Well, they did kill Theoden, so I guess that's something. But he was done as well, because he had found redemption. So the Lich King is an Eagle too! This complete uselessness of the evildoers was sort of in the subtext of the far less combat-obsessed book. But it gets highlighted in the movies until they really lose their impact as credible threats.
It's "O-R-C-S," my friend, not "O-R-K-S."
This is the Tolkien Universe... not Warhammer..
The orcs I’m just happy Legolas managed to finally kill that one
they also were a few years apart and as people grow they lose fears
but you are still right
In the books the 13 dwarves wore practically the best armor the mountain vault could offer that's why they made a difference
not to mention they are literally the best fighting dwarves in all the land as they were the only ones who survived the battle with the orcs that destroyed their people
@@fallencortex1571 bro
@@fallencortex1571 what???
@@fallencortex1571 Nah mate, most of them aren't even fighters. They were just the only ones to show up to Thorin's call for help.
@ali bazzi That's awesome! What about all of the other dwarves though? Like I said, most of them aren't fighters. Only like 4 of them are + Balin is very old already during the events of The Hobbit.
Wow, Tauriel and Fili/Kili (it's one of the two) have a pretty naff love story. I mean, they met in a prison and were barely together throughout the entire set of films. Then, to top things off, Tauriel waited for another 10 seconds to realise that her lover was going to die by an Orc. A single bloody Orc. Man, surely she could've just used her elf powers to knock the hell out of that guy. Did she want him killed?
Ah well, what can I say. It's still a better Love Story than twilight.
+TheDeathsReclaimer lol it is pretty shitty I felt the same about the whole Aragorn and Arwen love story in the first trilogy enough shit is happening in these stories there didn't need to be romance
+Jacob Grindel There';s one difference: the Aragorn/Arwen love story was in the original LOTR books, although it was expanded a lot in the film. The one in The Hobbit is just a tacked-on gratuitous romance. There's entirely too much of that in cinema today!
GuinnevereB yea lol exactly.
+TheDeathsReclaimer It completely undermines the importance of the Legolas/Gimli friendship in LotR. The whole idea behind them being friends was that it hadn't been done since the fall of Eregion and Celebrimbor's death, for various reasons. So Legolas seeing the "error of his ways" because of this tacked-on romance completely destroys his characters development over the three movies.
+Bewilderbeastie Never thought of that my friend. It only adds to the utter stupidity of the storyline.
13:57 hobbits are known to be amazing rock throwers. There like elves with bows, but they use rocks. There better with rocks than swords
*they're
And very accurate.
"should a hobbit stoop to pick up a rock, most creatures go running."
Now all I want to see is a short film of Hobbits playing baseball.
@Newell Orban theres this thing about rocks. Theyre really hard and dont require much force to break skin.
Proof: my 8 year old brother had split my skull open(flesh not bone) and required 4 stitches.
Then theres technique as well. A full grown man can throw a baseball at 100mph. If a hobbit can do even a quarter of that with the right rock, its gunna hurt.
Aragorn and Legolas did know each other. Aragorn said Legolas name several times before they introduced
When boromir spoke ill of aragorn, immediately legolas- "THis is aragorn, son of arathorn. Legolas obv new who he was. This narrator is dumb
Aragorn brought Smeagol (Golem) to the Woodland realm dungeons and no doubt knew Legolas from that visit.
exactly. Thy also explained how Thranduil's gems got into erebor
But the problem is that Thranduil says Strider, a nickname that Aragorn did not have until he was 21 i think
Thanduil says to Legolas to go find a man named Strider. The problem with this is that Aragorn was around 10 at the time and he went by the name Estel. He was nicknamed Aragorn when he was 21. It obviously doesnt make much sense.
Those are trolls... in sunlight.... why havent they turned to stone?
It's this whole thing about those being mordor trolls, known as Olog-hai, which are immune to sunlight, and given to Azog by Sauron
+konner teofilo I no mordor trolls are imune but these trolls are from gundabad and the misty mountains
+Alex Dawson i just rewatched the movies and it IS stated that those are gundabad trolls, but one thing I also noticed, its cloudy in every single scene of this movie that includes trolls, so that could be something
+Alex Dawson Has to be direct sunlight. There's too much cloud cover.
+ArvelDreth OR we could all just admit that PJ was running on fumes at this point and decided to throw whatever nonsense he could think of on the screen.
Out of all the Hobbit movies, I gotta say, the first one is still my favorite.
Absolutely. Same here.
It's hard to decide, bird crap, molten gold statue or ludicrous hammer? I'd say probably the book.
Haedox Probably because it was the only one that can be considered decent.
I'd have to say the 1985 Soviet version of The Hobbit is my favorite one.
Same here
Thranduil's story is actually really sad. His wife is dead. The gems he wants from the Mountain are actually his dead wife's necklace. He's lost so much and only wants to protect his people and son while forever grieving for his wife. Elves only fall in love once. There was a deleted scene they excluded that explained Thranduil's motivation. Wish they'd kept it so the audience would understand that he's not some smug asshole. He's a grieving husband, a widowed father, and a king with the safety of his people on his shoulders.
In the beginning he did not help the Dwarves because they had betrayed him. He had commissioned them to make his wife's necklace. Due to the dwarf king having dragon sickness, he gave into greed, and refused to hand the necklace over to Thranduil. A scene we actually see when he closes the necklace box in front of Thranduil. Thranduil left but not after repeated warnings that the dwarf king's mountain of gold and gems were going to attract a dragon to their kingdom. He was right. Smaug came. He refused to help due to his grudge but also because he did not want to risk the lives of his people against a beast they could not slay. Remember they needed black arrows. A dragon is a mighty opponent. He refused to have his people die to defend another kingdom.
Thranduil normally distrusts outsiders since his wife's death and sticks to the borders of his kingdom. Refusing to get in the business of others.
They're also immortal in age so it's just a waste for a hundred year old elf soldiers to die in a foreign land...... it's not easy for them to accept death because of their immortality
This is a sad and very interesting story to explore more. Somehow knowing this makes the movie even worse. Why would they cut such important character motivation but keep the idiots of Lake Town? That's just insulting.
@@schattentaenzerin I agree
Was I the only one that enjoyed the Hobbit movies and the Star Wars prequels? Was I the only one that didn't go full fanboy rage and enjoyed watching movies?
I know I'm the same I love it's completely idiotic and stupid storylines and effects.
But I don't think I will be able to watch the next star was anymore :“(
bob zanny Enjoyable does not equal good.
bob zanny I liked the Star Wars prequels. But no, not the Hobbit...never the Hobbit.
bob zanny i enjoyee the hobbit and other than jar jar i liked the prequels.
bob zanny I enjoyed the prequals, and I enjoyed the 1st two Hobbit movies, but Battle of the Five Armies was terrible
I hate to be the butt hurt fan boy but there are a few issues with this that I thought I would point out
0:14: Well the whole point of attacking Lake-Town was that the Dwarfs were hard to fight inside a complex mountain and Smaug believed that the people of Lake-Town were behind the whole thing and when Bilbo told him to stop since they were innocent, Smaug realised that Bilbo cared about these people and said "...Then you can watch them burn" so not only did he think the men of Lake-Town were behind it but also he wanted to do it to make the Dwarves and Bilbo feel guilty, almost punish them by killing others.
3:28 & 4:13: You said that she had all that power for both trilogies when actually it was only one. When she used her huge power move and then banished Sauron she used up most of her power, so they took her to Lothlorien as somewhere she could just relax for a few hundred years to regain her power. And even then she didn't really have any use for her power in the other two movies so she hasn't been a dick in not using it, only cautious to make sure she doesn't waste her power in case something important happens.
5:35: If I remember correctly (so If this is wrong feel free to correct me) this was addressed in the first film in the prologue (more detail went into it in the extended edition) where the dwarves had a deal with the elves for a trade of some sort, I could be confusing this for something that happened in the Silmarillion but I think the dwarves made those "Elf Gems" and agreed to trade them with Thranduil but the dwarves changed their mind because they loved what they made more than what Thranduil offered so kept them, and since then Thranduil still considered the gems his.
6:26: Okay I can understand this one but I think Thorin trusts Bilbo more because he was the one willing to go into the mountain, he was one of the most loyal companions in all the movies and Thorin trusts him the most, also earlier Thorin saw that Bilbo didn't care about riches, when he carried the (I think) chestnut from Beorn's garden he thought "this guy doesn't care about this gold or any of this treasure, he cares about his garden, food and books" so why would Thorin think Bilbo would take the stone? It is a grey area though.
7:30: It's possible he did hear that, Hobbits after all do have remarkable hearing. I will quote from the book (which I understand seems a little ironic since these films pretty much ignored most of the book "...When large stupid folk like you and me come blundering along, making a noise like elephants which they can hear a mile off." Chapter 1. If they can hear a regular human's footsteps from a mile off, I think it is reasonable to think they can hear a conversation from a few feet away.
9:23: Well he is shouting, I'm pretty sure she would hear.
11:31: The dwarves did have rams, when Dain first arrived he was riding one and I think a few others were too.
13:04, 13:07 & 13:30: I think you're confusing Goblins for Orcs, goblins are nowhere near as powerful, I mean you saw goblin town in AUJ they're pretty weak, I'm sure two of the best dwarf soldiers could take them on.
14:01: Again we will return to the original book. From Chapter 8: "Bilbo was a pretty fair shot with a stone, and it did not take him long to find a nice smooth egg-shape one that fitted his hand cosily. As a boy he used to practise throwing stones at things, until rabbits and squirrels, and even birds, got out of his way as quick as lightning if they saw him stoop; and even grown-up he had still spent a deal of his time at quoits, dart-throwing, shooting at the wand, bowls, ninepins and other quiet games of the aiming and throwing sort." So I'd say he had a pretty good aim if he was 51 and had been practising since he was a child.
14:06 If you're in the middle of a big crazy battle and this creature who is even smaller than a dwarf with no bears is just throwing rocks I would think "oh this is some sort of child" So why would you waste time killing it when you have people who do pose a threat to go against. Although I can agree for the most part with it.
16:10: Okay I can understand that since Aragorn look about 40 in the Lord of the Rings people would think this is stupid but there was a scene in the Two Towers when they're on the way to Helm's Deep that he explains that he is a Dúnedain with Royal Blood and so can live longer than most men, he was actually 87 at the time of Lord of the Rings, and since this film took place about 60 years beforehand, and we of course wont forget the fact it took Frodo 11 years to leave the Shire after Bilbo's 111st birthday but still that would make Aragorn 10 at the time of the Hobbit, there is still a sin here though. In the time of the Hobbit Aragorn wasn't a ranger yet, he was actually in Rivendel, after Aragorn's father was killed when he was 2 Elrond brought him to Rivendel to keep him safe so actually Thranduil should be sending Legolas to Rivendel.
16:26: Okay I'm not positive on this one but MAYBE Thranduil knew Aragorn was in line for the throne, I'm saying maybe because from what I read it was only Elrond who knew at this point but maybe Elf Lords communicate and Thranduil knows this, and they only met at the council of Elrond? Again nothing I've read up on proves this but when Legolas jumps up and defends Aragorn when no one else would, that seems like they've been friends long enough for Legolas to give enough of a damn.
16:43: Well the Hobbit takes place during 2941 and Frodo isn't born until 2968 so while Elves are very knowledgeable I doubt he can predict the future.
So that's taken about 16 sins off, some might need a bit more conformation but I defiantly think I have proven a few wrong. Consider this a Cinema Sins Sins. As I said if I have gotten anything wrong please do correct me.
you're awesome
Vrotdogi Pronin's Home of Suicide and Depression I'll explain some of the other "sins" Cinemasins pointed out and which were also not sins.
0:55: When the author of this video mentions the "video game weak spot" he has no point there, for if he had read the book he would have realized it is exactly the same weak spot that Tolkien gave Smaug. He can't be pierced or stabbed by anything but a Black Arrow. And a long time ago a Black Arrow ripped off a scale from his body, leaving this weak point behind. This is the only way he can die at present.
1:00: He says that the Smaug could have killed Bard whenever he wanted to and that is right. But if you follow the story, which also remains consistent to the book in this aspect, Smaug is a dragon that enjoys watching people suffer. He says this to Bilbo in DOS regarding Thorin's need to get the Arkenstone, and then it is also implied when he sets out to kill the people of Lake Town and says "they will burn". So, imo, he is enjoying himself watching Bard being hopeless, which is confirmed by the lust and excitement in his face when he says "is that your CHILD? You cannot save him from the fire!" I think that explains it.
1:53: This sin was really stupid in my opinion. Prisoners that are unwanted -like Gandalf was for the Orcs of Dol-Guldur- are usually not taken care of. I see no point for saying "how long was Gandalf in this cage? What if he has to pee? Does he get any food at all?" This is a taste of the mere bashing Cinemasins does most of the time.
2:31: Not true. The angle was right for him to notice where Thorin was, as they have shown the chamber full of gold some frames ago. Besides, he wanted to look for his uncle and see why Bilbo was telling them to leave.
2:40: Here, Thorin was already sick with dragon sickness and it's completely understandable that he could have been rambling words randomly about the treasure for a long while. Bilbo says he has been like that for days, so I don't think there's a sin here.
2:42: That scene was not to assure the audience that Bilbo has the Arkenstone, but to show a flashback of Smaug words about his desire to let Bilbo take the Arkenstone so he could watch how it drove Thorin mad. The scene was fine and is another proof of mere bashing.
2:52: It's understandable that you don't like Alfred's character, or that you do but despise him as a person -which imo was what they intended to provoke- but what I don't understand is why there can't be racist or misoginist lines in movies anymore. What is the problem with that? Like there weren't any racist or misoginist people in the world (rolls eyes).
3:03: Bard's knows the story about Smaug and how he killed the people of Dale and of many other towns and villages. He knows about how he stole every piece of value he could gather until he formed the treasure we see inside Erebor. Every Lake Town citizen knows the story. Many have died to pile up that treasure, so it's understandable why Bard says the treasure is "cursed" and that they will take only "what was promised to them".
3:19: Sauron can't kill Gandalf just like that. In fact, I don't think he is allowed to do that at all. Gandalf is a Maia, one of the Demi-Gods in Tolkien's lore that was given life to bring about balance to Middle-Earth. Such as Gandalf is not allowed to fight against Sauron, Sauron is not allowed to kill him without consequence.
3:43: This was very disrespectful to Tolkien's fans. The mention of the "Lord of the Rings masturbation poem" wasn't funny at all. Mere bashing once again, keep it up Cinemasins.
3:54: First of all, the Ringwraiths are regaining their physical form, so this is why they can appear and disappear like ghosts. Second, if there is anyone alive to fight the Ringwraiths and beat them, these are indeed Saruman and Elrond. Saruman is the most powerful of the order of the Istari and Elrond is one of the most powerful Elf warriors left, survivor of the Battle of the Last Alliance. This things are part of Tolkien's lore.
4:08: Dead wrong, nothing was made stupid by Sauron showing his eye form. He was in fact regaining his strength, and all he needed to be complete again was the One Ring. When Galadriel defeated him, he was thrown back in terms of the power he had gathered and so he lost the form of a man. Galadriel made this possible when she said he was "formless" and "nameless" and sent him back to Mordor.
4:45: Completely wrong again. It is Cinemasins who did not watch the movies closely, not Peter Jackson. Saruman never says -not once- that he knows about the location of the ring of power. He indeed knows its connection to Sauron, as do all, but he does not know where the ring is at the moment. And the huge mistake here is to think that when Gandalf is given the ring by Bilbo in the FOTR, he already knew it was the One Ring. Wrong. That is not the case, which is why he had to go searching for clues to see if that ring was in fact the One Ring. Also, we can't forget that in the FOTR Saruman was already evil, so why should he tell Gandalf about the ring or of his alliance with Sauron? No sin here.
5:06: Again, things do not work in Middle-Earth as in our own Earth. In end of the Third Age, which is where we are standing now, the Elves have lost much of their ancient power for having being so far from the Undying Lands. Plus, the ring of power she bears had limited power and it is almost spent by the time she confronts Sauron. So it is a no brainer really that she could not be involved in the War of the Ring much more than she already has.
5:55: Mere bashing again. It is obvious that five armies will appear on screen so I don't see the point on ranting over Bard telling Thranduil that he also has a claim upon the riches of the mountain. He does have one in the book as well.
6:10: No point in here either. The stairs were not big at all to justify the rant about the Dwarves going up and reaching the wall.
6:50: This shows precisely what this video is about. The author of the video knows nothing about Middle-Earth and he shows that by saying "sounds important! too bad I don't know what it means". Not only did he not hear what did Legolas say about Gundabad, but also he did not pay attention to the discussion that Gandalf, Thranduil and Bard had, where the plan the Orcs had was carefully explained by Gandalf.
7:25: It is precisely what happens with most foul creatures when they are faced with Sauron: they obey. Also, and for the record, animals in Middle-Earth are far more intelligent than in our world, and if you know how to communicate with them you can get them to do what you want. Therefore, it's completely understandable that the were-worms obeyed Sauron's orders.
7:45: There were three different groups of different races fighting for the riches of the Mountain since the beginning of the movies... I think Gandalf is right in telling Bilbo that dragon sickness would seem to be affecting the hearts of all who come near the Mountain.
7:55: Gandalf had intercepted a message that said a ransom would be paid for killing Thorin. Since then, he was suspicious about the Orcs having a plot to kill him and immediately thought about the riches inside the Mountain and that it was Thorin's birth right to claim it. Also, this scene comes from the Appendixes to the ROTK, and it was done almost exactly to what Tolkien wanted it to be. Moreover, the author of this video is forgetting that the whole point of the journey was not KILLING Smaug but to steal the Arkenstone from him and restore Thorin's claim upon the Mountain. Thus, the Elves, the Men and everyone would help him to kill the dragon once he had the Arkenstone in his possession.
Apart from these things I mentioned and the ones you already pointed out in your post, there are many other "sins" that were also not the case. Imo, the critical approach of this video comes from both not being in touch with the source material and not liking the movies. But seriously, lots of things had no point whatsoever even if you hadn't read the source materials.
Vrotdogi Pronin's Home of Suicide and Depression I just want to point out to you people that this video was sarcasm. It was all a joke. That was the point.So you sadly wasted your time correcting something that was not meant seriously to begin with.....
MortenStorvik well he is legitimately pointing out what he thought were errors and I was correcting him
Vrotdogi Pronin's Home of Suicide and Depression I only heard sarcasm throughout the whole thing. And i hope i heard right cuz no one would be this stupid..... i hope.
This movie should've been really called:
"The Hobbit: The Bore of the Almost Three Hour Movie".
Agreed
Lol yes
How the fuck can you find this boring?
***** it's about 26 minutes away from three hours - I don't know, dude, I wouldn't say it's a three hour movie
Asgovitch *almost
Aragorn is like 80 during the Lord of the Rings.
110
Josh Meek Really? I havn't read the books in forever but I thought in the deleted scene from the Two Towers he says he's like 80 or 85.
9_Bucks I watched the Two Towers (+ deleted scenes) 2 days ago and in a deleted scene before the Wargs attack them, he tells Eowyn he's 87.
9_Bucks It wasn't a deleted scene it was an extended scene. I have the extended version of The Two Towers and he tells Eowyn that he is 87. So you were right.
Agnes Amarfio Technically they are deleted scenes but back into the movie, since Peter Jackson has never heard of a Deleted Scenes feature on the Special Features menu.
I'm sure it's been said before, but I'll say it again. Both Legolas's rock jumping, and Bilbo's rock throwing, are both well within the powers attributed to their respective races in the books. Now, I know: 'the books don't matter, Mael, they won't sin things from the books', but I'm 96.538% sure that there's SOMETHING in one of the 5 other movies that mentions the hobbits' insane accuracy, and the elves' amazingly light tread, the one that lets them walk on snow. Though now that I think about it, maybe that should still be sinned, because I don't think elves are fast enough to do that. But I maintain they could climb falling rocks if the rocks were moving slower. Dang, that sentence made more sense in my head.
yeah u are right, in the last march of the ents peregrin and meriadoc are throwing rocks at the orcs and showing of their great accuracy
I'm sorry but Legolas rock jumping is physically impossible.
Pedro Albuquerque I just said that. He cannot move as fast as the rocks fall.
+Pedro Albuquerque Elves are magical beings. Their tread is so light that they can walk on metre-high snow without even leaving an imprint, while even hobbits sink into it. It's not a question of physics or weight. They are capable of communicating with the elements and nature itself.
I'm all for hating on the The Hobbit movies, but this, despite being action movie crap, does not contradict Tolkien's idea of elfish abilities.
Aragorn was 87 in LOTR. Get your shit together Cinema Sins. The rest are well deserved sins. What annoys me the most about this film is how bad, CGI drowned and Disney like the special effects have been. I'm baffled by how a movie from a decade later than LOTR can be worse at special effects.
Protector of the Republic
It only mentions his age in the extended versions. Not to mention that it doesn't really explain why he's 87 in the film.
Dedfaction As far as I can remember, he says in one of the films that he belongs to a royal bloodline of men that have all had unusually long lives. That his ancestors lived for hundreds of years, or something like that.
Protector of the Republic correct, he does mention it (I know he does in the Extended Edition, not too sure about the theatrical release)
Dedfaction It does get explained. Its because he is a numénorean, men with a much greater life spend. Their isle kingdom was corrupted by Sauron, and banished to the bottom of the sea by Eru Iluvatar (the god of the middle earth universe). Only a few lead by Aragons ancestor left the kingdom in time, and they became the kings of the new human kingdoms
***** Not in the films it's not, they skipped the 17 years. He's 27 in the movie-verse, it's explained in the films' appendices.
I’m way late by like 2 years but in the deleted scenes and extended edition is where the rams came from
But that's not the version that was shown in the cinemas. For the people in cinemas I wouldn't really make sense up until the point, were they watched the extended edition. That's just shit editing
@@Ace01 If you watch when Dain arrives in the theatrical, one minute into the clip you can see a few goats being ridden in the middle of all the other dwarf infantry.
The Rams came from LotRO - they were the only mounts players could ride in Moria
Corect
No "The power of Christ compels thee!" when Galadriel banished Sauron into the horizon? C'mon Jeremy.
Young Koots team rocket blasting off again!!!
Young Koots Also "The power of boners is stronger" when Galadriel kisses Gandalf on the forehead and waking him.
Young Koots Galadriel banishes Sauron to the Friendzone...
Demonflesh spawn or the phantom zone
Young Koots go fucked your cardinal hat.
"Halfway down the Anduin" except the River Running doesn't flow into the Anduin and the Bay of Belfalas, it flows into the Sea of Rhun.
+Bewilderbeastie That pissed me off so much, too.
+Bewilderbeastie This comment is funny because of geography. LAUGH YOU FOOLS!
***** That's a pretty good view of it.
***** But wouldn't they rather refer to the Mithlond? Since that is actually the way which the elves use to pass to the Undying Lands...
These people aren't elves, though. And I think that the knowledge of elves and Mithlond wouldn't be known by the masses.
i really like this movie sue me
I cant agree with some of these sins
Alpha Noodle me To I liked it but there where also Some sins that Made No sense
The scene with legolas and the bridge falling apart can i explain to you, hes legolas and because he’s legolas he can do that because he’s legolas and legolas can do that.
I agree but their are some sins I can argue like complaining about elves spinning their swords in battle that’s just awesome
the only ones I can't argue with are the ones that are about things that were added into this film to reference lotr 😭
Mr. BeagleBum one sin where it says in Lord of the Rings there was no indication that Legolas knew Aragorn until the Fellowship meeting but the second Boromir questions him he jumps up to defend the King because he knew him
This wasn't in the movies but Galadriel did fight in the war of the ring, she was just in the north destroying the entirety of the walls surrounding Dol Guldor so that sin shouldn't count.
Brent Lacey this is Cinema Sins though, not Literature Sins
The books DONT FUCKING MATTER
Brent Lacey In order to know that you need to be able to read. A skill that most people are missing.
Dante Rocca it does matter in this case because it was not part of the main plot of LOTR (its not even mentioned). So, only by reading further you would know that.
Duilio Murai you must be new here... Books don't matter here, if the movie is missing a lot of content from the book then it's the movie's fault for not explaining; this is +1 sin for not explaining. This is CinemaSIN, not bookSIN.
The Hobbit trilogy is LOTRs star wars prequels, a huge pile of shit
Amen to that
Badabada dabadaba Actually... Yeah... They are... They are a prequel, and a trilogy... So yeah.
No, the Star Wars' prequel are way, but way, better.
The book is good though, Jackson is the only one to blame here really.
Badabada dabadaba At least they didn't involve too many lengthy diplomatic talks like Episode II. And you have to admit, the scene where Bilbo meets Gollum is easily the best part of this trilogy, as well as the only part that matters in the long run.
Badabada dabadaba It's worse than the prequels. Much much worse. Darth Maul was cool.
Ja Ja Binks would fit really well in this series
2:14 the people probably didn’t tell everyone because they were almost right next to the master and a massive dragon falling clearly would of killed them on impact
I feel that Edna from the “Incredibles” would have a seizure from the elves wearing capes in battle. And Thranduil’s cape is- like, dragging on the floor
Nah man those caps are elven capes that wouldn’t happen, his is probably made with some type of magic anyways
Why did the CGI look so good in LOTR and so bad in the Hobbit? It's like they had Lucas do it. "Let's make everything look fake as sh*t" LOTR was good because it was a faithful adaptation of the book, and yet PJ threw out the book with this crap.
Dern Vader I ain't sure but i could have something to do with the fps
production time
the hobbit movies were extremely rushed.
Dern Vader You have to look at it differently. This movie's camera work is really well done and the acting is really well done because that was Peter Jackson's job on the film. Unlike the Lord of the Rings he had little control on what was actually in the movie. He wasn't even supposed to direct it. Guillermo Del Torro was the original director. He was put on the movie at the very last minute and his job was to film what some other people decided would make a movie. I am 100% positive if Peter had full control and he himself decided to make it than it would have been a very good adaptation of the Hobbit.
I've puzzled over that for a very long time, i agree with you 100% You are spot on !
I just hope Peter Jackson doesn't try to make the Silmarillion into 9 movies.
God I wish that such a beutiful work of art never becomes a movie
LoweWahrolen Tolkien's family aren't giving anyone the rights to adapt any more of his work, so it looks like you're in luck.
DocPicklez as long ans Christopher Tolkien is alive, there will be no Silmarillion movies (thank god)
Alessandra De Bernardis Yeah... Sigh. I don't know if that's a good thing.
Bad adaptations are bad, but good adaptation could be brilliant... Eh. :
Tomasz Wota It's like trying to turn something like the Bible into a movie. It just doesn't work.
Dumbest moment in all three movies: When Thranduil says "We attack at dawn" (like, tomorrow) when his whole army is already standing there, at dawn, on the current day.
Not that dumb. Like, dumb, but justifiable. 1) Thorin could've changed his mind or been made to do so by the others who didn't want to die. 2) Maybe it sends a kind of message to attack at dawn - the high, noble elves symbolically taking over with beginning of a new day instead of creeping in at night like orcs. I think they prefer day time for battle, while the ring-wraiths, for example, are stronger at night.
It's sad how they watered down his character as well as others just so they could add more plot than what was necessary or actually in the book
They did it to give Thorin time to change his mind. They knew the dwarves were coming but thought it would take an extra day but they marched through the night and made it there early (from the book) so they thought they had enough time to at least try to solve it peacefully.
If he woudn't wait till dawn then other armies couldn't come there.
how is that dumb? ever heard of a siege.
"ride north find tbe dunedain"
the dunedain are west of the mountain
My thoughts exactly. Kinda South West, since Erebor is too far up north.
At the time of the hobbit the dunedain were much further afield in every direction. It’s explained in the later parts of the Silmarillion. But summat to do with they had more power but then in LOTR Gandalf asked them to basically defend the Shire regions and also they were pushed back
Bugzy erebor itself I quite far north already, even if they were pushed back they did not go into angmar Wich was right above eriador
It's almost impossible to go more north unless you are in the snowy region (forgot the name)
Forodwaith
There were lots of denedain in angmar though, maybe he implied that?
1:26 this is the one time that I don't agree with the fact that the enemy should just kill them already. Smaug has no reason to expect any opposition other than the typical attempt with a normal arrow, and is just enjoying terrifying the foe as dragons do.
Pretty much like he said: "no one can stand against me"
@@obi-wankenobi1045 Interesting that you have the name Obi-Wan Kenobi. I recall in Star Wars:The Empire Strikes Back, how when Luke Skywalker told Yoda that he didn't believe in what he was seeing with his own eyes in witnessing Yoda lift the ship out of the swamp using the force and Yoda told him that that was why he failed.
Well, when Smaug gloated that no one could stand against him, that was exactly why he was killed and defeated.
Smaug's ego is one of his defining characteristics and that ego and that hubris-which you can just hear dripping from his every word, is ultimately what led to his downfall and death.
I'm not a religious person but it it really is true that pride goes before a fall(which is a phrase adopted from a verse in The Bible). Never underestimate someone and Smaug underestimated Bard The Bowman and assumed that no mere puny human could possibly stand against him and instead of just dispatching Bard and his son quickly and with haste by incinerating them with his dragon fire, he just continued bragging and gloating and in doing so, gave Bard enough time to set up everything he would need to fire the black arrow and kill Smaug.
I think the narrator of Cinema Sins missed the point of why Smaug was defeated and killed and why he didn't just kill Bard right away-as I said it before, it's because of Smaug's arrogance. Smaug knew what he was capable of but never stopped to even consider the possibility of what others might be capable of, as well and he didn't stop to consider the possibility that what he clearly saw as a lesser being, could kill him.
I have an idea for some fantasy graphic novels/comics that I want to write and I'm going to have a evil villainous powerful dragon-who like Smaug can talk and is intelligent but unlike Smaug, I'm not going to have the dragon be so pompous and full of himself that he underestimates enemies and talks too much. But going back to Cinema Sins, I'm surprised that the narrator didn't deduce why Smaug didn't just kill Bard right away and just kept bragging and talking too much, as soon as I saw the movie, I understood why Smaug didn't just kill Bard and the son right away.
And also, it's important to note that Smaug has a big mouth-and I mean that both metaphorically as well as literally. He's an arrogant, narcissistic, greedy psychopath who just happens to be a dragon and as intelligent, sophisticated and eloquent as Smaug is, he's still a monster, a brute and a thug-a scaly thug, if you will. It wasn't just that Smaug had no reason to expect any opposition other than the typical attempt with a normal arrow, I think another reason why Smaug kept talking and bragging and gloating instead of just shutting up and killing Bard and his son is because he's supremely arrogant and Smaug's arrogance and hubris, is ultimately, what led to his being killed.
Smaug did what you should never do and underestimated his enemy, he clearly saw humans as lesser and as beneath him and he couldn't even conceive of the faintest possibility that Bard could even harm him, much less kill him.
The narrator from Cinema Sins does have a point, if Smaug hadn't wasted any time running his mouth and just killed them, already, he himself, wouldn't have been killed. But because of how full of himself the dragon is he, he wasted valuable time bragging, gloating and taunting and threatening Bard and thus, bought Bard enough time to kill him. I like to say that it isn't just Bard and the black arrow that got Smaug killed but it was his ego, as well(and I'm sure Peter Jackson and the his crew thought of that, too). Pride goes before a fall.
@@JR-ju3kj Geez dude, that's a huge wall of text. As much as a want to read it, I can't
@@noahfountain7037 and that's with both comments being edited :o
I know it’s the point, but as an avid Tolkien fan, it hurts me to see the lore just thrown out for the sins
A lot of the sins exist because he doesn't undestand well the lore
He could have done some research but no
@@lars8973 if you need to do research to understand whats going on in a movie that is nearly 3 hours long and made from just a few chapters of a single book then it is a flawed movie
@Elizabeth LaPlante you should never have to do background research for a full viewing experience. This coming from someone who will look into anything and everything that interests me. Fuck i read a manga once that mentioned the power of tardigrade so i decided to look into everything about them. A movie that relies on outside information, is not a good movie.
@Allison Long that is true
Has anyone else noticed that this trilogy is basically the LOTR equivalent of the live action Transformers and TMNT movies?
Think about it: take a beloved franchise and add some bullshit backstory out from your ass. Anything that was original; make sure it gets Hollywooded. Have some extra-hammy and bad performances. Attempt and fail a love story. Throw in some painful references to the source materiel that you say is for the fans but actually ends up insulting them. Bad plot and characters hiding behind overwhelming and confusing action. Have the characters survive fatal situations because fuck logic. Wrap the whole thing in a thick layer of CGI and sell it IN 3D! All the critics hate it but the general public is like "good enough." Oh, and try to insult it and the fans will tell you that it's okay because it's for kids.
I'm surprised the Arkenstone wasn't actually just a Beats speaker.
LOTR equivalent of Star Wars prequels. Seriously, I like episode 1 just as much as I enjoy an unexpected journey, epidode 2 as much as Desolation of smaug(am I the only one who think DOS is the worst hobbit film?) and episode 3 just as much as battle of the five armies.
***** Congratulations. People CAN have different opinions. You solved the puzzle.
What point are you trying to make?
MurlocAggroB When the first Hobbit came out, I thought they were going for a kiddie feel, and actually applauded it for giving the new films their own identity. I realized by the second film that they were actually going for a stupid, illogical, borrow-as-much-from-the-old-trilogy-as-possible-because-that-clearly-worked-for-Star-Wars feel, and the kiddie thing was only an unfortunate byproduct of the stupidity and laziness.
***** Hey, it's just my opinion. Sometimes people have different ones than yours.
Opinions are a two-way street, friend, so try to remember that before using them to prove someone wrong.
Too little sins. The trolls don't turn into stone in daylight, Legolas immediatelly forgets "his feelings" for Tauriel etc. Just sin every scene with Tauriel in it.
P. Camenzind agree, they actually went soft on this and sinned only the most important and obvious sins, if they had been sinning like they do lately this would have gone over 300 sins
Miguel Bartelsman You do realize a number that high would have to receive the Transformers AoE treatment. Despite how enjoyable that was, I don't think Cinemasins wants to do that again.
Owen Po which is why they probably didn't
P. Camenzind There are certain trolls which turn to stone. There are trolls bred by Sauron which can stand the light, like the Uruk hai
Billy Batson If I'm not mistaked, those trolls didn't show up all the way until the second war of the ring, 60 years after the events of the hobbits.
Wrong that Aragorn did not know Legolas before the counsel of Elrond. (movie not book) He introduces Aragorn to Boromir as The Heir of Isildur at the counsel (in the movie). That implies that they must have had a history together. SO that sin is on you, lol.
Yeah, he's 87 in LOTR
In the lore Aragorn meets Legolas when he takes Gollum to Thranduils Halls for questioning
David P No it’s still retarded. Aragorn was less than 12 years old at the time of the hobbit nor was he known as strider then. Fuck off defending these movies.
If you read the BOOKS Aragorn did some work with Legolas in his ranger days. They tracked down gollum together.
@@JohnBanana Dude 🤨 The events in The Hobbit happen 60 years before LOTR. Aragorn was 87 in LOTR, so in the movies he was approximately 27 when Thranduil told Legolas to go look for him. It's simple math 🙌
Questioning the vision of "old ass" Gandalf? He's not a human, he's a demi god. cough, casual
Ikr half of the sins are by lacking of lotr universe knowledge.
@@kozotorul1843 the other half isn't even an actual problem with the movie
Well he is not a half god he is a Maïar, lower class of Ainurs the first living creature after eru illuvatar the creater hum self.
@@felixroussin7430 Yes, that's what I said. You're just using Tolkien's made up words. :)
I guess by saying demi god, that implies half mortal half god. When what I meant was more like the gods' pets, or 'assistants' Maybe should have said angel.
As I recall the mythology of Hobbits, they are great at throwing.
+Hiraghm Yeah, but CinemaSins ignores differences from book to movie; they just focus on the films as films and find their flaws therein. If they included story changes and discrepancies, we'd be here for hours.
+Hiraghm Right, but how is a rock going to kill an armored Orc?
+AIONBERSERKER that wasn't the point
cayden Garrand
This is a follow up question.
5:35 the elves gave those jewels to the dwarves before the dwarves became mad
graslund viggo while they still lived in the mountain
graslund viggo But that isn't explained in the movie..
XxCoolie99xX First film... We see it...
Mleouf in the extended edition
nope... The short one.
Aragorn is 87 in Fellowship of the ring, making him 27'ish here :3
dafuq i thought hes human
Just A Guy He is part of the race of men. But he is Dúnedain, their average lifespan is twice that of, say, men of Rohan or Gondor.
BeardedDanishViking Didnt know that
the dunedain are descended from the mumnornorians
jacob allen The mumnornorians?! What the actual hell xD Numenoreans, dude ;)
16:10 Aragorn was 87 when he joined the fellowship, and lived to be 210. He came from a line of Numenorean royal blood, which contributed to his long lifespan.
Aragorn was 10 when Thorin's company reached Rivendell
No, he was older
Infumii Nations actually he would have been pretty young. Sure 60 years till the beginning of fellowship but in the book Frodo has the ring for something like 20 years before he sets out on his adventure.
pursuing222 You are correct.
Infumii Nations Nope. 10
tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Timeline_of_Aragorn
EresirThe1st then the film is wrong
:42 How is that slow moving boat going fast enough to rip that wall out? And how is that wall weaker than Stephen Fry's rib cage? Because the wall is ripped out yet Fry is totally okay.
Shhhh... Logic.
OwenBruch22 Because Stephen Fry is a superbeing. Unfortunately he's weak against fire-type monsters.
Keith Fraser *normal attacks from fire type monsters
Karol Oppeln- Bronikowski Yeah and my point is that the boat couldn't of had enough momentum i.e. "slow moving boat".
Also if it somehow did it would have killed Stephen Fry.
OwenBruch22 Oh please we all know Fry's voice gives him superpowers
12:30 note to cinemasins in the extended edition the dwarves used the rams as part of the dwarves Calvary, and the three others were from a chase which ended with Dwalin, Fili, and Kili using the three remaining rams with other rams being eaten by wargs to catch up to Thorin while Balin holds off the wargs
Ngl I love the hell out of all three Hobbit movies. They have their flaws, and they aren’t on the same level as lotr, but still, I adore them.
I like how they tried to stretch out the battle, because in the book it was one brief chapter, and Bilbo gets knocked out, and since we’re following Bilbo it feels like we miss a lot, and then we just wake up to find out that Fili and Kili are both dead and Thorin lives just long enough to apologize for being a doodoo head. I love the book, but I still greatly appreciate these movies.
I too love all the hobbit movies but I think this one is my favorite favorite in this trilogy 💜
I like these movies but yes, Martin Freeman was most definitely the best part
Martin gets SO MUCH ACROSS with subtle facial expressions and body language. He does this in Sherlock as well.
babserella2778 He does the expressions that I imagine a normal person would do, which I find to be subtlety brilliant. I've never watched Sherlock, heard it's awesome though
+iReece4498 I enjoyed all the actors, it was the writing that ruined these movies for me.
I have sinned!
I freely admit to loving both trilogies, even though "The Hobbit" is a small book, expanded into three movies, with characters that weren't in the book.
it's not a sin when half of the points made in the video can easily be swept aside if you know middle-earth and the books
that's fair, I liked the movies too and The Hobbit doesn't deserve the hate it gets
Love the support for these movies
@@justcare.9390 Yes, it does. This horrible movie is so far removed from the actual story written by Tolkien as be not even related. What a hot mess!
Maleficent J maybe "sin the thirteen minute credits" will be our "always"?
*"Yes...it will be.*
Daisy-Rebelle Baggins Was that a Fault in our Stars reference?
StudioInkblot maybe. It was also just a message to my non-Tolkienite friend who loves cinemasins and TFioS.
StudioInkblot *It is 'THE Fault in Our Stars, thank you very much*
Maleficent J I always mix it up, sorry.
Galadriel is one of the Eldar, it's only in this movie they actually showed her power which kind of sucks.
Also if you're having trouble with those couple of names, DO NOT read The Silmarillion.
Aragorn was like 87 in LOTR, come on.
manynukes11 Her powers are turning into a wraith?
manynukes11 She shouldn't be more powerful than Istari though, does she? Gandalf is older than Arda itself.
Maybe they just got the lore wrong, I don't think we saw what the Istari were truly capable of but Galadriel is one of the most powerful beings in Middle Earth.
manynukes11 I love the Silmarillion, it's my favorite book ever. I need to read it again.
Eldar is just another term for elve. I assume you are just one of those movie fanboys who never actually read even one Tolkien book and think they can fool anybody by using a term they don't even know the meaning of themselve.
I hated every bit of this movie. Not because it wasn't like the books. Because it was a horrible example of cinema. It's so disappointing to see such great source material ruined in the hands of incompetents. I know. I'm not a filmmaker. I have no place to judge. I'm just a consumer. But any consumer with common sense and wits about him can spot the difference between a spam sandwich and cordon bleu.
David Galvin What made it so disappointing was, that it looked like it wasn't in the hands of incompetents, it was the same man who made LOTR possible, that was the worst, at least for me.
Krischan04 I feel exactly how you feel.
If only you had common sense...
David Galvin 'I hated every bit of this movie.'What an incredulous, over the top statement that reeks of a desire to hate things.
Krischan04 Exactly, man. That knowledge made it so much worse. :(
Just a fun fact, the reason Bilbo successfully hits every rock throw isn’t just bs luck. In the first film he states he is quite good at a game of conkers which is actually a throwing game involving the seed of a horse chestnut. So it isn’t a big reach to go from conkers to Bilbos rock throwing abilities
00::50 mark: In Smaug's eyes, the people of Laketown DID do him wrong: They funded the dwarves' attack on him, which Smaug knows because he can smell the scent of Laketown on them.
16:34 mark: It was clear in Fellowship that Legolas knew Aragorn. Legolas identifies him to Boromir at the council when Boromir expresses ignorance of who Aragorn is.
The inner Tolkien nerd in me wants to scream lore at this but the CinemaSins fan in me is cheering because Jackson did some stupid stuff with the movie.
***** Besides, screaming lore at this is irrelevant because the main point of this channel is to point out how bad movies are as movies. There are tons of great movies based off their book counterparts that aren't terrible and cliche'd to all hell. This is just one of those movies that no matter how much of it is lore and the book describes so much more about those damned Eagles, it's still a terrible, awful movie series from The Hobbit.
***** Personally I had a little loregasm when the bearers of the 3 took on the 9, but I can see it being sinful as the trilogy does very little to explain what's happening
+ReadActiveLobster
I know!
+LawffleCopter
Normally id agree, but here the lore doesen't help the film by explaining stuff they were just too lazy to put in the film, it makes it even worst! I don't even recognize middle earth, everything goes, nothing has real consequences, weird colours, strange creatures and don't even get me started on lake-town! It looks like venice meets pirates of the carribean! I hate hate hate the look of lake-town AND its inahbitants! God, i don't even mind the were-worms as much as lake-town. Middle earth exsits LONG BEFORE this specific fashion, why would jackson dress them like that! He got it so right with LotR! But, well there were specific details mentioned about fashion and design of the different cultures in the LotR books. I think the books are important here, because jackson mocks them by completly ignoring the logical frame they offer!
I have no issue with the lengths of these movies as most people do. Anything that gives lore or any more information, I'm up for it. What I hated was the laziness! I don't know what happened to Peter Jackson, but the CGI was horrid. In LOTR they had extras for everything, thousands of horses, chainmail and weapons, and then there's The Hobbit and they just skimped out on everything. Pretty disappointed in Jackson.
The one memorable moment I have from this trilogy is probably Erebor, I just absolutely love how massive that place is, and how huge Smaug is. Smaug puts all of the other dragons in the fantasy genre to shame.
peter had years to work on lotr he had months to work on these
I absolutely agree. What movies are about an hour longer than they need to be are the daggon Halmark Christmas movies. They are too long and soppy for me.
But this isn't any Tolkie lore, this was just shat out.
+AdamHH11 I heard that much more CGI was used in order to film this in 3D.
+AdamHH11 Jackson got bored after the first movie, panicked and just phoned the rest hoping it would finish.
It's just sad knowing Saruman's actor died.
Joe H yes
yes
Joe H yes
Joe H yes
yes
5:28 - 5:50 no, from what I've heard, the necklace thing was commissioned for his wife iirc.
Can you add 100 sins for making Azog and pretty much every orc CGI? That's one thing that still pisses me off.
Everything wrong with The Hobbit Franchise: Trying to make more that 2 movies out of 1 book.
DarkDenDan As someone who read the book before watching all the three movies, I have to disagree with you for following reasons:
1. Bard, for example, didn't show up in the book until he had to shoot down Smaug, without any explanations or foreshadowing. He was just some random laketowner #57 who walked out of the crowd and said: ''I'm gonna shoot that thing.''
2. The book pretty much skipped why and how Thorin got crazy and kind of rushed into the Battle of the Five Armies. At least in the movie I got to understand it better. Also his death was ''Bilbo was knocked unconscious while wearing the ring and woke up to find Thorin in his deathbed.''
3. Gandalf's absense/departure was covered by 'He had to go to a meeting with the Wizards and shit' and here we were given a legitimate excuse where he went.
4. The Dwarfs we kind of just there in the book and didn't have any real story arc. As I mentioned above on Thorin's death, Fili and Kili were just mentioned to have been killed and in the movie their deaths were shown in a way that made them matter.
There are other reason why I think the movies improved the story, but I think those are the ones worth mentioning. And I did find some things in the movies ridiculous and agree with some of the sins in this video. The ending however made it all worthwhile by closing it's circle with the paralleling scene from Fellowship of the Ring.
Arttu Lehmonen Btw I've never read the book or seen any of the movies. I'm just making a very bold unsupported statement with no prior knowledge of the topic or anything to do with it. In other words I'm a TH-cam commenter.
*trying to make more than 1 movie
Arttu Lehmonen They could've fit all of what you said in one movie if they'd cut all the neverending bullshit scenes. Like that scene after the battle where Bilbo and Gandalf are sitting in a fallen tree, and just stay there and stare at each other, not even talking. It didn't add anything at all to the moment, just a really worthless minute of movie. If you cut off these worthless minutes you'd get like an hour less of movie.
Jake High well its like last 2 twillight movies or hunger games movies. 2 movies, 1 book.
"I'll tell ya, this movie has violated me so completely, I'm beginning to mistake this for love." OMG! HAHAHAHA
Aragon is 87 in Lord of the Rings. His line has a blessing of long life.
in old times they live for about at least 100 years
Aragorn II died when he was about 208 years old
the people of gondor are the dunedain, they live 3 times as much as regular men from other lands
Actually it's the descendants of Numenor, not Gondor. The Dunedain rangers are descendants of Numenor who settled in the lands of Arnor and then Gondor. So... yeah. lol
Dalton brummer gondor is the decendent of numenor as is arnor (were aragorn was from)
The Rams came from the other dwarves. It showed in the extended edition that was removed
That's shit editing.
They are supposed to be Dwarven Cavalry that storm through the lines of the elves in the Movie
Problem is PJ removed them - so the audience had no idea where they came from :P
16:10 Two Towers extended gives says Aragorn is 87, so at the time of The Hobbit he would be 27
About Aragorn's age, he was 87 in LOTR, he tells that to Eowyn I think. Maybe it's just in the extended version? Anyway, that means that he is in his 20's at least. And the scene in Elrond's council states that they know each other, Legolas tells Boromir exactly who he is and defends him rather passionately.
The rest of the sins are perfectly valid, of course XD
David Del Pozo Filíu Aragorn is actually about 10 years old at the time of the hobbit (if you're going off of the book timeline and not the movie timeline) because the very beginning of the fellowship starts 60 years then an additional 17 years pass between the point of Bilbo leaving to Rivendell and Frodo leaving with the ring although this period was cut from the movies thus technically making Aragorn about 27 during the hobbit for the movie timeline
Brandon Hank I always go for the books, but Jeremy always says that the books do not count, only the movies, and, in the case of the movies, Frodo did not wait those 17 years, and Aragorn was 87, so following his own rules, he's wrong.
David Del Pozo Filíu Ya, and Aragorn tells him to shut up or sit down and Legolas fucking LISTENS. Not only are they known to one another, they have a strong respect
Rodgerinho Yeah, I guess a prince of Elves wouldn't sit down and shut up just because this guy "Strider" told him to. It was pretty obvious that they knew each other.
+100 sins for the bad tactics
Complete missuse of a phalanx, the elves jump in front of a pike wall which has its flank protected by a mountain. Use a goddman bow, if you dont have one there are probably some in the armory. Speaking of wich , pulling back inside would have made much more sense than charging out. Holding the little stone bridge would be easy with that phalanx, and they would have a retreat point through the door bilbo used to get in in the first place. And they could wait for reinforcements, almost noone likes the orcs. Also in a city as steep as this one they fail to set up multiple levels of defence. Should have still been obliterated but they would have lasted longer and taken less casualties. And dont even get me started on charging through a whole army on the ram mount from hell.....
Total War fan spotted :D
how can they take less casualties if they are obliterated tho?
haha yeah it is terrible. I can see the logic, like the elves have a supernatural fighting ability, still it would be better for them to allow the wave to crash against the phalanx then jump into the fray behind the first handful of orcs and cause an admixture of the armies as the fighting begins. So dumb.
Although thats true, please research the "behind-the-scenes" crap by WB, and how Peter Jackson had almost 0 pre - Production compared to 3 years for LOTR
The reason smaug was mad at lake town was because smaug thought that lake town helped the dwarves so thats why also if you check out the extended edition it explains more
Aragon is 87 in the lord of the rings
cody riddle What??!?😱
@@violentscorl697 He even says it in the movie to Èowyn when she is trying to flirt with him. Dunadine are the distant relatives of Elrond(Half elven) who became more like man than Elf but still had long lives into the early hundreds(vs elves who are biologically immortal).
TheScarletInfector Oh. I didn’t remember that part, well, it seems like it has been too long a time since I watched the movie !😅
ViolentScorl this is only in the extended Version of the movies I think, thats maybe why you didnt saw it yet
Bob Bambo probably
Another great video! Only part that troubled me is that both in the hobbit books AND movies it mentions the elves trading things of worth with the dwarves, hence reason why elf gems are in the lonely mountain. As for the second part of one of your criticisms, Erebor was a HUGE dwarven city, which was populated by huge amounts of dwarves, with jobs varying from banktellers to stay at home-dads
ahem, what hobbit "books"?
You know, written by JRR Tolkien, as a Prequel to the Lord of the Rings trilogy... The books that these movies are all based on... (HOW DO YOU NOT KNOW)
+depressed_snail Holy crap, there is only ONE Hobbit book. Try to get the facts straight.
Oh I said Books? Sorry xD I meant book.
Hahahaha exactly
"The women can clean up"
CinemaSins: "Thats racist"
Makes sense.
CinemaSins can't differ between racist and sexist. That being said, I couldn't disagree with that crooked guy on this one.
Racism isnt real, much like sexism, so who cares?
Kai The_Magical.Lizard one that isn’t covered with snowflakes like you
It's a running joke. CinemaSins say "that's racist" whenever anything in a movie is any kind of derogatory or exclusionary or biased or whatever. If a character says they don't trust psychiatrists, CinemaSins will say "That's racist." You get the idea.
@@TeamJella ok buddy
What would have happend if The Hobbit was written by George R. R. R:R:R:R:R:R:R: Martin
+Fasken2 Bilbo would die halfway through, the dwarves would be sexy whores instead, and the orcs would win the final battle - though Azog would die of a heart attack.
+Crichjo32 Mmmmm I think he'd more likely die from poison. He's not one for accidental deaths.
+Crichjo32 cant stop laughing. best post ever
+Fasken2 There would have been Pirates.
+Fasken2 We'd still be waiting for the last installment of the book and what actually was put into the movies wouldn't matter because of "creative license."
Where is the greatest CinemaSin of all on this movie? -- No Plot Resolution. This movie has as its central conflict: Who will control Erebor and how will the gold/treasure be allocated between the various parties? Resolution: None. Bilbo just goes home.
+oremfrien The dwarves control the mountain and im sure Dain gave Laketown their share of the gold and the elves just sort of fucked off to the grey havens
TheSilverPhoenix100
I read the book; I know what happens -- Bilbo has Bard return the Arkenstone and Bilbo uses his 14th share to give Bard all of the gold he wants and the Elves all of the treasure they want and takes only one chest for himself and Dain becomes King Under the Mountain. The point is that the movie does not address this.
+oremfrien In the extended edition they have this scene where Dain is crowned King but it's just not in the normal version/one they showed at the cinema so I can see why people are confused about this
+oremfrien If PJ had done the right thing and crafted just ONE film, like the ONE book it's based upon, he could have spent more time tying up these loose ends. I guess he figured, "Why bother with all that rubbish when I can just keep them entertained with a stupid romantic subplot."
+oremfrien he also picks up the troll cache from the beginning of the book to supplement his wealth. on top of that he was already a rich person before he went on his adventure and had held a position as the "rich" side of his family with the Sackville Baggins being the poor. Plus he was related to the Tooks who were also rich in the Shire. In addition to all that he had a steady stream of visitors from outside the Shire who would bring him exotic items like dwarven mechanical things like toys or tools of great value which would supplement his relative fortune. he would also probably get payments of his 14th share of the treasure over the years since one chest full would not be near enough even after giving most of it away to the elves and humans.
see the extended version of the movie just released, and several sins would be answered for. such as the rams
+Merrill R haven't seen that, so where do the rams come from
the dwarves bring a massive cavalry force of mounted ram soldiers, and they actually engage the elves in a 5 minute, very bloody battle scene. we also find out how that weasel human ( I forgot his name) dies.
The extended version is on TH-cam if you want to see it.
Some arts are a bit rediculous
I'll go look that up then, sounds interesting
+Merrill R "very bloody battle scene" XD all I saw was a tonne of crap CGI
Sebast7HD10 even animated, it's not often you see "blood" in the films
My biggest issue was with the big battle itself. Where did all the dwarves go that were still on the hill with all their siege weaponry when Azog arrived? Those whirlies could have taken out a great number of baddies.
Where did all the elves that jumped over the dwarves to engage the orcs suddenly disappear to when the dwarves behind the shield wall did a forward spear charge at the orcs? That entire Battle scenes and visuals were a confused cluster fuck, by the visuals alone it looked like the Orcs had overwhelmed them completely numerically and were gaining on all fronts, yet somehow 13 dwarfs made a difference and turned the tide of a battle that looked like a complete massacre?
I will just say this, regarding one of the later sins in the video:
Aragorn is 87 in the LOTR, and so he'd be in his twenties when Thranduil sends Legolas to find him. They may not be great chums, but Aragorn and Legolas both indicate that they know each other, during the Council of Elrond in the Fellowship of the Ring.
Wrong Python.
Ding!
The_Warmonger Are you suggesting it was a Michael Palin impression? They both portrayed "pepperpots" on Flying Circus and were practically indistinguishable.
Don Lawson It was clearly Terry Jones! ("He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy!")
The_Warmonger > import Eagles
I'm pretty sure every single one of those guys cross-dressed on camera at some point.
The_Warmonger watch flying circus and youll see that every python has cross dressed on the show
Aragorn is from a type of human in lotr universe who's ancestors are half elf half human so aragorn was indeed circa 80 y/o in the first lotr movie, that's not a plot hole actually.
I think he was canonically like 12 at the time?
Where in this movies is that stated? I've read the books, including the Hobbit and the Silmarilion and love the story and the universe but the movies have a whole lot of holes that couldn't be addressed either because they didn't want to o hadn't enough time to but that is the movie's problem. They are ment to stand on their own at least logically and not require the audience have read 2 to 5 books to get everything presented. Also, although the nod is for Aragorn, they could have been referring to Arathorn and it would still make sense.
@@miguelortiz3836 Éowyn asks Aragorn about it in the director's edition. His age is addressed in the movies too.
@@kozotorul1843 You are right about the director's edition but I don't remember it being addressed in other part (I'm not being confrontational, I'm genuinely curious). I remember Elrond talking to Arwen that he will die and she will remain but I don't recall ages being addressed.
@@miguelortiz3836 they do touch on it during a interaction between Aragorn and Eowyn (the extended Two Towers) when she asks how could he have served with her grandfather, she didn’t think it was possible because he’s too young. He reveals that he is in fact 87 but still appears in the prime of his life, that is because he is of Royal Numenorean decent.
I still have no idea what or whos the fifth army... theres the Dwarves, the Elves, the Humans and the Orcs so whos the fifth? Is it the Goblin Mercenaries? I thought they where part of the Orc army? Or is suppose to be the Eagles?
Satan Its supposed to be the eagles. Originally I thought the Ironclad were a separate army from the dwarves despite them both being a variation of dwarves, but I was wrong.
DucksUnlimited Ok it just dosnt make it very clear
***** Yeah I have read the books so I knew that was the fifth army in them but they (seemingly) dont appear in the movie so its not made clear what the fifth army is
*****
yup
Satan In the books, 'Orc' was just the Hobbit word for Goblin. Goblins and orcs were the same thing.
Well I don't want to argue with you, the movie do suck, but Aragon is 87 in the Lord of the rings.
***** Well it has nothing to do with wether or not it is as good as the lotr, I never compare Movies in that fashion. But only a fool would call the hobbit trilogy good, they overused CGI, added a whole bunch of characters thay did nothing but contribute to the movies run-time (Legolas, Tauriel, Azog, Radagast, Alfrid etc.) and they weird segways between "humorus and charming family Movie" and "War gloomy moods and seriousness". Don't get me wrong ofcourse they tried to get it to appeal to both younger and older audiences and one must take artistic freedoms with characters and such but it was done so poorly and most of the time felt like it was just there because it was there (example: the "Troll-ram") and the scenes of so called levity was mostly ridicolus (Bombur bouncing in his barrel, Radagast smoking weed etc). Ofc then there is the fact that they made the Hobbit into a trilogy... why? just why?
***** Yeah maybe I was a little salty when saying it sucked, where as I didn't care for it it did have it's moments and overall the trilogy is ok in my mind. But each to their own right? :)
Anton Larsson Legolas would have been in, no reason to leave him out, and same with Radagast concerning the white council vs necromancer storyline
The Silver Elite The book did ok without them and even if thy had to be in there they could have just had cameos. For example: Legolas is just seen beside Thranduil and some excuse is given why he would not fight later. Where as Radagast could have come to say "all hands on deck" to Gandalf anf then left again
Anton Larsson you do realise that Tolkien write the Hobbit before LOTR and thats why Legolas wasn't in it right? And having the prince of the Woodland Realm doing nothing wouldn't have been great and not worth it, and Radagast is one of the five wizards, having him not doing much wouldnt have made him live up to his ability, and he did take part in the fight for Dol Guldur
Well, some of the sins get explained in the extended edition for example sin 93, you can see that dain brought them and also how fili kili dwalin and thorin get them
It was so entirely ridiculous to have Smaug die that early in the movie!
You had to see the last movies ending there was a battle scene with him and they made the three movies out of one book so...
+Xx12345678987654321xX : I did see the second film, it was awesome. But the build up to the third, I was anticipating more of him in the story.
That's when he dies in the book though...
The logical thing to do would have been, have Smaug's death scene at the end of the second film, rather than ending that film on a cliffhanger only to kill him in an incredible anticlimax. These films were a mess.
That's true, but I don't care what the book says. Smaug can't be killed.
i would have added 50 sins for that mario bullshit at the end
Dachampster True
I feel like it would have fit better in the video if he had the sin (and "new sin ding") as he took each impossible step.
well, you would be wrong to do it because it actually makes sense Elves are extremely light on their feet
13:33 Exactly.. I thought about the wereworms, too.
"yay he killed the dragon" Laughed pretty hard at that.
In the extended version you see that Dain become king
Colte TFW you need an extended edition of three four hour movies based on a 200 page book.
@@magicmulder blame Peter Jackson for that
I love the extended versions of the LOTR movies.. They are the only ones I watch.. I will NEVER put myself through a extended edition of any of the hobbit movies they long bloated and messy enough as is, the effects are crap (compared to the last trilogy) and the story itself isn't half as engaging.. Why would anyone want more of that?
Nobody's wondering what happened to the Arkstone? No? Okay...
Javier Angeles just if you are wondering it ws buried with thorin in the center of the mountain
Wolfbane971 Did they mentioned it in the movie? Or was just in the book?
Javier Angeles In the book, but that scene may have been cut out from the movie. The movie did feel a little gutted, but that's just me
Javier Angeles This is what I said after leaving the theater. "What about the Arkenstone? Wasn't that a key reason all this crap happened?" I'm pretty sure Bard just kept it. For all the talk about greed that guy held onto the biggest treasure and no one called him on it.
Of course apparently not that case in the book, but the movie didn't note that. The stone was never mentioned again after all the craziness began.
Javier Angeles Legolas swiped it to use as a paperweight. :-P
i dont know why people hate on these movies so much they are all incredibly films with great graphics and loving stories and characters to include the flaws with inaccuracy to the books but why does that matter all that matters is that you enjoy these grate films for what they are.
Its really all the over the top scenes which is the most glaring in the battle of the 5 armies. The movies were fine by modern standards, considering the shit state of Hollywood.
4:23
Maybe Galadriel used all her mana in this scene.
Why would it make her weak? Even in RPGs running out of Mana doesn't drain your strength.
@@thepickygamer4450 because elves are tied to the immortal planes and magic of the world, as the world is corrupted, so too do they fade. Which is why they are leaving for the Undying lands in LotR (also it's why Lothelorien is so nice this time of year, Galadriel is using her magics and the magics of her ring to essentially slow down the passing of time within the forest boarders)
Yes and no... She did fight in the lord of the rings but it not written well... You have to read jrr letters after the book.. The eye hit Gondor . the Lonely Mountain and Mirk Wood and riven dale all at the same time.. His army was nearly two million strong. He wage war over all the middle earth.