Everything wrong with AUJ in four minutes or less

[Bêthberry]

I wasn't sure if I should put this here or in Mirth, since it is funny but not a game.

Enjoy!

Everything Wrong with The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey in four minutes or less

[Inziladun]

So now I can slag the movie without actually sitting through the whole thing? Outstanding!

Just those few glimpses of Radagast gave me shudders, and the way his eyes rolled in his head does give one the impression that he's maybe a little too well-versed on "herbs".

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

I wasn't sure if I should put this here or in Mirth, since it is funny but not a game.

Here is good because it's actually all true. Funny, and true.

He says it takes 43 minutes for the actual film to begin. Those were actually the best minutes in the entire film.

[Zigûr]

Although I saw 'n' enjoyed this video when I came across it a few weeks ago, I have to say that in my opinion it takes roughly two hours and forty minutes to fully appreciate everything which is wrong with "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey".

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

Although I saw 'n' enjoyed this video when I came across it a few weeks ago, I have to say that in my opinion it takes roughly two hours and forty minutes to fully appreciate everything which is wrong with "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey".

I agree. The most wrong thing in the movie is that it has to take 2h 40min.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

So now I can slag the movie without actually sitting through the whole thing? Outstanding!

Glad to be of service!

Originally Posted by Aganzir

He says it takes 43 minutes for the actual film to begin. Those were actually the best minutes in the entire film.

While I like the idea of showing the history of the dwarves, because I like dwarves, I have qualms about using the dwarves to link TH with the Legendarium. I also wondered about demonstrating that history through that particular narrative perspective, because the omnisicent voice generalises so that no individual perspective is shown. Except possibly for the thirteen dwarves that we do have.

Originally Posted by Zigûr

. . . I have to say that in my opinion it takes roughly two hours and forty minutes to fully appreciate everything which is wrong with "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey"

I am reminded of an old line from a professor who defended not reading an essay in its entirety: "One need not eat the entire egg to know it is rotten."

Originally Posted by G55

The most wrong thing in the movie is that it has to take 2h 40min.

One of the things I find interesting about this little video piece is the fact that it condenses the movie to criticise it. The music, the excerpts, and the narration all form a negative parody.

Yet, when I saw Charlie Ross do his one man Lord of the Rings at the Return of the Ring conference last summer--which was a presentation of the three books in one hour--the condensing of the story actually had the opposite affect. It rendered us far more entertained by and in love with the original. Granted he didn't have negative voice overs or critical summation, but it is intriguing how the effect can be so various.

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

While I like the idea of showing the history of the dwarves, because I like dwarves, I have qualms about using the dwarves to link TH with the Legendarium.

Me too, much as I love dwarves - I'm far from happy with PJ's dwarves anyway. The first 43 minutes are approximately until they meet the trolls, after which I didn't like the film any more.

[Elyna of Rivendell]

Haha love these sort of things! (although I'm never the one to find them...)

[MCRmyGirl4eva]

They did all the LOTR movies too. Please ignore the fact that they always mispronounce the names.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLoobrbKepE
Fellowship

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cgDVFBCiuw
Two Towers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQyn4AkkGHg
ROTK

Keep in mind, they don't care what happened in the book, it only matters if it was explained in the movie, because they know that not everyone in the audience will have read the novel.

[Erestor]

Originally Posted by MCRmyGirl4eva

They did all the LOTR movies too. Please ignore the fact that they always mispronounce the manes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLoobrbKepE
Fellowship

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cgDVFBCiuw
Two Towers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQyn4AkkGHg
ROTK

Keep in mind, they don't care what happened in the book, it only matters if it was explained in the movie, because they know that not everyone in the audience will have read the novel.

Nice. At the moment, I've seen the one for FotR. I have to say, they missed a big one with Moria. Something like "did Gimli really think Balin was still alive after seeing dead Dwarves at the entrance, or is letting bodies rot just common practice?"

[alatar]

I found (and enjoyed) this lecture about Tolkien's life and why Jackson's Hobbit movies are as they are (though you have to wait for ~36 minutes to see why).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xpu_R75lQVo