A lot of Théoden fans, huh? 1. It might not have been clear in the video, but don't mistake 'least favorite' for 'dislike.' I love Bernard Hill's performance, and I actually like Théoden quite a bit, just not as much as other characters. A 95 may not be a 100 but it's still an A, right? 2. I understand that his character is meant to represent human fallibility. I just think it's a little thick sometimes. It's not bad writing or anything, it's just a little eye-rolling. 3. And that's the point of Part One of this video. The personal nitpicks you can find in your favorite media after watching it more than a hundred times are not the same as fundamental flaws like in The Hobbit.

I never noticed he had an axe in his head I NEVER NOTICED HE HAD AN AXE IN HIS HEAD

I'm pretty sure that theoden was always meant to be an imperfect person. It adds to his character in my opinion

thanks to Lindsay Ellis that "why does it hurt so much" scene will forever be seared into my mind. it has reached a semi-meme status, a weird in-between place where I feel like it should've become a meme but I don't think it ever did.

Theoden was the perfect fit for that role. I loved how he was portrayed in the films. Aragorn is the one who has to be a perfect king. Theoden is sometimes rational, sometimes emotional. But he is a desperate man in a desperate land. The character has many flaws and perfectly portrayed.

It's weird, but I find the wizard fight in Fellowship badass. I'm not entirely sure why; perhaps it's the dialogue that builds up to it? It's just something about two of the most powerful players in Middle Earth having a wizard fight is very cool to me.

A dislike of Theoden isn't a criticism of LotR. His character isn't badly conceived or acted. He serves the story perfectly.

The battlespeech and the charge with the Rohirrim at the Pelennor fields is the best most epic scene in movie history.

The only scene I truly remember from The Hobbit is the Acorn scene because it’s the only scene that really captured the feeling of the Shire portion of Fellowship which I interpreted as what the Hobbit (book) is supposed to be like: genuine, heartfelt and sincere.

"The Lord of the Rings never uses titles for dates or settings" except for when the theatrical cut of Fellowship (not the Extended version) followed its prologue with "60 years later", which was paralleled by "60 years earlier" in Unexpected Journey.

14:15 holy shit does this cut just completely obliterate Legolas's power level. This is the problem with trying to make the prequel bigger and badder than the original trilogy, because now the guy who bragged about killing 42 uruks at Helm's Deep could apparently waste like 200 orcs in 10 seconds 60 years earlier.

HOLY CRAP! You were right! I don't remember any of these scenes from the Hobbit and it just came out a few year ago while I remember EVERY scene from LOTR and it came out almost 20 years ago.. The Hobbit was so forgettable

You hit the nail on the head in regards to the characters. Bilbo, and by extension the audience, really doesn't get to know any of the dwarves. It's one of the big reasons why Hobbit feels more like "store brand Lord of the Rings" than anything. I mean, sure, The Fellowship has less characters with 9, compared to the 13 Dwarves in Hobbit (with Bilbo and Gandalf bringing the party up to 15). But The Hobbit Trilogy is about 9 hours in length and most Dwarves get less time to develop their characters than others. We spend more time with Bard, with Tranduil. Hell, we spend more time getting to know Galadriel and she wasn't even in the damn book. Watching the movie, you really get the picture that the studios and Jackson didn't really care to make a "The Hobbit" movie. What they really wanted was a prequel to Lord of the Rings. While The Hobbit does take place prior to the events of LOTR, it's not a prequel. The events don't really lead into the plot of the trilogy. The big piece that does, the one ring, wasn't even "the one ring" in the original Hobbit publication. Tolkien hadn't come up with the idea yet. It was just a magic ring that was useful.

there was an axe in a dwarfs head???? I've seen the trilogy about 4 times goddamnit

I feel like I'm the only one who likes the wizard duel in fellowship

I loved this video, but I have to disagree when it comes to Theoden.I loved Theoden. He is the human weakness and the weakness of the intristically good in the story, and he plays the part of "good but weak willed" very well. He is the more complicated contrast to so many of our noble, always right characters.

The LOTR dialogue was poetry, the HOBBIT dialogue was just a school play tbh

9:07 THANK YOU! Fili was thrown under the bus in this series. It makes me angry to think about.

Good video, agree with pretty much everything, accept I actually think Theodin is a great character, but that's a discussion for another time.

Gosh, you know they did something right when Boromir is my favorite character from all of literature.

“WhY dOsE iT hUrT sO mUcH?” “ B E C A U S E I T W A S R E A L . “ -hobbit battle of 5 army’s and Lindsay Ellis

Hey just wanted to say that your re-edit of the big action sequence with the dragon literally blew my mind. Something tells me that's how it was written until they split the movie.

I love the scene where Thorin leads the dwarves out of the mountain for battle. It gave me chills just watching it here!

28:45 - Ok, yes - but the old "Down Down to Goblin Town" was amazing and you know it :P

"And Rohan shall answer." Theoden literally announces the turning point for his character arc. He's a top 3 character in LOTR. What the crap

sam falling asleep during the smaug sequence had me dying lmfaoooo i love the hobbit trilogy but you made some really good points about its flaws. i really wish they'd had the same opportunities to make it as great as lotr...

The Hobbit looks really glossy and while I like both I just find that while the lord of the rings is older it looks better

I literally gasped when you said Theoden was your least favorite character in the trilogy.

I HATED the love triangle

I love the Gandalf vs Saruman scene! Best magic fight scene ever. No flashy CGI or special effects, just camera work and stunts.

your videos are criminally slept on. hope you get some major growth soon!!!!!

I love this guy. Best movie analysis out there. No one else goes this deep. I just love how you analyze movies like I analyzed novels in my AP English see class. It's such a cool idea. I wish we lived in a higher IQ society, where a LOT of people would have thought on films as deep and well thought out as your thoughts.

Damn that Wilhelm scream. I blush every time I hear it and once you know it, it's impossible not to hear it. I would pay for someone to make a Wilhelm free LOTR edit. And that time it was used in the Hobbit for Thorin's father, I actually became quite angry. It's a cartoon effect. It's not a cute little movie maker inside joke. Playing a fart sound in its place would be more serious.

The fakeoute where they give up and start to go home bugs me so much. And yes, the A to B with the dragon going for Lake Town is so spot on!

Wait, one dwarf really had an axe in his head? I've watched all three films and didn't know. Was the scene where he removes it in the extended cut, because I could swear I don't know anything about it. EDIT: After seeing a few scenes from the extended cut, I'm just happy, I only watched the theatrical release.

Am i the only one in defense of the "choppy slow-mo" effect? I thought i gave a sense of a danger in the distance, as Legolas could feel their presence. It wouldn't have the same effect with normal slow-mo. But yes, that Frodo trippy fever dream was bad.

Theoden is fucking awesome, thats the only bad thing i can say about this video!

Just saw this and went back to check out your Hobbit Intervention video. Wow! I've seen so many breakdowns and fan-edits of the Hobbit that I thought there was nothing left to say, but your observations are so fresh and on-point. Even with topics that have been discussed to death (like the failure to present the dwarfs as interesting characters) you presented the case for how they could have been grouped together better as family units, which I had never thought of before. I also appreciated the thoroughness of your editing. You backed up every one of your points with a relevant clip or comparison.

WHY DOES THIS NOT HAVE MORE ATTENTION this was such a good video essay, really made me see the flaws in Hobbit and how brilliant LotR was

Yet another great video...they keep getting better! Great comparisons and re-edits. You make connections and so many great points about things I can't always put my finger on. And you do it all with an intelligent sense of humor threaded throughout. Not to mention the creative graphics and seamless transitions. Great Job!

Love the shout-out to Lindsay Ellis :)

Any chance of you doing a fan edit of The Hobbit?

i aim to be open towards criticism of films that i have cherished so dearly for years, but i still struggle to agree with a lot of the comments made by those who dislike the trilogy because, personally, i adore the films. of course, i can agree that ‘the lord of the rings’ was a cinematic masterpiece (being as perfect as the films still are, due to how well most of the content has aged) and to replicate their unique charm would be impossible. i am aware, even as novels, of how ‘the lord of the rings’ and ‘the hobbit’ differ - regarding target audiences and themes - so even then, comparing the two is unfair. it would be foolish to argue that ‘the hobbit‘ has the same “aura”, if you will, as that of ‘the lord of the rings’, but to mark the films off as disasters would be wrong. one factor that definitely separates ‘the hobbit’ from ‘the lord of the rings’ is the lack of nostalgia. i hope you’ll agree with me when i say that coming back to a film after many months (or even years) only adds to the love you hold for it, which is certainly the case with ‘the lord of the rings’. i find myself laughing harder at jokes, crying harder at deaths, and marvelling all the more deeply at the stunning visuals each time i return to the films. due to the connection i have to the plot and the characters, the films are even more enjoyable. on the other hand, this feeling is much less strong for me regarding the ‘the hobbit’ films. i’m certainly not disregarding the impact that ‘the hobbit’ had on my childhood, but the slightly dated, nostalgic feeling that ‘the lord of the rings’ holds is something special. although, of course, i believe this is not as much to do with the actual content that the films include, and rather how recently they were released. but why should you expect the two trilogies to have the same “aura”, anyway? the films were made a decade apart from each other, the film industry being entirely different at the times of release, so they are not going to be the same. but one point that many argue, and is mentioned in this video, is that the character deaths and other emotional scenes of ‘the hobbit’ feel confused and fail to move their audience. personally, i disagree, as the deaths of fili, kili and thorin shall forever pain me to watch and finishing the trilogy another time always leaves me as an unresponsive, bawling mess. i’m often reluctant to watch ‘the battle of the five armies’ because of this, but i’m definitely not marking that as a bad thing. in fact, if three films manage to gift me with such an immense love for its characters, i’ll regard that as a win. i can agree with how ‘the lord of the rings’ is much better at establishing bigger roles in the plot for its characters, and fleshing them out by explaining their backstories, to emphasise their deaths. but should a film be expected to spoon-feed sympathy for its characters to its audience? boromir is a good example, in contrast with fili and kili. but even though, as individuals, the young brothers had much less of an impact on their films than boromir, as a viewer i can understand that they were a part of thorin’s company and therefore losing them, yet also reclaiming erebor as initially planned, was a painful situation. moreover, the deaths of fili, kili and thorin discontinued the line of durin and passed the right to rule to dáin ii ironfoot. to me, this is genuinely saddening, and i don’t understand how another viewer can’t relate to how each and every dwarf contributed to the family-like bond the company had, and how losing some of them is heartbreaking.

I like the scene with the death of killi

33:00 I remember when I saw this in theaters. I immediately was caught off guard by just how on-the-nose and redundant this moment was.

It's a shame what became of The Hobbit. Corporate greed won over artistic vision. I had once looked forward to watching The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings back-to-back, but today I have no desire to ever revisit The Hobbit trilogy again. Great video on the matter, it was far better than the trilogy itself.

i much prefer your small edit of the Bilbo and smaug bit more than the Dustin Lee and the original edits tbh. felt way more natural

“It’s a bad sign if I’m nodding of during exciting sequences”. You ironically said that as I woke up after nodding off during your video 😂 (No worries, I love to use video essays as background noise to fall asleep to., your work is not particularly boring)

Theoden is undoubtetly one of the great characters of the movie: -he has the most extensive arc and transformation (from a lesser of son of great sires to a victorious martyr) -he has the best speech/moment of the trilogy (ride of the rohirrim) -he has the best death scene (I go to my fathers. in whose mighty company I shall not now feel ashamed) When I was a kid characters like Theoden and Boromir grated on me a little. Now I know that has more to do with how their character flaws mimic my own than them not being good characters. Watching Gandalf, Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli is a form of escapism. it's an idealized, mythical version of what people are supposed to be. watching characters like Boromir and Theoden is like looking into a mirror. the fact that it grates on you, that it annoys you, is part of what makes their characters effective, and their redemption so satisfying.

If you watch the all together at once they actually are perfect.....

I am shaken and shocked at how good this video turned out to be, wow. 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

how dare you ship Legolas with someone else when Gimli is right fucking there? square up, we have to fight now

One mistake I noticed that bugged me. The Lord of the Rings did use one “60 years later...” title thing during Fellowship of the Ring after the prologue.

Strong disagree on Theoden. I always felt that his main driving force was shame. He had failed to rule his realm well, his son had died, he was always a step away from giving in to despair. Most of this wasn't even his own fault, but he probably couldn't see that. So he was desperate for a chance at glory and to save his legacy. He chose Helm's Deep because it was a place of his people and his ancestors, something he knew and could cling to. He's almost a death seeker, wanting to die gloriously than live peacefully, which is why he says of his ancestors, "in whose mighty company I shall no longer feel ashamed".

Jesse, my dude. Your videos are absolutely fantastic. Your opinion feels fair and really well thought out! Keep on rocking man! ❤️🤙

Basically, what I consider a "bad" movie (or series) is if I'm not interested in watching it again after I finish it. If a movie makes you want to watch it again, then I think it did it's job, and I am really looking forward to watching the Hobbit trilogy again sometime.

Great job! I watched this immediately after you first version, both made great points but I appreciated that you clarified how you think of the hobbit trilogy trilogy in the beginning.

That was pretty good. very comprehensive, and the edits were well done.

Really enjoyed this - up there with Ellis' videos. Keep at it.

I haven't seen any of these movies but I'm watching just to support because you make great points and I wanna hear them lol

As a tremendous fan of LOTR and The Hobbit, with the Hobbit book holding a special place in my heart, I wholeheartedly agree with this video. I understand that Thorin and Co. couldn't use their ancient armor/weapons, due to the inability to act properly or move, when they finally emerged from the mountain, and rallied the armies of the Free Folk. It was far less epic than when I viewed it in my mind's eye all those years ago while I read the books. You have my thanks.

I always enjoy a good video essayist, you are one of them. And on top of that i’ve never heard of someone with the same last name as me. But your videos are great, keep up the good work bro. 😊

Dammit, bro! I'll never be able to look at the Frodo drinking water scene the same way again! 😂😂😂

I just wanted to comment, that Theoden is one of my favorite characters in LodR and explain the reasons for it in broad details. Lucky for me some other great fellows already did it for me ;-)

Thanks for mentioning the wilhelm scream during the Gandalf scene and the Eye. That has ALWAYS bugged me.

love your vids man

In the book Frodo was stung in the neck so the mithril would not have protected him, but yes, at least in the movies it is a problem.

I love this type of content

You're doing excellent work. Glad to be here early before your channel takes off big time. :)

A flawed character does not a bad character make inherently.

I actually really like the goblin's song, Goblin Town. It sets a very particular mood that fits the Goblins and their strangeness.

27:50 I have a theory why so much screen time is given to the cringey comic relief characters like the Goblin King, the Master of Lake Town and Alfrid. Listening to the directors commentary a couple things seemed apparent: 1. the shoot was long, stressful and borderline studio-obligated. 2. Peter and Fran thought that guest-actors Barry Humphreys (Goblin King), Steven Fry (the Master) and Ryan Gage (Alfrid) were hilarious people to have around on set, and were always cracking everyone up. For instance, Ryan Gage auditioned to be Frodo's Father, and even though the role was cut from the script, Peter and Fran went out of their way to write the part of Alfrid for him just because they thought he was such a fun guy to have around. I think Peter couldn't resist using these actors as much as he could to liven up the spirit of the shoot, then self-indulgently left their material in the final cut. If one remembers that Peter Jackson's film making background is grotesque comedy/horror than so many of these creative decisions in The Hobbit start to make sense.

Awesome video man!

Great video man! U deserve more subs!

23:09. The CGI is definitely not dated.

Okay, so I got a soft spot for the Hobbit, even if The Battle of the Five Armies is my least favorite of the whole bunch, I mean at least the Extended Edition is a complete film instead of the mess the theatrical cut is. And rather than beat the dead horse into paste about all the flaws of the Hobbit and the failures etc. I guess in the end the reason LOTR works better in its trilogy compared to the Hobbit is because of all the detail Tolkien crammed into the books and appendices that Jackson and co were able to tap into during those what, 3 or so years of prep time they had before a single foot of film was shot, and even then more or less have very set guard rails in how far they could stray from the main plot of Frodo taking the ring to Mount Doom to destroy it so they could get away with not having Tom Bombadil and other things like that. But with the Hobbit, I'm re-reading it right now and while it's a great book, it doesn't have the depth of detail as compared to LOTR and is rather vague in a lot of things. And I think the major failure of the Hobbit is that they wasted too much time on everything else but the heart of the story which is Bilbo's heros journey with 13 dwarves to help them take their home back. Honestly I think had they had the same prep time LOTR had, without the studio interferences, they probably could have made 2 wonderful films to complement LOTR. One last thing, the fact it seems no one wanted to tell Peter Jackson some of his ideas were beyond stupid, and I'm not just talking about the Legolas stuff. I mean things like Radagast being a mushroom smoking hippy covered in bird poop or Alfred, just just Alfred.

It's particularly difficult for me to even compare Fili to Éomer, especially because of how awesome Karl Urban is.

After watching "The Fellowship", I thought Jackson had made the best possible movie of the "first book" (quotes because Tolkien never intended his book to be a trilogy). "The Two Towers" disappointed except for a highlight here and there. I thoroughly disliked "The Return of the King." (FYI, I've read everything Tolkien wrote, LOTR at least a dozen times and "The Silmarillion" at least eight times.) I swore off watching "The Hobbit" but was convinced by a friend to see it with her. I sat through the entire movie thinking one thing, over and over, "This is terrible." I did not see the final two movies. Absolutely hated it. Note that I do not mean "hated it comparison to (Jackson's) LOTR." I mean just hated it for its infidelity and lack of respect for the source material (which is also how LOTR unraveled for me - the further into the story Jackson proceeded, the more violence he did to the source material, especially that he took time to show things that weren't in the book instead of taking that time to show more of what was in the book, as well as unnecessary departures from the main narrative). I couldn't get past how awful "The Hobbit" was as an adaptation of Tolkien's work - I never even considered its production values, either on its own merits, or in comparison to Jackson's LOTR. To me, it was nearly unwatchable. The worst thing I can say about a movie is "I don't remember a thing about it." This is now my recollection about the actual content of "The Hobbit." I merely recall my reaction to it, but the movie itself did not mange to ensconce itself into my memory (as did, say, "No Country For Old Men," "Taxi Driver," or "Blade Runner). However the clips from the movie in this video remind of how truly bad the first movie was, and demonstrates how awful the second and third must have been. I'm glad I passed them up, and I regret having taken the time to see the first.

its the watcher not a kraken

I get your points, but I also think people are giving the Hobbit movies less credit than they deserve. I love the books, but I also understand the choices they made for the movies.

"He's known in the wild as Strider" HOW the fuck is he known as Strider in the wild if he's just 10 years old

I should really watch the extended editions of these films, because I don't know half of these scenes.

Don't forget Gandalf said "Well all good stories deserve embellishment" and that the stories are written by Frodo, Sam and Bilbo. The movies tell a story, not depict actual events. Hence, the over-the-top scenes.

Yall support my man on Patreon! He can't keep giving us this amazing content for free!

Peter Jakcson never wanted to do a Hobbit movies. That's why It feels so different than LOTR films. But any way, i love that movies!!!

This is all great criticism, don’t get me wrong. But everyone’s too hard on the Hobbit Trilogy for not reaching the mastery of the Lord of the Rings which is lightning in a bottle I would say. Instead of comparing the Hobbit Trilogy to the LOTR, they should be looked at on their own. There’s a beauty in these movies that is often overlooked, but it’s clearly there. They’re far from perfect, but they’re forgivable problems when the story is actually beautiful. I have a lot to say about these movies, things that I don’t see a lot of people really mention. Maybe I should make my own video essay.

Great video, finally the KZfaq algorith is doing something right! I always thought I hated The Hobbit because I loved LotR so much, and because they had to pull the whole "children book"-aspect over this masterpiece of a franchise. Now I know The Hobbit is just alot more flawed in many ways..

My biggest and only complaint of the lord of the rings series is that the witch king didn’t get enough screen time.

20:55 I will gladly champion the existence of Smaug's 20 minutes of padding. I can't even deny that that's what they are, but I ONLY watched the entire Hobbit trilogy to see the dragon. Without those 20 minutes, Smaug literally may as well not be in the entire trilogy. You can probably total up his actual screen time better than I can, but I'd wager over half of Smaug's on screen presence is that 20 minutes of padding.

i liked the wizard duel scene, and i liked theoden.

Ironically, I think every single reason you criticize Theodan are all the wrong reasons as to why he's flawed: Firstly, he definitely understands the situation that the Rohirrim face -- that's why he's so clearly unsure what to do, the magnitude of the danger and his duty are overwhelming him; if he didn't understand the danger, he'd be far more confident Concentrating in Helm's Deep is undoubtedly the wisest decision -- it forces Saruman to concentrate in turn, attacking his foe entrenched in a highly defensible position; to do otherwise would risk destroying the Rohirrim in detail as they would defend their sparse and separated settlements Additionally, I don't think he gets "cocky in battle," I always felt that scene was supposed to be him speaking to his men, bolstering their courage and morale; regardless, Theodan is anything but cocky at any point in the LotR Concerning the apparently suicidal charge at Helm's Deep -- to the Rohirrim, dying valiantly in a last, hopeless charge is effectively their ideal way to die; you're more or less quibbling with the different ways Aragorn and Theodan articulate their internal motives, as it goes back to the same place Him being reluctant to go to the aid of Gondor is completely within character, especially after narrowing surviving the battle with Saruman Finally, I cannot actually believe you think Theodan lacks the ability to rally his troops -- did we both watch the Battle of Pelennor Fields? For that matter, the people of Rohan clearly continued to revere and respect their King, even as he fell into despair and magically-aided madness; that surely shows the impact he has on the hearts and minds of his people He's undoubtedly a lesser son of greater sires -- the point is that he rises above his weaknesses and despair to become greater than he is, even in his last days

27:33 You know that you did something wrong when a hobbit shows not one but TWO middle fingers.

Wait? On the sword Gandalf is using at 2:18 does blood even stick on it? It's shining bright the whole time as if it was never used. So I guess that could be the "bright as daylight" thing.

These trilogies are my favourite. I just needed to put that down.

i have a kind of love-hate relationship with the hobbit movies...hate, because in hindsight, i can recognize how fucking...weird and bad the stuff is that you mentioned in this video, and i kinda cringe at that now. but love, because these movies gave me so much joy when i saw them back when i was around 14, i met new friends bc of them, and i do love some of the characters...like, martin freeman as bilbo will always be great in my heart tbh. also ive read some great fanfics for the movie lmao. its complicated in my heart haha

does anyone else not remember a bunch of scenes that jesse used in this video

You just said a lot of thing I had already noticed and didn't like about The Hobbit, but didn't know how to express, and you did pretty well.. Also let's have in mind that Peter Jackson set the bar too high with LOTR that not even himself can pass over it. Have that in mind, because horrible things are coming with "The Rings of power"..

You and Lindsay Ellis should get together and remake all six movies into one 3 hour movie. I would donate to that.

I think the Wilhelm scream is used in maybe The Boys or Preacher, too.

i walked out of the theater when azog re-appeared. screw these movies.