Speaker 3: If you defile something, what's to file something?

Speaker 1: It's like you can file your nails to make them smoother, but then sometimes you can throw stuff on it to make it rougher. I assume that's what happens in nail salons, is they just go in and defile their nails quite a bit.

Speaker 3: I don't know if that's a pun. don't know, is that how it works?

Speaker 1: That was just what I came up with first. Or maybe alternatively, you take something out of the cabinet and put it in the wrong one and send

Speaker 3: I thought that was D. ⁓

Speaker 1: That's defiling because filing it is putting it in the right spot.

Speaker 3: Yeah, so I don't want to be a defiler. I want to be a filer. So I'm a filer.

Speaker 1: Organization is good. Welcome to Interior Analysis, I'm Evan Westman.

Speaker 3: I'm Jelani T. Kelly.

Speaker 2: and I'm Angel Michelli.

Speaker 1: And today we're talking about The Hobbit and Unexpected Journey. So, before anything else happens, I want to make clear from the outset, I have given Jelani plenty of opportunity to not watch these movies. Like, I have told him I will be fine doing the episodes without him. I didn't want to subject— Well, okay, no. I shouldn't say that. I did want to subject him to it. But I didn't want to do it without warning him, like, these are bad, and I will not hold anything against you if you don't— wanna watch them. He is here of his own volition. I just want that to be clear for everyone.

Speaker 3: Well, it's also the entire reason you wanted to be my friend to begin with.

Speaker 1: Yes, the day the day I met you in playwriting one I was like I know what

Speaker 2: So I hear you've never seen the Hobbit movies.

Speaker 1: I didn't find that until like years later. So the day that this is coming out, we are dropping a lot of Hobbit content. I have written a two-part adaptation of The Hobbit. The link for that is in the description. I probably won't be talking about it much in this episode, but there is a video that I put out on the other channel, the like main video essay channel, that explains my process. And then also today we will be dropping episodes on the Desolation of Smaug and the Battle of Five Armies. I think I said that in plural. There's one episode where we talk about both of those. We haven't done that yet. So Jelani has not seen, Angel and I have already seen all of these movies, but Jelani has only seen Unexpected Journey for today. As of today, you can go listen to that reaction to the later ones, which I'm sure will be a lot.

Speaker 2: We should have made you watch him backwards, Jelani.

Speaker 1: You know, if we really wanted to do it for science, would, we could do that with anything though. Like that would be an interesting experiment with any series. Maybe we do that with Lord of the Rings. We show him Return of the King first and then Two Towers and then Felic.

Speaker 2: No, no, that's the one that he has to watch in order that you can't ruin Lord of the Rift. You can ruin the Hobbit, can't ruin Lord of the Rings.

Speaker 1: That's true. Maybe we do that with like Fast and Furious, because I think the order doesn't matter there any. We are going to have a lot of time featuring Jelani's reactions. It's going to be one of our topics, so he's gonna go last on this. Angel, why don't you go first? I have a lot of history with this movie, but I'll throw it to you first.

Speaker 2: That's actually good because I don't remember my history with this movie for the most part. Like, okay, so here's the thing. It came out when I was 16. I definitely saw it in theaters. I just like, I don't remember it. And at that point I wasn't as into Lord of the Rings as I am now. So I probably enjoyed it, but I don't think I was comparing it as much, which I think is where a lot of people's gripes with this movie come in is like all the comparisons to the originals. And I think back then, like I thought they were fine. I care as much about how the effects looked back then. I'm like, ⁓ cool fantasy shit. There's swords and goblins and orcs and shit. It's all fine. I enjoyed it. And I liked Martin Freeman from Sherlock by that point. So I'm like, OK, if Martin Freeman's in it, I'm going to watch it. And he does a really good job. He's got that same gentle nature that Elijah Wood had as Frodo, which we get to see compared because Frodo is also in this movie. ⁓

Speaker 1: ⁓ I don't want to throw too much shade at Elijah Wood, but Frodo is one of my least favorite things about the other trilogy.

Speaker 2: I you know what I think it is? This actually highlighted for me why that might be. I think that it's because Frodo is like very, very soft in the way he speaks and his whole demeanor, whereas like Bilbo in this, he's a slightly more gruff and rude to the point of being a little unlikable at the beginning, but I think it makes his character... ⁓

Speaker 1: He just has more personality, think. Like, Frodo, he was stoned half the time.

Speaker 3: What personality? Yeah, what personality?

Speaker 1: Bilbo?

Speaker 2: He likes smoking and uh, and food. And he hates guests.

Speaker 3: I'll wait.

Speaker 1: I might actually push back on you on that. I think he has plenty of person.

Speaker 3: Nah, I'mma put a little bit on this one. they ain't no personality. Go ahead.

Speaker 2: He's got fantasy protagonist personality in that like not like he's filler for the audience or anything But like he's got a couple of distinct traits so that we know who he is He has a very obvious character arc set up, which is not always a bad thing. I think I think it works here I think it's

Speaker 1: There's plenty of fantasy, sci-fi, genre movie protagonists you can point to with significantly less personality than-

Speaker 2: ⁓ yeah, he's not as generic as some other ones.

Speaker 3: We know he doesn't like strangers in his home and he can't speak up for himself.

Speaker 2: Yeah, ⁓ Aragon is a good example. I feel like Aragon doesn't really have much of a personality. But also, like in that story, it works, because I feel like the first book is a lot to set up the world and like, the world is cool. I'm cool with that. Like it can work in some contexts. And I think in this, so much of Lord of the Rings has to do with the tone and the environment. And I think most of that is captured here. Like there's cute moments, there's nice moments. Like I love the Misty Mountain scene.

Speaker 3: ⁓ yeah, that guy.

Speaker 2: I love the idea of other scenes, like the dinner scene is fun and cute and you know there's another song in there I think the Blunt the Knives song or whatever. yeah. Which I think is in the book and that's really cool. I think that's really cool and fun but there's so many of them in some parts that shouldn't be in the place that they're in that it kind of kills the pacing a little bit. Like I do feel like the beginning of this movie is really long. One thing I wanted to point to that I'll talk more about

Speaker 1: want the knife.

Speaker 2: in my topic is the prologue. think it works fine until we go to the scene that doesn't need to be there where Frodo's there. I mean, it's pretty obviously it's tying into Lord of the Rings. Like people want to see Frodo, basically. It's a cute cameo, but it halts it. And then we go from the past to, I guess the present would be Lord of the Rings and then back to a different past. And it threw me off a little bit this time because I'm like, it's killing the momentum. that already got from the prologue, which by the way is like it's an addition but it's really good. And I know why they-

Speaker 1: okay with the prologue. I actually was a fan of it this time.

Speaker 2: No, I think in a lot of these, kind of needs it. I don't know if you guys watch Rings of Power.

Speaker 1: I saw like two episodes, I think.

Speaker 2: They have a monologue at the beginning of that too. I don't think it's a spoiler to say like because it's the beginning of the movie. It's like it's a callback to Lord of the Rings. It's a big fantasy thing to have a monologue at the beginning. In Lord of the Rings, it's so good. And in this, it's also really good. I think it works really well. It's just having a scene after that. The monologue and then it was the photo scene.

Speaker 3: What was the scene after? ⁓

Speaker 1: Yeah, where it's old Bilbo and him just wandering around bagging.

Speaker 2: Yeah

Speaker 3: So that was the prologue you were talking about.

Speaker 2: It's very useless. it makes more sense why it was in there, like, if you've seen Lord of the Rings. I guess if you haven't, I don't know, just, doesn't, I feel like it wouldn't make any sense. It's just kind of there and it stops things and then it goes to the actual adventure. So, I don't know.

Speaker 3: I didn't even complain about that. I forgot about it. I know I was like, ⁓ hey, that's Frodo. And then the rest of it, just blank.

Speaker 2: I on this watch, I definitely felt the length more. I didn't think I would because I'm like, ⁓ I haven't seen this in years. So I'm like, maybe it'll just be fun this time. And there were points where like, it really wasn't like I fell asleep at some point and I had to go back and rewatch part of it. Like, ⁓

Speaker 3: I finished it today. I split the movie in half because I had to go to sleep. And I was going to fall asleep again today watching it.

Speaker 2: Wow, yeah. I just started it really late. I wasn't expecting it to make someone sleepy. So it wasn't working for you either, in that case. This movie's a lot of setup for the other movies, which I think have more problems than this one. I think mostly, this movie's like okay enough to be solid, but generally like, it's just got so many issues, especially when you've seen the other movies and you know what they're doing.

Speaker 1: think this is tolerable. I don't know if that was the word you just used, but I remembered this as the good one. I still would say that, but I found that my tolerance went down this time. I gave it a three and a half out of five on Letterboxd where it had previously been a four. Cause I'll get into it in the talk. There's moments that work and a lot that don't.

Speaker 2: There's some surface level issues like the effects or the jokes. think this is one of those ones that's like, what is it, like 48 frames per second or something. And it makes it look like a video game. And like, this was the first time they were trying that something like that. And like, I was watching for that this time having known that. And I'm like, all right, it doesn't look that much like a video game. The environments just look a lot more CGI than they do in a lot of other fantasy movies. But I think it works fine because the CGI isn't breaking my immersion when it's like pretty much everything even the the wargs that they ride like they're also very cgi so i think they're the

Speaker 1: weakest though like this time I are those look pretty bad

Speaker 2: Oh yeah, no, they look, but it's also, you gotta remember too, this is 2012. I mean, it's actually a real-

Speaker 1: I like they looked better in Lord of the Rings though, like they had wargs there and I think those look a little better somehow.

Speaker 2: Well, remember there's a reason for that, like an industry reason, like the industry got so overwrought with work that they didn't have enough people. like that's why Iron Man looks better in like the original Iron Man than he does in most of the other movies after that. There's just way too much demand and not enough people. So CGI itself just started to look worse.

Speaker 3: We're transforming the same thing,

Speaker 2: Oh yeah, Transformers, exact same thing. It's an industry issue. that a fault? No, absolutely not.

Speaker 1: It's not the artist's fault. I also want to make that clear. I say this in my video too, but I want to make it clear here as well. Like, we are gonna throw a lot of criticism at these movies. I do not want to throw the creatives that were involved under the bus, even up to like the level of the people who made story decisions on this. Because from what we've heard, like, there's just so much behind the scenes like nonsense that Like, Peter Jackson didn't even want to make these. I feel like everyone was kind of fighting a losing battle. Like, I have a lot of respect for the people who were tasked with making this. So, like, any shade that's thrown, and we're gonna throw a lot, I do want to just shout out everyone who worked on this. Like, you guys are not the bad guys here. Like, you did your job, and it sounds like had a lot working against you. So, I don't want anything that we say to be taken as, these people are bad at their job. I don't think that's true.

Speaker 3: feel like that's the case for most movies we do,

Speaker 1: Yeah, think, I mean, I think there's rare cases where you can assign creative intent to people a little bit more than others. Like, in other cases, I tend to be like, maybe they're, at least give the benefit of the doubt of like studio interference. It's only in an extreme case, like a Snyder cut or like an Avatar 2 and 3. where I'm like, okay, we have a pretty good amount of certainty that like, nobody told you no, this is like James Cameron's decision or this is Zack Snyder's decision, like, otherwise I try to give a lot of grace for stuff like that. So, but especially in this case, like, just because these movies have been clowned on a lot, so.

Speaker 3: You should follow that and have it as like a video intro or something for the channel

Speaker 2: Yeah Like a disclaimer, yeah. I think my main note is just like, I have the same issue that I think everybody does, where it's like this movie's really trying to be Lord of the Rings, and I think that really has nothing to do with the creatives, like you said. It's not Peter Jackson, like he didn't want to do this. It's not any of the writers. It's not any of the effects people. They were banking on, we can do more Lord of the Rings and make more money. I think that's what a lot of it is. And maybe that's kind of cynical, but I think everybody's kind of got that feeling.

Speaker 1: I think it's worth giving the benefit of the doubt there. So if you're good with your notes, I'll get into my history with this. I think there might not be a collection of movies that I have more history with. I have a lot of history with this story. So I remember like the first exposure I had to it was watching the animated movie when I was like four. Yeah, and if you want the polar opposite to this trilogy,

Speaker 3: The 70s one?

Speaker 1: in terms of like how it's adapted, go watch that because where this stretches everything out, that one is like how fast can we get through the events of the book challenge and they go very fast, too fast in a lot of cases but what a contract it's not even that, I think it's like 75 it's re- and it was a different era

Speaker 2: It's like 90 minutes, right? I mean it's an animated movie too.

Speaker 1: of animation with like it was all hand drawn and it shows that there's a charm to it. So yeah, I saw the animated movie first and then throughout the next like several years as a kid I tried reading the book and I got like most of the way through it. Eventually I ended up reading the whole thing. I don't know when I finished it, but then we had the audiobook on CD all growing up. So I've listened to this book. maybe hundreds of times. By the time the movies, these movies came out, I probably had this book pretty much memorized from listening to it so much. And I was like so excited for it because I had like in the past couple years before that watched all the Lord of the Rings movies and was obsessed with it. And I don't love the Lord of the Rings books, but I loved The Hobbit book, and I still do. But even at the time I was like, man, this could be so good, like I think I hadn't been as hyped for anything as I was for these movies. No, I didn't care about Inception when it came out. I didn't know much about it. Yeah, which wasn't until like two years after.

Speaker 3: inception.

Speaker 2: You didn't know it was good until you saw it. Yeah. I kinda felt like you went to the theater. ⁓ wait, would've been like... Yeah,

Speaker 1: Eleven. You would have been little. I got to that later. It is my great regret that I wasn't older when it came out. But I did go to the theater for all three of these. By the time this came out, I was like so excited for it. But I remember being hesitant because like I knew the book really well and they showed in the trailers like the latest shot from it was like at the trees. And I was like, wait, are they really going to end there? Like I thought it was going to be two movies. And I don't remember when I found out it was three. It might not have been until after I saw the first movie, but I recognized like even as a 13 year old watching it, I was like, okay, there's some stuff that's stupid. It's not as good as Lord of the Rings, but I still really like it. And I was like the kind of not defensive of it, but I was like, I still enjoy this. I can forgive the bad parts. And I still loved it. In the years since As I've returned to it and rewatched it, I've just gotten more and more disappointed and my tolerance has gone lower and lower for it to the point that I decided to write this two-part adaptation. And after rewatching it this time, I was like, I kind of want to chase it by reading my adaptation. And I don't know if I'm going to rewatch these movies anymore.

Speaker 2: Dude, I want a retro adaptation at this point, because it's got to be better than some of the choices they made here, more streamlined at least.

Speaker 1: I like to think yes, but I also, think a lot of why my version was allowed to be a little better is that I had these movies to go off of as an example. My job was way easier than theirs was. So like, want that to be acknowledged. My doing that wasn't just to be like, let me dunk on these people and then prove how much easier it is. Like, I do think that there's not a lot of excuse.

Speaker 2: ⁓ yeah. ⁓ yeah, no.

Speaker 1: for why these movies are as underwhelming and or bad as they are, or disappointing, I guess is a good all-encompassing word. But there are challenges. Like, there are a few things that some people like to be like, this is dumb, and I actually have come to through doing my adaptation process. There's some things that I'm like, it's not a good solution to the problem, but there's a problem that needs to be addressed. And there's an appreciation that I have for some choices that were made. Also, my last thing with this, this movie's always gonna kinda be special to me, even if I don't like it because it happened to be the first movie I ever wrote a review for. So it kind of marks, my beginning as a critic. I don't really remember why I chose this one out of everything that I'd seen as a 15-year-old, but that's just what I picked. Needless to say, there's quite a bit of history that I'm coming in. to this with, which is why I wanted Jelani to start his Middle-Earth journey with these movies. So, before you, we have questions for you and we're gonna go to your topic, which is just kind of your reactions, but the first thing I want you to, you told us, I think, after last episode, but I want you to just catch up the audience before you get into your reactions. What did you know beforehand about, like, all things Middle-Earth?

Speaker 3: What was dude's name? Aragorn. I know his name. Smeagol and Gollum. My Precious. That was the whole thing. That was probably the first thing I heard about it. I know Frodo. I know Samwise. I think Frodo dies in the trilogy and comes back, maybe. I think in like the second movie, maybe. I know about the spider. Shalom. I know Eagles saved the day. know about elves and dwarves and Saruman and Sauron that's I don't know why they did that

Speaker 2: I mix them so much honestly dude like when I was a kid I mix them up all the time

Speaker 3: I think Saruman's evil. I mean they're both evil I think. I know Gandalf dies and comes back as Gandalf the White. I know you shall not pass. I he does that to a dragon. I don't know if it's smoke. And my axe? That mean... is that it?

Speaker 1: That's about as minimal knowledge as I feel like it's possible to have as like a person existing now with the internet.

Speaker 2: Yeah. Cultural osmosis at this point like you're gonna know little bits like if you've never heard the name Frodo, that's astounding

Speaker 1: Or I feel like Gandalf and Bilbo maybe make it into the popular culture a little bit, like non Lord of the Rings things a bit more.

Speaker 2: I would say like if you just know words though, like Frodo would be the first one that I think of and Gandalf not even

Speaker 3: Gandalf is mentioned a lot in other things too as well. Yeah. somebody's making fun of somebody else, they'll call him like, who you think you are, Gandalf, you're not my dad, you're not my mentor or whatever.

Speaker 2: Y'all, you guys see Falcon and Winter Soldier? Bucky references Gandalf and Falcon's like, how do know who Gandalf is? He's like, I read The Hobbit in 1937 when it came out. And I'm like, okay, that's actually pretty funny. Yeah, it's crazy. Yeah, man. It came out like almost 20 years before Lord of the Rings books. Those were in the 50s.

Speaker 1: Yeah. I forgot that book's that old.

Speaker 3: So Tolkien, he like, coined a lot of this fantasy stuff, didn't he? Well not elves and dwarves, because that goes back as far as like Norse scenes.

Speaker 2: Yeah, yes and no. ⁓ Yeah, he popularized a lot of it and kind of made that what everyone thinks of as mainstream fantasy. And then that's kind of what the formula became afterwards. I think he like repurposed and defined a lot of how things are used as opposed to like inventing a lot. Yeah.

Speaker 1: I think a lot of stuff that's in here like hobbits I think are the main thing that he like whole cloth created I don't think those necessarily like pre-kicked him

Speaker 2: day.

Speaker 3: half human half dwarf or something.

Speaker 2: No, they're just small. That's it.

Speaker 3: So why are they calling them halflings? Like, they just something different entirely?

Speaker 2: I think because they're short, I think that's really all it is.

Speaker 3: The dwarves were calling him halfling. And they're short. They're like the same height.

Speaker 2: I think the dwarves are meant to be like a little bit bigger. I don't think it's as apparent in this movie. I'm gonna be honest with you. They make it more clear in the other movies that dwarves are bigger.

Speaker 1: Yeah. This is the first of probably many things where the movie is not doing a good job catching you up as a new person. Because one of the first things that Fellowship of the Ring does and The Hobbit, book does, is explain what a hobbit is. Both of them do. This movie does not. And if you, like, even now, I feel like if anyone's seen any, like, you don't need to explain what a dragon is. Because those are in, a lot of other fairy tales. And so are dwarves. Like, if you haven't read

Speaker 2: Yeah.

Speaker 1: Any Tolkien you've probably seen Snow White as a kid. Like that's a thing that I think you can safely assume. But Hobbits don't show up anywhere else except Middle-earth. And like kind of D &D. But you're probably gonna be exposed to Middle-earth stuff before D &D.

Speaker 2: Yeah, hobbits are a Lord of the Rings thing, maybe. Like, they rarely show up in anything else. Like, dwarves though, all the time. Yeah, same with elves, but I think they also explain the cultural differences in their- like, the cultural context is actually important. They explain that in the books.

Speaker 1: Same with elves. Yeah, you're kind of left to assume most of that here. Both versions, like Hobbit the book, Lord of the Rings the movie, it tells you a lot early on about, like, what is Hobbit's lifestyle. I watched the deleted scenes for this, and there weren't very many of them, but there is a little bit of time just, like, spent in the Shire. that isn't in this movie. It wouldn't really be enough to catch you up, but it might just give you a little more time to be like, okay, this is Hobbit culture. And there's a lot of that time spent in fellowship.

Speaker 2: Especially the extended editions, like I like those because you get a lot of explanations about like hobbits and the stuff going on.

Speaker 1: It's not doing a good job with that, and I don't think it would take a ton- like, we'll get back to your reactions in a second, but I think across the board, when there's stuff that's unique to The Hobbit book that, like, you wouldn't know from seeing Lord of the Rings, they tend to do a pretty good job, I think, catching you up. But anything that you would know from Lord of the Rings, they're like, you know already, we're not gonna bother with it, like, it gives you pretty much nothing.

Speaker 3: No, this note pretty much. was one of my first notes and my reactions. They're relying heavily on the strong possibility that the viewer has either seen the original trilogy. They don't hold anybody's hand with names, terms, cultural, anything. At points, it was difficult for me to tell apart the names and the locations from each other because they all sound the same to me. It's all just word vomit. A bunch of letters thrown together.

Speaker 2: It's not like watching Game of Thrones though, everyone's named Aegon.

Speaker 3: I do compare this to Game of Thrones. First time watcher, as I said, was kind of whole point of Evan winning to become my friend to begin with. It's not, but...

Speaker 1: I can see That's a comparison. Okay.

Speaker 2: And now the friendship is over. Just use you and spit you out.

Speaker 3: I was looking forward to this. love learning about new worlds and world building. Partial because it inspires me with my own work, but this did not have me. It didn't grasp me. It didn't keep me. And I don't plan on ever willingly watching this again. I'm just not interested. It's not, I don't hate it. I just don't care. Sorry, you asked a question about what hobbits are. Did they CGI Christopher Lee? Did he pass before this movie was made? And he looks CGI to me.

Speaker 2: No, I looked this up because you asked because I saw your notes. He passed in 2015, so he was alive.

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 3: ⁓ why does he look so strange?

Speaker 2: But I kinda felt that way about Gandalf too, like when Gandalf first appears I'm like, Gandalf looks weird. Why? I don't understand. And I found out, I don't know if this is why exactly, but like a lot of scenes he's by himself. And he's, didn't like-

Speaker 3: ⁓ So is this the movie that broke Ian Mc- sorry Ian McKellen?

Speaker 2: Yeah

Speaker 1: I think yeah. One of these movies.

Speaker 2: think it was this one that started it though, because he was green-screening so much of it, yeah. And he's like acting by himself. No, not at all.

Speaker 3: That's horrible.

Speaker 1: It's sad and he's he's so good like

Speaker 3: That's best part of the movie to me.

Speaker 2: ⁓ yeah, even when he's a little disengaged, like he still feels engaged. He's just doing a great job.

Speaker 3: I wish there was a decision-making point for Bilbo at all Because he just wakes up after they sing and he just joins them. It doesn't see I don't he doesn't say anything He's just like, oh, guess I'll go on an adventure Like that's why I'm saying like I don't understand what you guys are talking about when it comes to his character to me It just feels like he's going along with the plot. I'll get more into that in a second. But speaking of singing The Misty Mountains cold scene just felt like it was inserted out of nowhere. I only gave it a pass because the song is cool, but I needed to point that out. Also the dwarves, speaking of them, I didn't like any of them. There are 13 to possibly like and I didn't like any of them. I'm gonna cut this off with the question, is thorn in the dwarves some sort of Jesus and Moses allegory? because there's 13 of them and the pose when he's in the eagle's talons and also his hair he kind of just looks like dwarf Jesus so I don't

Speaker 1: I don't think Tolkien is going for that. He does look a lot like... I hadn't really noticed. He kind of is modeled off of Aragorn. At least that's the comparison people point to more so.

Speaker 3: Jesus.

Speaker 2: does. But I could see the Jesus thing with the Airhorn 2. get what you're saying. Tolkien said he hated allegory, which I think is misinterpreted a lot. think he hated saying, ⁓ this is definitely about World War II. He said it's not a direct thing, but he had metaphors and versions of things that happened in history.

Speaker 3: How are you a writer and you hate allegory? That confuses me.

Speaker 2: No, but what I'm saying is I think he wanted people to stop saying that it's like a one-to-one thing. Like it's exactly just this one thing. It's like different things about like themes of history in general and like the patterns that are followed through like in war and tragedy, not one specific event.

Speaker 1: Yeah, he maybe didn't want people to read his book the way that people are meant to read, Animal Farm, where it's like, this pig is this specific historical figure. Exactly.

Speaker 2: Exactly. I think as far as the Jesus thing goes, he wouldn't have written Thorin or Aragorn to be specifically that. It would have just been a leader figure and the different themes that go into that.

Speaker 1: Plus, ⁓ CS Lewis took the baton from him and was like, will make the most explicit Christ allegory ever in my fantasy world. Don't worry, I got you covered there.

Speaker 2: Wait, is Narnia about Christianity? Is Aslan supposed to be somebody that we know of?

Speaker 1: Yeah, is Edmund supposed to be Judas? You know, we can guess. I should make a whole video about it.

Speaker 2: Honestly, yes. We're following a religious theme lately, I feel like. I realized it.

Speaker 1: No, I won't because...

Speaker 3: Queen of Romans?

Speaker 1: She's a lot of things across the different books that she shows up in, think. Anyway, to answer your question, no, I don't think... I'll also tell you that at the very least from Tolkien's perspective, Thorne is quite a bit different here than he is in the book. He is kind of just a grumpy old man in the book. They do a lot to make him more of like an inspiring leader figure in this. So if you're looking for like an allegory there, I don't think so. I don't even see them going for like any kind of allegory from like a more modern perspective. The way that like V for Vendetta was updated for like the Bush era. They don't seem to be doing anything like that here. I think they just wanted a different characterization for Thorin that I actually like a little better. I'll also push back. I'm not gonna, well, I won't push back on your reaction because I think it's valid. I'm a little bit surprised and even a tad disappointed to hear that you don't like Bilbo's arc and his lack of choice to go on the quest because it's actually worse in the book. Like, I think they made a good change there because in the book Gandalf basically comes over and is like, what the hell, man? You were supposed to show up at the inn. Get out the door. And he basically just pushes Bilbo out the door and is like, you're going on this quest. Like Bilbo's fully ready to just nope out in the book. He's like, but I was making breakfast. And Gandalf's like, nope, time for the quest. So I actually like it much better that Bilbo at least decides to do it himself.

Speaker 2: At least he makes a decision.

Speaker 1: They give him more agency than the book does, for better or worse. But I, you know, your reaction's your reaction. If you didn't buy it, then... I think some of it is that, like, his refusal of the call is also kind of an addition, where he's like, sorry, I'm not gonna sign the paper. They don't have as explicit of a beat for that in the book. I have a hard time saying if I would buy it, because... it's just always been a given for me. It does say something that you don't buy it as a first-time viewer.

Speaker 3: That's why I'm here. Here's a positive. I like that they don't really show smog. I want to say smog. I like that they don't show the dragon in this film. Yeah, the most we see of him is like the kite, his legs, snout, and eye. And I think that's dope.

Speaker 2: It's smoke. I agree. I know why. to the mystery. Yeah.

Speaker 3: Stylistic choice. Yeah. Even though I feel like he's just gonna look like a dragon, it's just fine. The design of the orcs and goblins feels lazy. I didn't even know the goblins were different from the orcs when we meet them in the mountain. Like, I didn't know those were goblins until I think somebody said something about goblins. So I originally thought the dude with the saggy chin was a different, like, orc leader or something. They're all just ugly and pale and, and just like, I can't tell the difference between them. I guess the goblins-

Speaker 1: They tend to be interchangeable in most things, like Goblin and Orc are kind of interchangeable. I think there is distinctions in Tolkien's like extended lore, but I don't really know what they are.

Speaker 2: The orcs are way bigger as far as I can tell, as far as the role that they play. The goblins are just there as another obstacle, I feel like, but the orcs have a lot more background to them. I think they're also meant to be larger. It's just harder to tell because they don't interact, and also all the goblins are a CGI mess or horde put together. It's very difficult to get a sense of... scale like we were talking about with like the hobbits versus the dwarves it's very difficult to tell like how big they're supposed to be in comparison to each other because they made thorin taller on purpose i think than bilbo and most of them but like he's meant to be smaller because he's a dwarf so it's hard to tell

Speaker 3: The Gollum scene feels like a quarter length of the film. It is way too long. Why is it as long as it is? I also think the Radagast introduction scene is way too long. His name is cool though. That's 100 % like a wizard name or a dragon's name. Azog. ⁓ god, this PC. He ain't even a cult villain, bro. The fact that he wasn't defeated by the end of this movie.

Speaker 2: Yeah, I like red a guest

Speaker 3: It's just like why? Obviously there are sequels, but I feel like something should have changed by the end. Somebody should have been defeated. Like, why did you introduce this guy? You have the dragon and then some there's some looming threat and none of them, none of them are defeated or anything by the end. He just shows up, chases them down and then leaves. Like that is so pointless. It feels at this point in time. I feel like something should have changed with the threats by the end of this in order for this to feel like its own movie, but right now it just feels like a really long episode of a TV show.

Speaker 2: Yeah, that's true. Actually, I didn't think of that. But yeah.

Speaker 3: The Eagles, shout out to Evan's shirt.

Speaker 1: Hey, Jalen Hurts was so clutch in this movie.

Speaker 3: Yeah, why? They said it's keep planche it right? I think I spoke. Yeah

Speaker 2: Yeah

Speaker 3: They sent her up to come when Gandalf needed help. did the whole mind thing and... eagles show up. So there was no payoff with that right now. There was no mention of eagles in this at all. What also annoys me about entering new worlds? is no hints beforehand before you introduce something new. I understand it's a fantasy world, it's a high fantasy world. There are different races and different languages, have a common tongue, you got different cultures, different locations that are hard to pronounce and everything. But when you just... get to a scene where hobbits are there at the dwarfs and hobbit is chilling on the mountainside and then you have just a rock fight between stone giants that weren't mentioned before. I'm a little taken aback. Same thing that happened with the eagles that popped up out of nowhere. I know they're in the original trilogy. I didn't know the eagles would be in this too. do you have something say? I don't really.

Speaker 1: A little. I mean, I can put- I'm not gonna go through like every point by point of like what's in the book and what's not. I will tell you that the way that this ends with them at the trees, there are differences, and I have a question that I've been waiting literal years to ask you about that, but I'm gonna save that. As it's set up in the books, they are just up in the trees being like chased by the goblins, and then the eagles just show up. There is not a setup of them before. That is just kinda how it goes in the book. Like, they don't... Yeah. Yeah, that's how they weren't in the book. No, they absolutely are. They save them from the trees. I actually kinda... For better or worse, my version doesn't really do it better, because, like, there's not an organic way to be like, hey, there's also eagles in this world, and they do stuff. Like, it never happens. They just kinda show up where they want.

Speaker 2: Wait, the eagles? They're in the book?

Speaker 1: And that's sort of the cop-out that, like, any Tolkien lore person will give you when they're like, well, why can't the Eagles just bring them all the way to their destination? They're just like, well, Eagles are their own thing. In the books, they speak. They don't in the movies.

Speaker 2: I actually heard a really good reason in high school for this because I read fellowship my senior year and I think my teacher said basically like the reason thematically that they don't just use the Eagles and fly all the way to wherever in Lord of the Rings and they just walk everywhere is because it would be like a show of power that the bad guy would know and be able to like predict whereas like it wouldn't be like that you know if they walk there so I thought that was pretty cool.

Speaker 1: It's flimsy and it's why people point to it a lot because honestly the best justification you can give is just like the Eagles don't feel like it. Yes. ⁓

Speaker 2: The Eagles want evil to win, I think that's what you're saying. They do!

Speaker 1: to an extent, they're just kind of like, ⁓ something's happening over here. Well, okay, I think the way that it's introduced in the book is we get, a couple paragraphs from the, like, head eagle's point of view, and he's like, hey, what's going on over there? Let me go check it out. ⁓ this is what's happening. Let's save these dwarves. They seem like they're in a tight spot. All right, good night's work, everyone. And then they just leave. Like, that's how it goes. And it's a tough thing to justify.

Speaker 2: Well wait, and this Gandalf sends them a butterfly, I think.

Speaker 1: Yeah, that's kind of a shorthand that the movie adaptations do is like they have this little moth thing that like tells people when they're gonna show up and they just kind of rely on that.

Speaker 3: Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. If you are going to have your heroes be saved by something like that in the climax, they need to be mentioned at some point or shown. I'm sorry, that's not okay.

Speaker 1: How do you feel about it if it's not the climax? Because it's not. This was never supposed to be the climax, and I don't think it should have been the climax of the first movie, but like, as this being... Because I'll just tell you right now, the Eagles do show up again in these books. So if you try to divorce from your mind this, like them showing up at the climax, it doesn't make the movie better. Like, you can still hold that as a criticism against the movie, but like... What if this is their first introduction of two times? Because it is. I'll spoil-

Speaker 3: So you're saying to not view this as its own movie in this case?

Speaker 1: Kind of. As its own criticism, like you coming in totally clean, yeah, this must feel like complete bullshit that it's just like, ⁓ this thing you didn't know existed is saving the day. Like, it's terrible from a climax point of view. That was gonna be one of my questions, is like, how do you feel about this as a climax? It sounds like...

Speaker 2: I had that question too, just about the ending in general too, because I had my own issues with how this particular one ends.

Speaker 3: Well to answer the question, does it feel like a good closing to part one? No. As he hasn't been beaten, they're saved by things that aren't even mentioned in the movie before they show up. Also, Thorin is a garbage warrior. He got three people.

Speaker 1: He does get... clocked pretty hard.

Speaker 3: He got hit three times and was down for the count. Like, they're following him. And he got three pieced. By a dude who has one of them.

Speaker 2: I literally have a note that says, bro, what are you doing? He's walking across the tree like while his friends are in trouble. He's not helping anybody. He's just going and like doing a dramatic pose. And I get it, but I'm like, what about all of your, all of your friends? They're going to die. Like.

Speaker 3: That's their leader. There's also a lot of dramatic line reading moments where they like look at the camera and like pause and then we cut to the next scene. I'm like, was that meant to be like epic? Cause it didn't feel that way. I don't even know what the hell you're saying.

Speaker 2: It's also that weird scene when he's explaining, I think it's Balin is explaining the backstory that Thorin has with the orcs and that to introduce a new subplot and it's almost like all of them are listening to this story that they already know and that Thorin is looking off in the distance listening to them talk about him and not commenting on it. The scene is almost set up like he can't hear them. It's such a weird way to do it.

Speaker 3: Some things in this, it feels like they know they're in a- like the characters know they're in a movie. They do. what are you doing?

Speaker 2: You read that contract that Bilbo had? That was the script.

Speaker 3: ⁓ that why he read incineration? That was funny, the way he said incineration.

Speaker 1: incineration. I would keep Martin Freeman. He's so good.

Speaker 3: No, I'm not blaming him. I can say it before, we're not blaming anybody who made this. There's also, I mean, speaking of that, the climax and... Evan, answer your question as far as to look at it like... that... I think that makes it less bad? It's like... Yeah, that being their introduction... That makes it less bad.

Speaker 1: With the Eagles being like this. Not a climax. Yeah.

Speaker 3: It's a hell of way to introduce. It would feel better if they were like still mentioned earlier or something. Bilbo says, hey Gandalf, you still tight with those eagles?

Speaker 1: And he's like, yes, I have Saquon Barkley's contact in my phone at Nick Cereani on speed dial.

Speaker 3: Um, yeah, so, something like that. I don't know.

Speaker 1: It's tough. I hear your criticism. I don't know a good way to get around it. And I like, I didn't even try in my adaptation to like set it up. It might work a little better because it's, that is not a climactic scene. I won't get into that, but it's a tough challenge to get around. Tolkien just kind of got away with it. And people have like criticized him for it. They're like, Hey, that's a little convenient bro. Cause he leans on it a little bit.

Speaker 3: I think this is where I learned this is or this was the example given in screenwriting one as far as Deus Ex Machina.

Speaker 1: It's a good one.

Speaker 3: In this movie, was Lord of the Rings they were referencing. Also, there's a lot of last minute saving in this film in general. Bilbo with the trolls and then the doors come and then Gandalf comes when they're about to be and that happens and then the goblins and then Gandalf shows up and he's putting in work at the last minute. I didn't care for that. One, it was repeated a lot and It made it feel like no one was in any real danger, which I don't know if it's the point, because there's a lot of also just goofing around, it feels like. the dwarves feel so unserious and maybe it's like their character and culture or whatever. for a world where they're like... The tone doesn't give off goof. For a world where they're slicing and dismembering people, it feels like they're in a Looney Tunes show in comparison. Also, if anybody did...

Speaker 1: Yeah, I've never liked-

Speaker 3: I don't think I would blink but that's a whole other thing. But on the topic of the violence, I do appreciate the violence I know it was made PG-13 so it made as much money as possible, but they really only skimp out on the blood and language to make that possible for this I really didn't mind because they're like fully decapitating people and whatnot and I think that's cool for a PG-13. The dude was talking about the trash dog was talking about like drinking people's blood and I was like that's dope.

Speaker 1: You tuned in for like one second, like, ⁓ drinking blood. Respect.

Speaker 3: Not not for me but I think the theme was used too much I added that while I was while we were talking

Speaker 1: Yeah, you do you. The music theme? Or... yeah.

Speaker 3: The Misty Mountain, the Lonely Mountain, whatever it's called, the Mountain song was used I think way too much. And in different, like they used it when they were walking. It was like, bro, come on. I know it's like a montage and everything, but like, now you're it with the action scene and now you're using it and they're just sitting there talking and you're using it then. Like, oh my God. I think it lost.

Speaker 1: Island.

Speaker 3: its value and how much it was. Like I liked the song, but it was a lot. And I normally don't even pay attention to music like that in movies. But this time I was like, there's a theme again. We just had the theme, there's a theme again. Cool. Third scene? Okay, there's a theme again. So my last point, I don't know if it's probably not a big one, but why does something like this not work for me but Game of Thrones does? Outside of the violence in language, obviously. content in Game of Thrones. They are both fantastical. And before you say Game of Thrones is more grounded, which yeah, it is. It starts with somebody coming back to life like an ice zombie. So there's that. And apparently also, I mean, the books, I haven't read the books, but a bunch of videos on the world of ice and fire. Apparently it's so much more fantastical as well. And Game of Thrones, feels like it starts with the mystery. And then you got the grounded medieval stuff and then, you know, they keep like adding stuff along the way. You get the Night King eventually, get dragons and giants, mammoths, all that sort of thing, stuff. So I'm wondering what the difference is. Like, maybe it's just because I was thrown into this and there's not really many much explanation or building it feels like. It just feels like the world is there and they want you to, they want... Me is the first time you would have to figure it out. We're Game of Thrones. It's not like holding your hand, but there's buildup towards everything. You got a mystery trying to solve what the hell does winter is coming, meaning what are they talking about? ⁓ this person is having sex with their sister. Okay.

Speaker 1: Drinking blood good incest bad. We know where we stand on this podcast.

Speaker 3: You

Speaker 2: So wait, are you like, are you asking us this question or are you just pointing-

Speaker 3: Sure, I mean, I'd throw it out there.

Speaker 1: Game of Thrones, they're long books and they stretch it out to a TV show which thank god because you could never get-

Speaker 2: Yeah, there's too much fucking material, honestly.

Speaker 1: There's a lot. The Lord of the Rings movies are long. The Lord of the Rings books are pretty long. And I do think that The Hobbit, I mean, clearly because of how I did it, like, I think two movies is good. You need some time to ease things in. And what I will give Tolkien, I'm not gonna give it to this movie, because again, don't, like, it starts you out in Erebor, really. for this one, it starts you out with, here's the dwarf kingdom, before you get anything else. The book gets to that backstory by chapter one, but it starts you out in Bag End. And the Shire is still fantastical, but it's a little bit more familiar. It's just kind of like a farming town, a fairly small agrarian community, like something that is similar enough to like just a pleasant, like medieval era village. And everyone's short. That's like, I'd say the most fantastical it gets there. The book maybe doesn't necessarily do a ton more to like, ease you in, but like, it kind of is banking on like, Bilbo is a normal dude. He just likes living at home and making dinner just like you, the reader. It's trying to do that in a fantasy context without like, breaking the world. Tolkien also does this weird thing. in his writing where he'll kind of talk to the reader a bit and I've never quite understood what he's doing with that because I think there are- Kind of, yeah. he low-key does that in some cases. I- it's not even low-key.

Speaker 2: You at home, Kevin. No, he honestly does, you're right.

Speaker 1: I've never understood whether that's supposed to be Bilbo because I think there is like evidence in the books that Bilbo does write a telling of everything that happens here. But I don't know that the Hobbit, the book is meant to be all him because sometimes Tolkien will kind of say things where I'm like, are you speaking as J.R.R. Tolkien here? Like it kind of feels like you are because Bilbo wouldn't. Perfect example. When he jumps over Gollum in the book, There's a line that's like, had Bilbo known it, he only barely missed, like, clipping his head on the ceiling. There's no witness around to know that. He doesn't know it. Gollum doesn't know it. And nobody's there watching. Right. Well, like, there's weird stuff like that. And I bring that up just to say that, like, he leans on that technique a bit in those first couple chapters, which might help ease you in a little better. And then Fellowship of the Ring kind of,

Speaker 3: and why are you telling us?

Speaker 1: spends a lot of time in the Shire where it's like, this is a more familiar thing, you get a Galadriel voiceover at the beginning to ground you somewhat. She doesn't need to be here, really. ⁓ She's a carryover from Lord of the Rings, the like, blonde woman.

Speaker 3: Who the hell is that? Oh wait, I should've asked, was the hobby written first or the Lord of the Rings books?

Speaker 2: Yeah, the Habit of Virtin first. did make, so Tolkien did actually make changes in like newer editions to tie it into Lord of the Rings more, which like we're not going to spoil like what the tie-ins are, but like, you know.

Speaker 1: You already pretty much saw the one and you could probably guess it. It's just like, Bill Will gets the ring from Gollum. That's pretty much it. Yeah.

Speaker 2: I think they changed that specifically to make it more of a focus in the newer editions of The Hobbit.

Speaker 1: I was curious about that for you too, because like, I know you probably have some understanding of what the One Ring is just from prior knowledge, but like, did that feel like it lost you a bit too, like the introduction of the ring?

Speaker 2: Did you feel anything at all?

Speaker 3: I was just like, hey, that's... I don't even know if there's more than one ring. Is Lord of the Rings, is there more than one ring?

Speaker 2: Well, there are, but only one of them is important.

Speaker 1: Yeah.

Speaker 3: Only one of them like

Speaker 2: In the main movies, of them is important. Rings of Power is different, but there's a lot of reasons for that. In the lore, there's a bunch of rings, but in the movies, only the one ring is really what matters.

Speaker 3: So why isn't it Lord of the Ring?

Speaker 1: That's a fair question. think it just sounds better to make it plural.

Speaker 2: I have no idea. I don't know. ⁓ I'm gonna DM Tolkien and ask.

Speaker 3: Good luck with that, ⁓

Speaker 1: Our guest on this episode, a Tolkien lore scholar and medium.

Speaker 3: Bro I'm thinking back to last episode where Angel was like and our guest for this episode

Speaker 1: I have a question now. It's not quite off of where we were because I think your points are all valid about like it doesn't get us in there. You don't know what's in the book and what isn't and it seems like you haven't done a lot to gather it. I will tell you there are two characters in this book or in this movie that their role is very different. So I want to ask you about each of them. What do you think Radagast and Azog's roles are in the book? Because they are included, but it's very different.

Speaker 3: if they mean less and what's worse. It radical to deliver a message, I don't know, about the darkness coming and that's it.

Speaker 1: correct. No, take a guess at Azog as well. What do you think his role is in the book?

Speaker 3: I feel like he's like a... he doesn't even feel like a boss of any sort. He feels like a sidekick to somebody. So that's my guess.

Speaker 1: Okay, I'm gonna read you their entire inclusion in the books. I've marked these pages. Radagast is introduced in a conversation with a character that has not come up in the movies yet. So Gandalf is talking to someone who I'm not going to name. Let me find the spot. Okay. And I'm gonna try my best to get McKellen for both of these. I have heard of you, if you have not heard of me. But perhaps you have heard of my good cousin Radagast, who lives in the southern bollards of Mirkwood. That is Radagast's entire inclusion. in the book. He's never mentioned again. Now we're gonna go to Azog. This is in the first chapter of the book, his first mention. So they're talking about the map and the key that Gandalf gives Thorin. That's literally it. That is their entire inclusion in the book. They are both in all three of these movies, I think. I think Radigast makes it into all three. Azog is, I'll like give you a little bit of a tease. Azog is like kind of the big bad of this series. What? That is his whole inclusion in the book. ⁓ I have been waiting for years to see how you would react to this information.

Speaker 2: Yeah man, I have no It's just.

Speaker 3: is not even a side character he's not even a my he didn't does it doesn't even sound like he deserved a name in the book

Speaker 2: I'm pretty sure he's dead. And he's been dead for like 40 years.

Speaker 1: I don't know where Tolkien lore comes into that.

Speaker 2: Well, I looked this up and I'm pretty sure he's been dead for like a long time like like he's basically a historical figure at this point Like he did kill the grandfather, but that's it. That's all that added in to get they added

Speaker 3: Sounds cooler dead in that one sentence than he does in this entire movie this entire three-hour

Speaker 2: They don't give him any personality in this. I think that's the problem. He's not like a real character.

Speaker 3: There's nothing to them.

Speaker 1: There's a few problems. So when they both showed up, because they show both of those characters in like back-to-back scenes, and I remembered their names because I just had known the book very well at that point, and I think they show Azog first, and I was like, ⁓ that one line from the book, that's weird. I guess, okay, we're seeing some backstory, alright. And then they show, ⁓ he's still alive, I guess, and then they do the same thing with Radagast, and I was like, ⁓ we're doing another? Cut away to this other guy that we know one line about in the book.

Speaker 3: ⁓ so I was right. scene didn't even- His- Not only did his scene need to not be that long, but he didn't need to be there.

Speaker 1: No, and there's a few other reasons for that and that'll be one of the only other things that we tease from the later things. Yeah, I want to defend Azog's inclusion a little bit and I have one solution that I think might make his inclusion in this movie a little bit better. So goblins are an antagonist that will stick around.

Speaker 2: Yeah, I have stuff on that. It's just...

Speaker 1: And I don't think it's the worst idea if you're gonna do multiple movies to have like a consistent head orc.

Speaker 3: Wait, orcs or goblins?

Speaker 1: either. It doesn't fucking matter.

Speaker 3: That was my point earlier, yes.

Speaker 1: In the book they're called goblins and then orcs show up in Lord of the Rings and this one, like, they're kind of interchangeable. The Great Goblin, the big dude with the swinging chin, his inclusion is pretty much the same in the book. He shows up for ten seconds and then dies. It's kind of the same orcs who, like, chase them to the trees. Like, they just kind of go from the mountain. They're like, ⁓ we're gonna keep chasing them outside of the mountain and then they get away. I don't think it's the worst idea to have a like big bad orc across all of these movies. The way they include him I think is dumb though. You show the backstory which I think is kind of good backstory for Thorin. Like there's some decent character work there. Which is debatable, but like I think it's something. It gives you a decent backstory. Then they like immediately show us, ⁓ he's still alive. And I was thinking this time, what if you save the reveal? Like what if we never cut away to Azog? doing villain things, but we do, like, kind of tap the exposition signpost again when they get to the goblin tunnels, and the Great Goblin's like, oh, there's a price on your head. Guess what? Azog's still alive, and Thorne's like, no. He died in Moria years ago, you're bluffing. And then we don't find out that Azog's alive until the trees. Holy shit, he's still here. I think that could at least be a fun reveal.

Speaker 3: That's better. That doesn't change how trash of a villain and character he is. But that's better. That's just better story-wise.

Speaker 2: Yeah, because I mean, the whole thing is like, don't tell the audience shit they already know. Like, it's way less exciting because we already know he's alive.

Speaker 1: And Thorin's

Speaker 2: We don't care. The biggest- don't care because like we knew that.

Speaker 3: the biggest dumbass in this movie because he thought bro died to getting his hand severed.

Speaker 1: I mean, in fairness, medieval fights like that could do you in.

Speaker 3: they are fighting

Speaker 2: No. No, no, no, no, no, Magic? No, no, none of that. No one, no one is thinking about medieval hygiene when they're watching these movies.

Speaker 1: All right. That's true.

Speaker 3: Yeah, not when they're-

Speaker 2: He died of- he died of sepsis. ⁓ No one se- no one.

Speaker 3: No, no. Thorin looks like a... ⁓ just the biggest idiot. Just a... he died from... I sliced his hand off. He died. I just saw giant stone things throw rocks at... throw their heads at each other. But he died from getting his hand chopped off.

Speaker 2: Yeah. It's also a level of hubris that is like, astounding. Which I guess technically makes sense for Thorin's character in some ways, but also just upsets me.

Speaker 3: It sounds like he was trying to convince himself that he died. He was like, I got him, He's not coming back.

Speaker 2: I wish that was the line reading. I got him right.

Speaker 1: He's talking to Balin. Balin does the whole backstory and Thorin's like, yeah, he's dead. then later everyone's asleep, he's like, you think so? Like, got him, right?

Speaker 3: Definitely got it The hand, that was enough. You think that was enough?

Speaker 2: Thank Colton.

Speaker 1: He does have a sick prosthetic. ⁓

Speaker 2: I want to see where Thorin wakes up and he's like, ⁓ shit. Wait, did I?

Speaker 3: laughter

Speaker 1: And then they like change the ending, he's like...

Speaker 2: He's trying to figure it out you see he's the the Charlie Day wall up behind him like it's always

Speaker 3: Damn it!

Speaker 1: And then Azog shows up, he's like, what's good, bruv? Who thought? Who thought?

Speaker 3: Yeah, he's just he looks so stupid for that do we do where there more questions

Speaker 1: I am done with my questions for you. We kind of covered the other ones that I had. Angel, did you have others?

Speaker 2: Yeah, I did. You kind of answered my first one, which is like, did you like this as a fantasy story on its own? You did not. From what I've gathered, you didn't like this. Honestly, my main question is, are you excited? have two questions. One is, are you excited to watch the other two or do you hate us for making you do this?

Speaker 1: I did not make him do it. let him I told him he could opt out do not use that word

Speaker 3: You

Speaker 2: I repeat my question with the exact same phrasing.

Speaker 3: No, I don't hate you guys. couldn't hate you guys, but ⁓ I'm- I know, I'm not looking forward to- I mean the fact that Ezra makes it through the three movies alone is just like... If you have a villain, an overarching villain, you gotta make him cool, man. You gotta make him at least watchable. He is the most generic, by the book, cookie-cutter...

Speaker 2: Okay.

Speaker 3: villain you could come up with. He's just...

Speaker 2: Such a waste too, because he's played by Manu Bennett who-

Speaker 1: And shout out to him, he has a great physical performance. he's, it's mocap obviously, but he does, he makes him look intimidating at least.

Speaker 2: So good! No, for sure. Like, he's got the physicality, but it doesn't matter when I don't know anything about him.

Speaker 3: He does the villain thing of killing his subordinate in his first scene.

Speaker 1: I hate that trope. And it's like at its worst here.

Speaker 3: I'm sorry for using it, I don't even use the term like, he has no aura. He got nothing about him, bro. Like, I don't care. There are some villains you just love to watch, love to hate. There's something about him, you're like, oh, maybe he's right. You know, maybe Magneto was right. Maybe Killmonger was right. Like, there are some that are just like evil for the sake of being evil. And there are very good versions of that as well. Homelander.

Speaker 1: Even Smaug has a good setup in this as like...

Speaker 3: And he doesn't even say anything! He doesn't even say anything! Yes! He's got- we don't even see him and we feel his aura. We feel his presence. He takes over a town in his introduction scene. Or a city.

Speaker 1: Yes, multiple. A city and a mountain.

Speaker 3: He's burning people. They can do nothing to stop him. We didn't even see the guy and he's living it up in gold right now. But this man's is what he did to Thorin. I feel like I could three piece him and beat him. Like bro, you are not it. You are not him. You know, no, no, no, no. I was already not looking forward to the rest because if this was how it starts and it gets worse.

Speaker 2: It gets worse for other reasons that may not affect you the same way they affect us.

Speaker 3: Random question, why is Keely the only one among the dwarves without a freakish nose? Is there a reason for that?

Speaker 1: Yes, but you will find out in it. There's not like a lore reason, but there is a, you'll find out in the next movie why it will probably become somewhat obvious, but it's not like a reason.

Speaker 2: But there's a reason. I guess I'm tired already. I

Speaker 3: You

Speaker 1: Yeah

Speaker 2: Everything just just end the whole series right now. We'll just start talking about something else. We should switch to a different movie right now

Speaker 1: Well, I'll go into like why this one's tolerable for me. Maybe you guys don't agree. I think there's enough good character work that like... There are at least scenes where I'm engaged. My topic is character work, good and bad. They fast-track Bilbo's arc. I don't want to say too much about it because it'll get into scenes that we haven't gotten to yet. But people who are familiar probably know what I'm talking about. I like that they at least give him focus here, like... I think they pulled too much focus away, but you can call Bilbo the main character of this movie.

Speaker 3: just by technicality.

Speaker 1: On a technicality, I think they should have given more focus, or not even given him more focus. They shouldn't have spent time on other stuff, which is your topic, Angel, so I'll save some of that, ⁓ my criticism there. Like, I've mentioned a few of the moments already. I like that it's his decision to leave. I like that he has a refusal of the call moment. I also, even though it doesn't go anywhere, I like the beat where he decides to go back to Rivendell. I think it's stupid that Bofor, of all people, is the dwarf that he's talking to.

Speaker 3: for these nuts.

Speaker 1: Yeah, both are decent enough.

Speaker 3: ⁓ I'm sorry, I'm 13.

Speaker 2: No, it's okay. I actually heard that joke earlier today, too.

Speaker 1: We can also make it in the next one because if you abbreviate Battle of Five Armies, it literally is BOFA.

Speaker 3: Tofu.

Speaker 2: ⁓ my god.

Speaker 1: Early in college, somebody was like, do you know what BOFA is? And I was like, let me Google it. And the first two things that came up were Bank of America and Battle of Five Armies.

Speaker 3: Yeah.

Speaker 2: What's the F?

Speaker 1: Yeah, so I like that beat of his character arc, and that's another addition. Like, he never really decides to go home, but I think it is good to give him a beat. Like, one thing that'll happen in the books a lot is he'll just be in a situation and he'll be like, man, I wish I was home right now. But he sticks it out.

Speaker 3: He's so real for that though. That I- that- that makes sense to me.

Speaker 1: But I think it's also as an adaptation choice, like you don't want to have him just every 10 minutes be like, man, I wish I had some tea right now. Yeah. I guess, yeah. In a movie, it doesn't work as well, I think, as it does in book. I think it's good to give him some level of hesitation, and I do think Rivendell is the right point to do that. Like, I won't spoil it. I have a similar... it's not the same kind of beat, but I tried to like give Rivendell that kind of weight in my adaptation.

Speaker 3: Rivendell's the elf? Yeah.

Speaker 2: Yeah, it's important in Lord of the Rings 2. Like, it's an important elf city for the characters. I don't know if it's the ca-

Speaker 1: Gandalf maybe has a line in the movie that's like, this is the last homely house on this side of whatever. Which is kind of true, like in the quest narrative of it, it kind of marks a point of like, hey, you're gonna get to like, sleep in an actual bed and have actual meals for the last time in a while. Because like, that's such a big thing for Bilbo, like the comforts of home are so important to him. It does kind of mark a transition point. So I do like that when they are like one day away, he's like, you know, maybe I could just make it back. And that's kind of his last chance to opt out. And I don't think it's a terrible beat that he almost takes it. And I do think it makes him coming back to the company later a bit stronger. Like they kind of strengthen that beat. I think it's, it's weaker because they split it across like, ⁓ he comes back. ⁓ then he saves Thorin. and then Thorin accepts him like kind of halfway in the first one and then fully in the second. That's a little clunky and that beat is supposed to be saved for a later scene that we haven't gotten to yet. It's not as good as it could be and it's super clunky. I still am kind of like, man that works. When Thorin like hugs Bilbo at the end, it kind of gets me. It's not as good as it should be, but I'm like... I kinda like have to give the movie some kind of credit for doing it there. Cause they sure as shit don't do anything like that for the other ones. So maybe I'm like being too generous. I understand if it doesn't hit, but I kind of like it. And I'm not even saying that to like stave off criticism. I'm just like, it works barely enough for me.

Speaker 3: Incorrect.

Speaker 1: fair.

Speaker 2: I also disagree. Not trying to step on your point, I also disagree.

Speaker 3: No, your feelings are your own Evan, ⁓ but

Speaker 1: So are yours,

Speaker 2: I'm glad it works for you, honestly.

Speaker 1: Mmm.

Speaker 3: I'm glad you got some enjoyment out of it. I could see it as deep as you did.

Speaker 1: It's not enough for what that relationship could be. I can't really talk about it fully without going into stuff that we haven't seen yet. But I'll just say there's a better beat where, like, Bilbo's acceptance into the company is earned more. And I make that the climax of my version. And that's part of why I did that, because, like, the stronger scene is when Bilbo comes back and Thorne's like, no, it matters. Why did you come back? And letting that just kind of sit for that beat, I think would be stronger. I think that's a actually really organic moment where he is fully doubtful of Bilbo and he's like, Gandalf, why did you give us this guy? Like he's been useless. And then Bilbo kind of exceeds his expectations and he gives him a little bit of a second look, but not more than that. He does kind of say, ⁓ I underestimated you a little bit, but maybe he's not ready to admit that yet in that scene. And I think it just doesn't feel as strong because, you know, sure Bilbo like goes linebacker mode on Wanna Work somehow. And then he's like, now you're accepted because you can't

Speaker 3: You're a dwarf and my brother. Yes

Speaker 2: That's my whole thing. It's too abrupt. it's how I feel about Thorin's whole thing. I want to talk about Bilbo first, but...

Speaker 3: It's- it feels like he's... just halfway through everything. Like he's- Thorn? Yeah. But you- you go first.

Speaker 2: I didn't think about it as like a character work movie necessarily except maybe for Bilbo until you were talking about it. There's a lot here for Bilbo and it works really well. I do not think that Thorin has really anything except for like hints and stuff that might come later. My thing with Bilbo is I like that they kind of start him off as a little unlikable where it's like he's a little snobby. We can tell where his character arc is gonna go and even if it's a little obvious and clear they... make it emotional enough and they work really well. think what works well about Bilbo here, except for that one moment, they don't make him like an action hero. They don't turn him into like the same as the dwarves. They make it clear that like he's part of this group and he brings something different to it, which is like his charm and his wit and his way of like talking his way out of things. I think the biggest example is the troll thing, but also then you have like the golem scene with the riddles. Like that's all Bilbo. None of the dwarves could have done that. They make him a unique character among the company. And that's why he's there and I love that and I think that the moment that I really loved was when he decides despite what Thorin just said about him to reveal himself to the company and to stay with them and I'm so glad

Speaker 3: Cause I felt like that movie could've dragged out for another few minutes. God, I can't believe he said that about me and then have him run off.

Speaker 2: Yeah, really. Yeah, just at just ⁓ well, what's the word? Artificial tension like they could have

Speaker 3: Correct.

Speaker 1: We have enough of that already. I'll get into that in your topic.

Speaker 2: And they didn't and it shows that Bilbo has grown this confidence in himself despite what other people think that is really cool and I think that's great and it gives it they then give him that moment of I have a home I have this great place that I can go back to and I miss it but you guys don't and I want to help you get it back because by this point he cares about all of these he cares about all these people and in my opinion that's where the movie basically should have ended there should have been no

Speaker 3: Yes.

Speaker 2: battle with the orcs or anything, but it completely kills the tone of the entire ending that should have been a lot more like sweet and nice and cozy than it was where it's like, it should have been an emotional character moment. And instead what it was, it was the ending of a Lord of the Rings movie where they have this big epic battle. also speaks to the larger problem with Thorin's character where the whole time he's just the typical gruff leader who doesn't trust anybody. And he doesn't trust anybody until the plot needs him to. Like the elves, he just sits down and has lunch with the elves even though we know that we have the backstory for why he hates the elves. And like, we know that he's wrong to loop an entire people into that one thing, but we also understand that he's going to do that anyway. There's no progress made until this one scene at the end of the movie. Like there's all these hints about it, but he's constantly just like

Speaker 1: He the others.

Speaker 2: not trusting people, including Bilbo, and then one scene changes the entire thing. So like to me, Thorin doesn't have a character arc in this. He barely has a hint at one. Like I know, if I remember correctly, that he's gonna get more stuff later, but even then, it doesn't stop the ending where he hugs Bilbo from feeling ridiculously abrupt. And in the next movie, if I remember correct, I'm pretty sure if I'm, he goes back to not trusting people again, like.

Speaker 1: Yeah, he's

Speaker 2: It just makes his character arc seem way more backwards than it has to. Like-

Speaker 3: I gotta stop talking about the other movies, man. I already don't want to watch them.

Speaker 1: I think part of it though, part of why I defend the ending here is because it's the best we get. Like, it's all we get, so I kinda have to love it or just be like, yeah, but that's problem, It's that or disappointment.

Speaker 2: Get... But that's the problem, It just means his character arc is ultimately kind of disappointing, at least in this movie. Like, I don't remember enough about the other ones to really speak on it yet, but it's enough where I'm like, I don't believe that he would change that abruptly that quickly. Especially, too, that also takes away a little bit from what I was just saying about Bilbo where they don't make him an action hero, where all of a sudden, he's then able to take down an orc by-

Speaker 3: ball tackles speaking of eagles.

Speaker 2: There's also one other thing I want to talk about. They do this weird thing a couple of times where, Jelani, you were talking about the whole Deus Ex Machina thing with like last minute saving. They do it with the trolls where all of a sudden all the dwarves come in and save and save them, which is like, why didn't they do that earlier? Why did they send only Bilbo and why didn't they just all of there for while. Yeah, and they just, they all could have gone and gone apeshit on the trolls, taken them by surprise. It doesn't make any sense. And then they do that again here. I think it was Helium Feli that jump out of the tree and like also save somebody like it's Bilbo and then they also have two other dwarves jump out and fight them and I was like ⁓ all the dwarves are just gonna come off the tree now but then they didn't because other dwarves were still in trouble so I was just really confused on like what was happening

Speaker 1: It's a rough set piece. Bilbo saving Thorin doesn't happen in the book there. It's just, they're in the trees, nothing falls over, and then the eagles show up. Like, there's no character beat there, really. It's just kind of a little action set piece.

Speaker 2: Eagles then show up.

Speaker 3: So ditto to everything Andrew was saying, big enough word for word. You can't copy me.

Speaker 2: You have to come up with your...

Speaker 1: Hey, great minds.

Speaker 3: Thorin talks about hating elves the whole movie and Gandalf says one thing to him and then he says nothing about it for the rest of the movie. ⁓ Feels like Thorin is there just to surfacing grumble about elves or Bilbo not belonging. Right, and the dwarves listen to him as their leader and he's got that going for him. And Balin explains why, but were all of them there for that?

Speaker 2: and to be Jesus.

Speaker 3: No, right? Because they're not all from the same kingdom. So do the rest of them follow him for other reasons? ⁓ I guess we don't have time for that because there are 13 of them! Why are there so many dwarves in this movie?

Speaker 2: True. talk about that too it's fucking there's two men and like you can cut down a cast if you have to I only remember five of them I

Speaker 1: want to defend them there because that would have pissed off every Tolkien nerd ever, possibly including me, if I was like, five dwarves? What the hell?

Speaker 2: But then give them stuff to do cuz like

Speaker 3: I know four by name I think in face. I can match four of them with the name in face. We got Thorin, Bollins the old dude, I know Keely because he's the only one without the nose, and then I think Boforty's nuts is the one with the weird mustache.

Speaker 1: He has the hat.

Speaker 2: Yeah, and one thing I don't I don't love and We can cut this if it's not relevant, but like I feel like they just Like bomber they just make fat jokes about him and I don't it. Yeah, I don't think that

Speaker 1: he doesn't have a single line in any movie.

Speaker 3: It just adds to the Looney Tunes factor,

Speaker 2: ⁓ yeah. Well isn't he the one that notices Bilbo's leaving?

Speaker 1: I don't know. No, no it's not.

Speaker 2: See this proves like they're not none of them are distinct. That's the problem I only know Keely because he's played by Aiden Turner who I liked in other stuff That's it. And I know Feely because that's his brother and they're always together

Speaker 1: And it looks like Chad Kroger from Nickelback. They give him like the same hair and everything. Yeah. He's look at this grass dude. That's where you would know the face from.

Speaker 2: Yes he does. ⁓ yes he does.

Speaker 3: That's a band I know. I thought it was looking...

Speaker 2: You made the movie so much worse in my head!

Speaker 3: You

Speaker 1: Sorry to take it down from a two star to a one and a half.

Speaker 2: I had it at three and a half stars! Like you- I checked my letterbox while we were talking about it. I don't even know what to do with it now.

Speaker 1: We did. The dwarves are a tough problem to deal with, I think. I want to defend them a little bit on that. Because one, I stand by what I said about like, everyone knows there's 13 dwarves, like, who's read the book, it's kind of the thing. I think to cut it down would have felt a little bit like a betrayal. I do agree, it's hard, I think it's just hard to deal with them. Like, I found this as a challenge that I didn't expect in my adaptation. In theory, it would be nice to characterize all the dwarves. One problem is Tolkien gives you nothing. There are only maybe two of them. Like Thorin has stuff to do, Balin kinda has stuff to do. And Bomber, like, just is kind of a punching bag for a lot of it. They're just like, why are you so slow? Why are you so fat, bro? Like, come on. It's all he has.

Speaker 2: I can't stand it, man. Don't use a character just to make fat jokes. It's not nice. It's just... I don't like it. ⁓

Speaker 1: was looking for an interview with, I think Steven Hunter is the name of the actor who plays him, because I've seen it in Lindsay Ellis's video and I couldn't find the interview, but there's an interview with him where somebody is just asking him like, so what's your character? And he just goes, so Bomber's a fat dwarf. ⁓ Yeah, that's it. Let's not beat around the bush.

Speaker 2: That's all they give him and it's upsetting.

Speaker 1: Like, the fact that you got the guy to play this and he can't even talk his own character up, like, it doesn't speak well to any level of it from Tolkien on. But, for the dwarves as a collective, I don't think you should give them that much character. You don't have time. And they cram in a lot of other things, so like, maybe if the other extra stuff had been time spent on all the dwarves, maybe that would be something. My solution was to pick, like, four of them. And... focus on them and then just kind of leave everyone else as like they're also here. It's not perfect but like and and to be fair these movies do that a little. We'll get more of Kaley and Balin, I actually really like some of what they do with characterizing Balin. Like his dynamic with Thorn in a couple scenes is pretty good when they're at bag end and he says like you've made a good life for us we don't need to do this. I was like wow. You have a good scene here. you have a good dynamic developing. they don't really keep it going that much. It'll come back in later movies, but in this one, this maybe will transition us into Angel's topic of Verretti, but Thorin's race... No! I'll save that. I'll save that.

Speaker 2: I have more things that upset me! ⁓

Speaker 1: Go into more things that upset you then.

Speaker 3: I'm gonna jump back to Bilbo for a second. I don't like weak slash me characters. I never have. They're essentially the same as cowards to me. Deku for my hero is one big example. Bilbo comes off that way to me and I'll explain in a second, but to compare it to Game of Thrones again, Sam Waltherly, another Sam, Sam Wells, Sam Wise, is probably one of the only examples where I learned to accept him as a coward. And I think that's partially due to the fact that he accepts that he's a coward and he literally says that in his first scene. But not only that, he finds other ways to be heroic or just help other than just swinging a sword. Bilbo's reaction to a bunch of dwarves invading his home also pisses me off. Both sides piss me off, actually. I can't stand when someone is too weak to stand up to someone who's clearly crossing a line or boundary. And in this case, it's the dwarves entering his home and eating his food. And I also can't stand when another character or characters lack respect for another without reason or lack self-awareness in general. So... I hated the entire intro scene. Maybe it's a cultural thing among the hobbits. I don't remember if that's explained or maybe it's a Dorven culture thing to be an asshole. Disgusting asshole. Okay, cool. So that was just like, was that their attempt to make them in? We don't have a lot of time with them. They set up their names and they list them off. Cool. But if you're going to do that, was that their attempt to make them endearing or make this

Speaker 2: It's not that either.

Speaker 3: want to follow them, because it wasn't funny, it wasn't cool, none of them were interesting enough for me to give a shit about them, sorry, I try not to swear on this, but it kinda pissed me off.

Speaker 2: Are we not allowed to swear? I swear a lot.

Speaker 3: No, I just try not to on the show in general.

Speaker 2: ⁓ okay. Because I was like, no one told me. I definitely dropped it.

Speaker 1: I think we, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 3: So there's that, and that just fuels more of the fire I was talking about when I said I don't care about anybody in this film. Bilbo is such a nothing character to me in this film, It feels like he's just going along with what the plot tells him to do. Like nothing feels earned to me. As I said before, you can see this with this decision to join the dwarves in the beginning, and then from that scene we get one... instance of him wanting to go back because he forgot his handkerchief and then from then on it feels like he's just doing what he needs to do like saving the horses. He does that. He could have ran back with them, but he just goes and does that against three trolls and it's like, would his character do that? I'm not entirely sure about that.

Speaker 2: Also, is that his job? Because they kind of imply like, you're the burglar. You're the one that gets horses back, I guess. And I get why they did it because it's like, ⁓ you're going to sneak into the camp and do this. But they don't explain that part. It just seems like they don't want to go. So they're like, ⁓ this is miscellaneous man's Yeah, they're like, ⁓ your job is you're a gopher, basically. Go for this, go for that. That's it.

Speaker 3: Yeah.

Speaker 1: Yeah, I think something that's missing that characterizes him well in the book is that he has a little more desire to prove himself, and they never really give a hint of that here.

Speaker 2: Which I guess that would kind of make sense because he doesn't want to be there. So I get why they didn't really do it that way. I could see that working better in like if they were going to give him something in like the next movie because his arc kind of ends here. So that could have been his other arc in the next one. Like in this one he accepts that he wants to help them. The next one could be, ⁓ now I need to prove that I should be here at all. Right. But I don't think it would even really work in that one either.

Speaker 3: Because he does that here or they try to make it seem like he does that here that he belongs with them or whatever because

Speaker 2: Yeah, he's accepted in this one. Yeah, he's accepted in this one. That's the thing. So he would have no reason to need to be accepted in the next one. Yeah, like if Thorin was still skeptical of him at the end of the movie, which you could have that work if you cut out the orc scene, that would have been fine. Then that could have worked later on.

Speaker 1: It's all kind of a, like, product of, you shouldn't make this three movies, I think is a large part of it. Like, that ending doesn't work because, I mean, it's supposed to be a longer story, but it's also not a good spot to split it. It's just not. I think that's the main problem, but within that, like, let's just say you have, like, the studio's giving you the mandate, alright, we gotta make this three movies, sure. numerically, like math-wise, that kind of makes sense to split there just to like make it three evenly sized movies, I guess. But within that, like you can kind of do it a little better and I'm realizing from your reaction that like, yeah, why is Bilbo there? They don't really give us enough of a scene to explain it. And in fairness, Tolkien doesn't help a ton there. like

Speaker 2: I got to that part, he doesn't really either.

Speaker 1: Yeah, like I guess I've always taken it as a given and I think I tried to do a bit of character work in my version, but it's still a challenge because he just he's not in it for the love of the game really. He's not in it for the money. So it's a little bit hard to show his motivation of just like I feel like I need to do this to like prove it to myself, which I like to read it that way. They don't really give you that here.

Speaker 2: You have to do some work to read it that way though, and I think that's part of the problem. Like, if they set that up well, I think that would have been okay.

Speaker 1: You have to do the work to set it up before you can do the work to read it that way, Like, you can't ask the audience to fill in the blank if you didn't give them anything. You gotta write the rest of the sentence for them to fill in the blank.

Speaker 2: I think it would have worked better for that had Bill Bill said, I'm going to go get it. If he had again made a decision instead of what it felt like, which is feeling Keeley like kind of forcing him. For the troll scene. Yeah. I think he does some of that later.

Speaker 1: You're saying for the tools Yeah, the way the book frames it is a little bit more as like a challenge for him where they just see like a fire and they're like, hey, ⁓ Bilbo go check that out and then come back and tell us and he goes and checks it out and he's a little bit like, hey, I'm supposed to be a burglar. I'm going to prove that I can do something for them. So he tries to steal something and he fails. I think it's a poor framing that they change it to this in the movie. You could argue that the book doesn't frame it perfectly either. But in that, the very least, like, you get into Bilbo's headspace in the book, and you can see that he's, like, kinda doing it because he wants to test himself a little bit there, and that's absolutely not how it's framed in the movie.

Speaker 3: Well, his character would need to be changed in order to fit that.

Speaker 2: That's I was saying in the movie. Like it doesn't fit for this version of his arc the way that they lay it out He's not at the proving himself stage yet and now it's making me think too like would it have been better to give him two different arcs and have this be the two movies where his arc in this one is like wanting to be there in the first place and deciding to help them and the next dark is like proving to himself that he needs to be there and I guess by the end him concluding that like he's already been accepted He's already proven it a million times. He just needs to tell himself that but they don't do that.

Speaker 1: Yeah, like I think him wanting to be there needs to be established by the time he's out the door is the problem. And that shouldn't be the end of anything because it's the inciting incident. Basically, at best it's the end of Act 1. Like you can't hold it off that long. I don't know if I handled it perfectly in my adaptation. I think I tried to give it something, but-

Speaker 3: Take a shot every time Evan says adaptation. Please don't, you'll die.

Speaker 1: Maybe a sip.

Speaker 3: I'm realizing in you guys saying that and saying this movie didn't need to end where it did, it should have ended at a different point. A lot of scenes just feel too long, just in general. If you wanted to make space for, I'm guessing you guys think it should, something happens in the second movie or...

Speaker 2: you

Speaker 3: in the books where like that could have been put into this movie and it sounds like a lot of this could have just been cut down for that to have it end at a certain point because the golem scene the troll scene feels super long as well. Like I realized in watching that last night, like I felt that in the moment. I was like, wait, this scene is still going. Bilbo's trying to get the horses. They're doing a whole three stooges bit, which is unfunny. He gets caught. Yeah. And then the dwarves come come to save them. They use X. They could have done that earlier, whatever. And then, you know, everybody's caught now and Bilbo's trying to outsmart them. It doesn't even matter for the outsmarting, I guess, because I None of the dwarves thought to like stall for time or whatever because I guess they knew Gandalf was coming back. I don't know. But then they're saved last minute again by Gandalf.

Speaker 2: Yeah. They had no idea. I think they implied that Bilbo is a smart one and they're too dumb to figure it out, which is also upsetting because like you can't reduce all of them to just being dumb characters, except Thorn who realizes what Bilbo is doing and then kicks them and then all of them get it.

Speaker 1: Your point earlier, Jelani, about like, why is Thorne hanging around with all these people? I felt that way more this time. Like, they feel like they're from different movies. Like, especially he's like, I would take this group of 13 over an army of thousands. I'm like, you would take both of these nuts guy. you would- I like the sentiment too, but when you're-

Speaker 2: I like the sentiment.

Speaker 1: army like when your group of 13 is a dude with a dumb hat and some jackass with a slingshot

Speaker 3: and then you know the

Speaker 2: I forgot about slingshot ⁓

Speaker 3: That joke guy

Speaker 1: Like, that's your crew and he's like, I couldn't ask for better Dwar- no, no you could. You could ask for many better people.

Speaker 3: only one I'll give him is ballin'.

Speaker 2: Maybe Keeley. Bollan's awesome. But Bollan's doing a trope thing though. He's doing that kind of older, my mentor thing slash ride or die friend. And I think that there's a reason that works here.

Speaker 3: mental. He's giving big death energy. It feels like he's going to.

Speaker 2: I honestly don't remember. I fully forget. I honestly have no idea because I don't remember anything about 5Army's anymore. ⁓

Speaker 1: I'm not gonna ⁓

Speaker 3: What is that?

Speaker 1: still tap out.

Speaker 3: I gotta see it through now.

Speaker 2: No, we're finishing it now.

Speaker 1: Okay, I guess maybe we should do what we have at the moment.

Speaker 2: I have so many angry thoughts about the other two.

Speaker 1: I do too.

Speaker 3: What's gonna happen to our friendship if I just tap out now Evan? was a whole-

Speaker 1: Nothing, that's what I was saying. Like, will not hold it against you if you don't do it.

Speaker 3: There is a hole!

Speaker 2: We're gonna let we're gonna have you watch Lord of the Rings next year and

Speaker 1: ⁓ I hope it won't put you off for Lord of the Rings, because those are legit.

Speaker 3: No, probably not, but...

Speaker 2: that was my other question I didn't ask before was does this put you off like do you not want to watch Lord of the Rings now?

Speaker 3: I know there are long movies too. I never wanted to watch them because they were so long. I think that's it. I mean, nothing... It doesn't make me want to watch Lord of the Rings any less. I'm not excited, but I feel like I had to at some point anyway, so...

Speaker 1: You kinda do.

Speaker 2: One thing I'll recommend, don't watch the extended editions when we do this. Like, watch the regular... The regular versions are fine. The extended editions are if you've seen them already.

Speaker 3: I didn't want to, I considered it, but-

Speaker 1: ready to move into angels topic yeah yeah we've gotten into a of

Speaker 3: You're cramming in a lot of this.

Speaker 2: feel like it needs to be over. So my topic we've covered so much of, but I have a lot of points here that I want to get into about like packing too much in. This actually, as we're talking, I've realized this packs too much in in a different way than a lot of things that pack too much in. Usually I think what they do is when they're packing stuff into an adaptation, they'll put too many things into a much shorter runtime and try to include everything. And this does the opposite, where because they're stretching it into three movies, they are packing too much in, but they're extending scenes a ridiculous amount. The way that they pack too much in here is all of the additions they're doing, honestly, to make it feel like Lord of the Rings, because here's the thing. So the Lord of the Rings is a big epic fantasy adventure. It's supposed to be nine hours. It's got a much bigger scale than the Hobbit is supposed to. The Hobbit, is children's that is half the length of the first Lord of the Rings book, which I think is the short film.

Speaker 1: I don't know if it's half, but it's like shorter than the first book, so you have less than 30 % of the like page count that you're adapting into the same way.

Speaker 2: It's pretty close to I think. I think it's like 95,000 words is the Hobbit and then the first Lord of the Rings book is I think 170,000. So it's not exactly half but it's pretty close.

Speaker 1: The audiobook takes 10 hours. It was a 10-disc audiobook, so it's about the same length. It's not that far off from the length of these movies, which is not a good ratio.

Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, it's just it's it's so much and again that what they're doing is basically they're trying to make it feel like a big Lord of the Rings esque epic when the fact is the Hobbit is a children's book My brother read it when we were kids. It's meant to be a Child's fantasy adventure essentially, I mean written in the 30s So a little bit different than it would be now, but at the same time it's supposed to be like a short kids fantasy adventure and I think that There is enough material where you could make it into two movies like you were saying, Evan. It could also even be like one three hour movie. I think 90 minutes for that animated one in the seventies. It is a little too short. They're going to rush through stuff, right? That's packing too much into a too short runtime. But back then it kind of made sense. Now it's just like what they're doing is they're trying to recreate Lord of the Rings and it is very obvious with all of the like extra Backstory, I'm trying to think of how to do this without spoiling anything for Jelani, but basically like yeah a lot of cameos

Speaker 3: There's like, ten meals I feel like.

Speaker 1: There's a scene I want to get into that I feel like is just a huge middle finger to somebody in your position as like fresh viewer.

Speaker 2: Yeah, I may know what scene you're talking about, but I want to talk about like there's there's a few major points that are like differences from the book of like stuff that they add in that I think I can talk about without spoiling anything about Lord of the Rings or like the other two movies. But like one thing is the prologue. I talked about this earlier. I actually like the prologue. I think that it does set the tone for what they're going for. And it could even work even if this was tonally closer to what the Hobbit is supposed to be as opposed to being Lord of the Rings. It adds an epic scale to it that I think they were going for and it sets up the story really really well in a way that's familiar to fans and I think that's really cool.

Speaker 1: And you want some epic scale. Like, that's not a thing to avoid. They go too big, but the amount they do in Prologue, think is enough. It's a good amount.

Speaker 2: enough because that's the thing, there's a lot of dwarf backstory that's important, there's this big epic city, they're gonna fight a dragon at some point, they set that up really really well here while making it small enough that it could feasibly be contained to at least these characters or the legacy of this city or whatever. And it works fine. I think what kills it is like I said, jumping to the Frodo scene because that's very clearly them trying to say, look this is a Lord of the Rings movie. He could have showed up and smiled at the beginning when he's like, my dear Frodo. I think that's literally the first line. He could have showed up in that way. Elijah Wood could have made a little bit of money and that would have been all we needed to see. We didn't need a whole scene explaining what's gonna happen in a movie that we're not gonna see yet. Then they jump back again to Bilbo being Martin Freeman. It speaks to like a lack of focus, I think. Another one is Azog the Defiler. They're like, he's not alive in the book. He's been... gone. Like, Thorin was technically right, because I guess he only read the book, he didn't read the script. And that's why he didn't know. But the reason they add him in is honestly to give an overarching antagonist to make this seem more like a classic fantasy story, where, you know, it's good versus evil, which is fine. I think if they contained it to just this one movie, they could have made it part of Thorin's care dark, and you could have done that. But as we've talked about, he's going to come back in other movies. them not putting Smaug into this movie, it makes sense that they wanted to add in somebody else. Percy Jackson does this, where they kind of add in another character that represents the greater evil that they're fighting.

Speaker 1: Yeah, you can have like mini bosses, kind of. Like, as well, could been a mini boss, so maybe you do- maybe it would have been stronger to kill him at the end of this movie, and it's like, ⁓ cool, we got our climax, we beat this movie's

Speaker 3: Exactly, that's what I was...

Speaker 2: It would have been cool. The reason that doesn't work here is partially also because Azog is not representative. The greater evil that he's representative of has nothing to do with the main plot of the entire trilogy where they're gonna go fight the dragon. He's got nothing to do with Smaug. He doesn't even have anything to do with the next thing I'm gonna talk about, which is like the main plot of Lord of the Rings, which they also kind of tie into a little bit with like another thing, like some of the stuff that Gandalf does. and that he talks about too. Some of that stuff with... in that context, I can't even necessarily say the character, but actually they even talk about it.

Speaker 1: I mention him here, and that was like the only thing I was gonna tease.

Speaker 2: We can save that for when we get into that scene then, because I definitely know what scene you're going to talk about. like, he doesn't even have to do with that. It's a whole separate thing that kind of has to do with Thorin's backstory that is just yet another subplot that they're adding in. Thorin has two major tragic backstories in this. Yeah. Just so much. He's got his city being destroyed and then he has a separate epic battle later where his grandfather dies. A character. ⁓ wait, no. in this it doesn't as I'll kill his father it's his grandfather okay a character that we don't know or care about right

Speaker 1: No, it's his grandfather. And who always looks CGI'd. Thror always looks fake in this for some reason.

Speaker 2: He's not the king that lost the shiny rock scene, right? ⁓ he is this.

Speaker 1: Yeah, he is. Thrain doesn't matter, he might as well not be here.

Speaker 3: How do you give two tragic backstories to one of your main characters and your main character still ends up being a nothing burger?

Speaker 2: Because he's a placeholder. He is simply meant to be an epic Aragorn-like character. He's meant to be the big, cool, epic king. Like, he's a figurehead, basically. Like, he represents something, not an actual person. And that's my main issue with, like, his backstory in this. He doesn't have, like, any connection to any character, except maybe Balin, who is also just kind of a way to get the other characters to open up and talk about themselves. If they're gonna have him hug Bilbo at the end of this, they should have spent time with him warming up to Bilbo over the course of this movie. And that could have added to his own character and shown him softening up a little bit. Bilbo could have brought that out of him, but they don't do that. They kind of have Balin as a go-between between like the two of them to explain backstory, but also to like be that person who is comforting to all these other characters. And then my last point, my last point doesn't matter, but the Eagles are dumb. We talked about this already. The goddamn Eagles. can't like, They were dumb in Lord of the Rings, but I feel like at least they made sense enough that I was like, whatever, I don't care. But in this, they're just there, it feels like, to be a callback to Lord of the Rings, even if they were also in the book. But like Jelani was saying, it's because they're not set up.

Speaker 1: Yeah, I just defend it with, that's how it is, but yeah. It is how it is. It's not, but again, I think it's another reason to not end the movie there. It's a bad ending spot. If you have to pick one, I mean, they had to pick two was the problem. So they ended up picking the wrong one both times because they had to.

Speaker 2: Better in the book Yeah, my next point is like the scale of these issues is way more apparent in the other two movies So we'll get into it more in our patreon episode But it's very obvious just from all the setups that they're doing the extensive amount of extra scenes and backstories like Radagast inclusion all of it has to do with something completely separate from the smog stuff and all of it is again about callbacks to Lord of the Rings so it's just they're adding in so much extra stuff and it kills the pacing it does it makes it so that like We're learning about things that we're not invested in yet because they don't matter yet and they're not gonna matter for the rest of these movies. You know, it's just so that people know what all of these references are to. This is stuff like you could honestly just cut a lot of it out.

Speaker 3: Dark Power referencing Sauron?

Speaker 1: Basically, ⁓ Yeah.

Speaker 2: Yeah, pretty much.

Speaker 3: I even have that in this trilogy, because it's a-

Speaker 2: Exactly

Speaker 1: Well, I'll give you some justification. of. So, Jelani, did you have points you wanted to get into because this could transition to...

Speaker 2: It's in the book a little.

Speaker 3: I feel like it all of this overlaps

Speaker 1: So one of the scenes that I most wanted to talk about with this topic is the White Council with Galadriel and Elrond and Saruman. Yes, that's the literal name. I knew you were going to have something to say about it.

Speaker 3: I mean, there's not a better name, man. Come on.

Speaker 2: Wait, which one are you shitting on, L-Round?

Speaker 3: No, the White Council.

Speaker 2: all the way notice not is not a better name there has to be a white council in every fantasy book

Speaker 3: I mean it just sounds, it just sounds not good, but continue.

Speaker 1: It doesn't, But that's

Speaker 2: It doesn't. Welcome to the world!

Speaker 1: in that series. expects you to already think Sorrow Man is a bad guy, because he is there, and that's not really a spoiler to say, because if you can't guess it from Christopher Lee playing him, it tells you within two minutes of him showing up. He's a—it's like, surprise he's a bad guy, but it's not a surprise, because you just met him.

Speaker 3: He was really walkin'

Speaker 2: No, it's not. He's evil the whole time.

Speaker 1: Yeah, it's Christopher Lee. Like, he's born to play a villain. You have that, sure. They mention the Necromancer. I'll just tell you, he's that thing that Thred will continue. That's the most I'll say. And they are setting that up here with the stuff with Radagast and the White Council. None of that is paid off here, so it feels very unsatisfying in this movie in itself. They're also doing this really frustrating thing where they're having to create extra conflict. And... I rewatched that White Council scene today, because I was thinking about it and started really bothering me. And I was like, why is that scene so boring? What do you do to fit, like if you have to put it there, because like, we don't see it in the book, but we get enough implications that it's like, sure, probably there was a conversation like this that happened when they went to Rivendell. So like to show it, if you're gonna go into that, then like, sure, I think it makes enough sense to have that scene to just make it so that later things will not come out of nowhere. The scene itself has a big problem though, which is that it makes Gandalf seem stupid. When Saruman's like, Gandalf, none of what you're talking about is a big deal, I agree with him. Because it's not. It never was meant to be a big deal. What I think you should do is reverse that scene. Like, they've all gathered to be like, we need to talk about something. And all they're really here to talk about is like, Gandalf, what the hell are you doing with these dwarves? We don't want you to do that. Because Gandalf's the one, they're calling him to this meeting, like they have something to say, and he's the one being like, guys, there's a thing we should worry about. You just need to flip that around and have it be, Gandalf's like, hey, I'm on this quest, I'm doing stuff, and they're like, yeah, we need you to worry about some other things that are happening. And he's like, ⁓ but I kind of have this like... fixer-upper thing going with Bilbo. I really want to give him a character arc. And they're like, cool, let that be, because there's bigger things happening. That's all you need to do to fix that scene. Presumably that's how it happens based on what we have in the book. Cut out Radegast showing up, or maybe even have him and have him say like, hey Gandalf, I saw some really concerning stuff over in Mirkwood, and Gandalf's like, oh, well thanks for letting me know, I'm kind of in the middle of something. get back to me if it gets worse, and then he gets to Rivendell and they're like, hey, no, that's stuff Radegast told us about? Yeah, well, he told us to and yeah, you should look into that. I know you're having fun with your dwarf friends, but you should really go look at this. It's as simple as that. And for some reason they have to like flip it around where he's like, are we at peace? And Elrond's like, yes, we're at peace. Elrond is right. Like, they- It is. It's a really simple fix and I- Like, I don't get why they have this need. I'll go off on my other thing that I hate here. But Thorin's elf racism is another thing that's a problem. It's kind of setting up some things for later, but it's just extra conflict. It's not a good allegory. It's not good social commentary on, like, actual bigotry. He's just elf-racist because...

Speaker 3: It's also funny how he gets rejected though in the prologue. Cause dude is- he looks at him he's like...

Speaker 2: Not just that This is something that I hate I don't hate it because sometimes it's funny But there are points in like other stories where they'll do that where it's like you see the army in the distance The leaders are looking at each other from several thousand feet away a mile away You don't see his eyes. You don't see what the fuck he's looking at at all. I'm sorry I should stop swearing now now Jelani's made me self-conscious about it

Speaker 1: We have a Patreon episode to get all of that out. I'm not gonna be censored.

Speaker 2: You're not wearing binoculars. You can't see his eyes. So you don't know what he's looking Yes, you see them turn around, but they're making it look like they're making eye contact with each other. And they're not. Like, I get it. Also, they kind of imply that this is the reason that the whole dwarf race has a problem with elves, because that's a thing in other parts of the lore.

Speaker 3: But if that's only one kingdom...

Speaker 2: It's one kingdom! Like, if this was the main dwarf kingdom, like if this was Moria, fine. It's not. It's not even the main dwarf kingdom. It's a dwarf kingdom. But they very much imply, because again, the epic scale doesn't fit here, but because of the epic scale, I think it implies that they are like, ⁓ this is why all dwarves have a problem with all elves. It's not true. Like, that's not the way that it works.

Speaker 1: Yeah It's not. It almost does this both sides bad thing where it's like, well, if they just could talk to each other, like, it gives a very shallow reading of, like, I think you can do good allegory like that in fantasy contexts. I think it's a little bit of a tired trope, but I'm not, like, I can see it being done well. I don't know if I ever have. Maybe X-Men, but that's not really the same thing.

Speaker 3: available.

Speaker 1: ⁓ your book. Well, I haven't read enough of that to get to— I got to some of it, but I haven't seen all of what you do with that. I think it's like a context you can do it in. With this, they're trying to set up— because like Thranduil, the guy who does the dramatic head turn, will come back. He's a big player in the rest of it. No, this— exclusively in the Hobbit series.

Speaker 3: in this series or Lord of So he does more than one.

Speaker 2: He's gonna come back,

Speaker 1: He comes back in a big way in the other ones, so like... But you don't really need to set it up here. They make, like, Thorin's elf racism, like, a whole thing in this, and it's also kind of inconsistent. Like, the way they present it, he's like, well, the elves didn't help us back in the day, so I don't really want to mess around with them. And then Elrond shows up pretty willing to help them, and he doesn't seem to have any, like, it doesn't have any effect on him. Like, Gandalf's like, come on, man, like, get over it little.

Speaker 3: says and Thorin's like all right yeah yeah Cure's is racism

Speaker 2: We get a hint of the other dwarves also feeling the way that Thorin does because they immediately like, you know, they put Bilbo in the middle and they like, they all go to arms and like they're ready to defend themselves. But then it's like, no, he's offering you food. After that, only Thorin has elf racism. Nobody else does. So this is not like a dwarf thing. This is a Thorin thing. Thorin is just, I guess Thorin is just racist. I don't know.

Speaker 1: If Elrond is going to offer to help, maybe at least give Thorne a moment of like, ⁓ maybe I'm questioning my bigotry a little bit. maybe I shouldn't assume that every elf is out to get me, because this one is coming up clutch for me in this moment and giving me a major key to completing this quest. And also, none of that's in the book. They just stop there and Elrond's like, hey, let me look at the map. Wow, I just unlocked this thing for you. It's a little bit convenient, but like, he's very willing to help. He does not like confirm Thorne's racism. Like he fully challenges it and Thorne seems fully unaffected. He's just like, okay, he doesn't even do a like, this would be a terrible beat. He doesn't even go like, ⁓ you're one of the good ones, I guess. I'm glad they don't do that. But that would be an understandable thing for him to do with this setup. You really should just.

Speaker 2: I I can't read Evan's adaptation now.

Speaker 1: I don't do that there. I completely cut it. I like thought about it because it was in this movie and I was like, do I do something there? And I was like, you know what? I don't fucking care. Like... Yup. That's a person. I know that name. I'm forgetting. Oh, he's an actor. For some reason.

Speaker 3: L. Ron Hubbard.

Speaker 2: Yeah.

Speaker 3: Battlefield Earth Oh, Arthur, Arthur. 1911 to 1986. So he was alive when these came out.

Speaker 2: ⁓

Speaker 1: Good for him. And Tolkien was like, hey, can I name a character after you? I'll make it, I'll disguise it a little.

Speaker 3: Yeah, that's the copy of my homework, but change it over.

Speaker 2: in general, all of it makes this kind of feel like it's not a complete story, which obviously it's trilogy. So it's not going to feel like a total complete story. But there's a way to wrap up an arc or several arcs for these characters and have it work and make sense. and they just don't do that here because again, they're trying to add too much scale to it. I have a couple of like comparisons. kind of turn this partially into like another topic, which is like what does make prequels work, especially prequels of like really successful franchises. And I had one big example that like, I don't like talking about Harry Potter anymore because I don't like JK Rowling, but I think Fantastic Beasts is a really good example of like the same kind of thing that they're doing here. In that, it's sort of a small scale story that they're doing, even smaller scale than this because it's not a real book. It is a fake guide to like magical animals. and they're creating a backstory for the author of that. And that's what the movies are about. But a big complaint that people had for those movies is that they were trying to turn it into a five movie epic wizard war film set in like the World War I, World War II era, like in the twenties to the forties. And it just didn't work because the tone of the main story is like a cozy animal rescue type story, not even animal rescue, but like a cozy like finding magical animals type story and all that they do there is they add in another evil figurehead that's basically Voldemort. They add in like an evil sect of wizards to fight and they make it so that like the main character needs to choose a side eventually which makes no sense given that he's just a zookeeper. They kind of do that here where this is meant to be like a cute standalone adventure and they try to turn it into Lord of the Rings again because they hinted all this Lord of the Rings shit and they add in the whole Azog thing and I think they later imply something about like...

Speaker 1: Don't spoil the thing I think you're about to spoil. But I think I know what you're talking about.

Speaker 2: But you know what I'm talking about. Well, I'll get into it next time. But the point is, like, the scale of this is not working. I think there's good examples of this kind of thing that they could do. Like, this is not a whole trilogy, but like Prey is a good example of how to do a prequel well, I think, because it's got a lot of the same tropes of the other movies, but it's also got a great protagonist, really good themes, a clear character arc, and enough of a twist on things to make it feel different. But it also doesn't ⁓ JJ Abrams

Speaker 3: Bye for now.

Speaker 2: but basically like people had issues with it for the tonal differences between the two. But the way that they reboot that kind of it ties into the old stuff. It respects the old stuff enough as far as like at least the narrative goes and the changes make sense and they use that as a good way to like modernize it. Not to like spoil too much of what those movies are, but like they give us an in-lore reason for why things are different. Another example I had was like Pearl, which is another standalone movie. It's a whole different feeling and tone from the movie that it's a prequel of, which is X. And it expands on a character that people wanted to know more about. Like there was a level of demand there for that. So it justifies its own existence.

Speaker 3: Well Maxine too, It's a prequel sequel, isn't it?

Speaker 1: No, it's-

Speaker 2: It's a sequel. It's a sequel to X. That is set after X. That's a little bit of a different conversation. I think it's good, but that's a little bit of a different thing. I feel like watching The Hobbit, like Lord of the Rings isn't meant to add to The Hobbit and The Hobbit doesn't really add to Lord of the Rings. You know what I mean? So like that's part of why it doesn't really work here.

Speaker 1: They're meant to be, like, mildly referential to each other. Like, the way the Lord of the Rings movies tackle it is pretty decent. they give a couple of indications of, Bilbo went on this adventure, he gives the ring to Frodo, so we have to— we have to know a little bit about him. We have to know that he got it from Gollum. There's a couple small things that are just, like— ⁓ remember what Bilbo says in his adventures. But like, that movie never expects you to have read The Hobbit. I don't feel like it does. I had read it before I saw those movies, so I'm not the best person to say. I think you could have taken a similar approach here. If you have seen Lord of the Rings, there might be a couple of things that are nice for you, like they show Elrond. I'm trying to think of something that wouldn't be like Super Cringe. But you could make some light little references to Lord of the Rings that are just like little Easter eggs for somebody. Instead, they throw in the whole White Council. Yeah. It's just that is really just there for like, we're gonna do Lord of the Rings stuff. The prequel thing is is a big problem. The book really isn't a prequel. I think if you took more of a spin-off approach, like, I mean, for a recent example, Night of the Seven Kingdoms, Actually, I don't know if that's the best one, because I think that kind of assumes that you've seen Game of Thrones, but I don't know that it's crazy necessary.

Speaker 2: Not from what I've seen. At least not from episode 1.

Speaker 1: I think at most it's like, you should know who the houses are, so it doesn't give you so little. Maybe a better example for like a prequel that does it well is X-Men First Class. I think I saw that before, see, I think that might have been my first X-Men movie. And there are references, like it sets up who these characters are gonna be. You have your Wolverine cameo, you have a couple of names that maybe come back. I don't know, is Stryker referenced in that? I don't know, he might be.

Speaker 3: He's an ex too.

Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, he's in X2, yeah.

Speaker 1: I don't know if he's in first class, like,

Speaker 2: Well, his character isn't, his father is, and he's mentioned.

Speaker 1: Okay, so like you have a little bit there, like I did not feel lost when I watched First Class as my first X-Men movie.

Speaker 2: They established the characters really well.

Speaker 1: Yeah, it does its own thing. I think that works as its own story.

Speaker 3: overarching villain in Magneto.

Speaker 1: Well, they have Kevin Bacon in that one, but you have complete character arcs. Like, it doesn't mess with, as far as I know, it doesn't really mess with anything that came in the previous movies. Like, the continuity is all there. It's also set, and The Hobbit is like this too, it's set like 40 plus years before the like, main trilogy that's already there. So as a prequel, like, you're not having to do like, the Rogue One thing of getting us right up to the minute of... when the other thing started. You don't have to justify everything. It's only doing a couple of characters from the new ones, and it's just kind of getting them there at the end. you can cringe a little bit when, like, Charles loses, like, when he gets paralyzed. It's like, ⁓ that feels like, okay, yeah, I guess you had to get there. Like, a little convene.

Speaker 2: It does feel like doing that specifically to like set that up.

Speaker 1: There's some like fanservice-y things, but their focus there was not so much to be like, hey, look at the X-Men thing. It's, let's make a good X-Men story in this world on its own. And I think they should have tried to do that more here, because that's what the story is kind of meant to be anyway. It did that approach.

Speaker 2: the story needed x-men.

Speaker 3: Well, it had.

Speaker 1: It does have Magneto. They could have, they absolutely could have hit up. I don't want to say that they had First Class as an example because that came out like a year before this, so they would have been deep in production already. They also didn't need it. Like, you don't need a better example. The book was there.

Speaker 2: ⁓ yeah, no, there's no way. They just watched X-Men Origins Wolverine and then they did that.

Speaker 1: Maybe. Or a lot of people have compared this to the prequel trilogy of Star Wars.

Speaker 3: Revenge of the set because it had action the other two suck

Speaker 2: I ⁓

Speaker 3: It's so memeable.

Speaker 1: not sure if that's going to be a reaction here, because Battle of Five Armies, as its name suggests, has the most action. I'll leave it at that.

Speaker 3: but it's memeable too.

Speaker 2: This is a bad example of like how to do a prequel because it relies so much on like you having seen the other movies and it also references them way too much to the point where this doesn't feel like its own thing. The narrative that it's supposed to be here is distracting.

Speaker 1: I agree with your prequel point. Like, I think forcing this to be a prequel is... it weakens it. My one other point with this topic of cramming too much in... I really felt this time, like, this movie has, like, just such ups and downs for me. The other two are mostly downed, because they get rid of the good stuff. But, like, every other scene, I'm like, ⁓ that's a good scene. And then the next scene after it is a bad one. Or just a boring one. You go from... the terrible Stone Giants 4D ride scene to a scene where we have a good character moment with Bilbo wanting to go back. So I'm like, well, alright, like, this is a good scene here. But I never get any momentum because all of the other bad stuff, like, makes it just not fit together because you're not focusing on the good stuff. And I think... That can be frustrating in any context. I think I've said that about The Boys, where like, there are characters I'm interested in, so I just kind of tune out when we're with the people I'm not. That's a TV show where it's a little more acceptable. With this, you don't have as much of an excuse, but the scene I felt it the most was the riddle scene. Jelani, you were kind of hating on that. I think it's one of the stronger scenes in this. But I think it's weakened by the fact that... I forgot that they don't cut away from it. I remembered it being that they cut back to the Goblin tunnels during the Riddles game. They actually let that play out in full. And it threw me off, because I was like, we haven't had a scene go for this long. Like, we've had some long scenes, some are too long, but there hasn't been, like, a scene that's been allowed to breathe this much with only two characters. It feels anomalous. And in some cases, I might think that that's to draw more attention to it. Our last episode was Wake Up Dead Man, and we have that moment where it like stops fully to let Father Judd talk to this woman. That's doing a thematic thing. It's killing the pacing to draw our attention to it. And I feel like the riddle scene almost hits like that, but it's not for a purpose. If you didn't have so many other things distracting from Bilbo's arc, I think that scene would fit better. The scene itself is fine, but because you've surrounded it by all of this extra stuff, I don't even know if there's a good sense of what we're supposed to be focusing on. If we keep Bilbo as the main focus, you kind of understand what that scene is doing for his arc. And Jelani, it doesn't really sound like you did. Like, it didn't feel like that hit for his arc at all the way you talked about it. I don't blame you.

Speaker 3: I have no idea what it has to do with

Speaker 1: My reading of it has always, or at least in, like, my more recent appreciation of it, that's the first challenge that he has to get out of by himself. Because prior to this, you've had Gandalf getting them out of the situation with the trolls, and then you will have him getting them out of the situation with the goblins at the trees. that's a place where he's fully on his own, and he just has to fend for himself. So it's kind of proving to him like, ⁓ hey, I can, I have a bit of luck on my side.

Speaker 3: And then there was also the elves with the wargs and them saving them.

Speaker 1: Yeah, that's also not in the book. But sure, can add to that pattern. At the very least, like, he hasn't had to fend for himself like this. So that is an important beat in that sense. And you don't feel it like that. It's a really long beat, but I don't think it would feel that long if you let the scene with the trolls breathe. That's another one that's only, like, pretty much in the book. It's first chapter, the dwarves show up. Second,

Speaker 3: Yeah.

Speaker 1: Chapter is the thing with the trolls. Third, they get to Rivendell. Fourth, they get captured by the goblins. Fifth, he has his encounter with Gollum. They're very episodic about it in the book. Like, the chapters are divided up very much into, here's a little scene. And, like, those are the things that are included in the book. So when you have it divided up that way, and you don't add in all of this extra stuff, you're able to feel the weight of it more. And... I think the fact that we have all of these other things, even when there are good moments, like, I think they still take the time to give Bilbo an arc, but you're so distracted by the other stuff that, like, we haven't seen him really do anything for a little while by the time you get to the scene with Gollum, and we kind of forget a little bit that he's the main character, because, like, there's so many scenes where... You're just showing him among the dwarves. You might not even really see him. I think the animated movie, despite moving too fast, Bilbo is the main focus in any shot that he's in. Even just that little visual language thing really matters. It also doesn't add all these extra things, but when you have the beat of Bilbo wants to return to Rivendell, we haven't checked in with him for like 20 minutes at that point. Even if it's a good beat in itself, it loses the weight. So that's just like a thing that I noticed this time with like, even when there are good things in your movie, having too many other things that are not working, it also just has a side effect of making the good stuff worse. And that's a lesson to take away from this. The extra lore might be interesting. I feel like this movie should be a director's cut. You could make a two-hour cut of this movie. that is better and gets rid of a lot of extra stuff, like get rid of all the Radagast things, get rid of the extra Azog things, still keep them at the climax if you have to. Like, if you are- if everything is shot and you're in the editing bay deciding what should be released, you could cut out parts of this movie to make it better. And I think literally just the act of getting rid of them makes the better parts sing a little bit stronger. Sure, you have to make three movies. You didn't need to make all of them this long, you could have made three two-hour movies. And I think this series would be remembered a bit better as a result. It's too many. It is absolutely too much. But clearly you make three movies because you want money, but length doesn't determine how much money you make. So just cut them down. You don't really lose anything there.

Speaker 2: That's still too many.

Speaker 3: But the longer they're in the theater, the more snacks they'll get.

Speaker 1: When there's no intermission.

Speaker 2: Yeah, it actually is more cost effective to do shorter movies because you can do more showings in a day.

Speaker 1: Yeah, that's often an incentive for theaters.

Speaker 2: Yeah, that's why they don't want to show like the Snyder cut.

Speaker 3: Who's the business guy here?

Speaker 2: Not you. Wait, what are you talking about?

Speaker 3: I'm asking, ⁓

Speaker 1: It's because he has all the money.

Speaker 2: That's actually very true. I get what you're saying though, like it would be a more focused narrative without all this other crap in there, which is what I've kind of been trying to say. Honestly, you could have cut out Azog entirely, including the ending. Like he doesn't need to be at the end. If anything, if they wanted to change it, they could have just made it the goblins and then done the eagles because it's in the book. Fine, whatever. But I think the ending would have been significantly stronger if it had ended with Bilbo having his moment of like saying, I'm to help you take it back if I can. They look at the mountain, the movie ends. Yeah, and then they're in the next one and no they also and then obviously we get the hint about smog That's fine. Leave that in there That's a good way to hint at what's coming on because they're like, ⁓ I think everything's gonna be fine now And we can see that it's absolutely not that

Speaker 1: Last shot with his eye? Goes hard. No notes on that shot. Last shot. That was the end of my notes. Did you guys have anything else you want to say? There's gonna be a lot more Hobbit Talk, so we're not done after this, but...

Speaker 2: So good, it's behind you right now. It's so good. I think I'm good. I'm so tired. I think the Hobbit's broken my spirit and I don't think it's gonna get better with the other two. I actually realized I have more problems with the other two watching only this movie because I realized how much worse it gets in some parts. And what's funny, Smaug was my favorite of the three. I don't think that's gonna be the case now.

Speaker 1: Yeah, ⁓ I mean, we'll get to it. I'll save my thoughts for that. Jelani, thank you. I mean, I should really thank both of you. Angel, you knew what you were getting into, so I almost, I don't know if you deserve more or less thanks for that, but thank you to both of for sticking this out.

Speaker 2: I forgot so much. It's, it's worstest.

Speaker 1: Yeah. Thank you. I really do appreciate both of you going through this and I mean I'm suffering with you but I kind of chose it so... But I asked it of you and I do appreciate that. Our next episode... Well, I don't know what we're gonna do for the main channel. I think we have talked about Daredevil as our next episode. Daredevil born again. ⁓ But as you're listening... Yes.

Speaker 2: We're Daredevil. Talk about it, we're doing it. We're making you watch Daredevil, Evan.

Speaker 1: We're doing that. We'll lock it in here. As you are listening to this today, our Patreon also has an episode, just one episode, about Desolation of Smaug and Battle of Five Armies. We made it one episode. But we haven't done that yet, so we don't know what that's gonna be. That's out there. Thank you to our patrons who do support us already. Good time to join if not. ⁓ Yeah. Thank you for su-

Speaker 3: Shout out to y'all, man.

Speaker 2: Just Patreon again.

Speaker 1: Uh, $1. I think there's a $1 tier and a $3 tier, but you get the— I don't think I put anything significantly different on them. So, the bonus episodes, uh, we'll also be having our Season 7 Tangents episode up there, hopefully soon. Yeah, you have a And there's a lot of good—

Speaker 3: You have a dollar.

Speaker 2: If you us yell about two movies for only one dollar.

Speaker 1: Well, there's a lot more than that too. But yes, even that would be worth the one dollar. You could do it just for that. I have some rants prepared for the next one. If you do not want to watch the Hobbit movies, but want some Hobbit stuff, my scripts are free. They are not on Patreon. The link is in the description for this. And then also, again, there's the video that I put out about my process that dropped today that's available now. I honestly do think it will be a good I won't expect everyone else to like them as much as I do, I hope that it alleviates the disappointment of these movies somewhat, because that's a large reason why I wrote them. That's free, that's available, thank you for listening. Our logo is by Kelsey Hendry, the show is on Instagram, TikTok, BlueSky, at INT Analysis Pod. I'm on Instagram, BlueSky, and Letterboxd at ev underscore Wes. Where are you guys?

Speaker 3: Instagram at Jelani T Kelly still no letterbox I promise for next time so probably by the time you guys see this I have a letterbox I don't know what my username is though so I don't have one

Speaker 2: We'll drop it in the next main episode, yeah?

Speaker 3: I mean I'm an actor if you're willing to pay me for my time hit me up I'm on actors access and backstage right now and buy my books I have some books on Amazon if you just look up my name. You could even just look up Jelani Kelly, I think, and my book will pop up. Descended, all descended stuff. Descended Awakening and Descended Anticipation are my two novels out right now. Then I have kids books, Descended for Kids, out on Amazon right now. If you want to dive into a new world that has less fantastical names, but superheroes.

Speaker 1: And Angel?

Speaker 2: I am on Instagram at angelmichelle.film, letterboxd at Serenity Cinema. I will probably actually be putting up a review of this movie because apparently I have a lot of thoughts. I didn't realize how many thoughts, but I will. I may put them all up at once, honestly, because I'm to have a lot of stuff about the other two, I think. I know Battle of the Favre Armies upset me last time. It's going to upset me more this time. So we'll see how that goes. But yeah, follow me there. I put a lot of lists up, so. be fun stuff to look at there too.

Speaker 1: Alright, thank you guys for listening. We hope you'll join us to finish the journey on Patreon. I may not be sober for that, but I'll have- we'll have a lot to say. Yeah, I don't know if- I don't know what I'll be drinking, but I don't know if I can get through those movies sober by myself. So, we'll see. We'll see you guys next time. Thank you.

Speaker 2: I'll bring the Jaeger. Bye!

Speaker 3: Stay safe.