Everything wrong with AUJ in four minutes or less

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

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

Glad to be of service!

Originally Posted by Aganzir

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

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

Originally Posted by Zigûr

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

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

Originally Posted by G55

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

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

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