Everything Wrong With The Fellowship Of The Ring In 7 Minutes Or Less 

Am I the only girl in the world who fancies legolce? Yes ok just me never mind

+YOLO Gamer Legolas you mean? The real question is what girl DOESNT fancy him XD

+kassuday thank god I'm not the only one XD sorry if I spelt ur name wrong don't judge I'm a terrible speller I'm the worst in my class

+YOLO Gamer lol u try hard to be relatable eh

+YOLO Gamer I am a male and he is my second favourite, after Aragorn.

Oh there are sins in these movies if nostalgia glasses are removed. Plenty of them. Just elvish swords not glowing when they are supposed to glow is all over all six movies. In fact it's in the first montage of this very movie that you are claiming is perfect. Orcs with bad teeth, changing characters, not understanding the plot a couple places, distances way too short etc. MT is supposed to be like 1000 KM from Mt Doom, yet it's clearly visible on the horizon as if it's just nearby when observed from the city walls. Frodo and Sam can clearly see it from Emyn Muil too, which is like 2000 Km from Mt Doom. Have you ever tried looking above 2000 Km of marshland and volcanic desert? You can't see that far clearly even on a good day. At sea level the horizon is about 5 Km, and the higher you go the longer you can see. But not clearly, as if things are toys on your table. Hazy and far away. Everything looks like it was made with CGI in a movie studio rather than real, which is probably because it was. No one who made LotR has ever seen a mountain range in the distance. There's haze and things. Mountains usually look blue at a great distances, because that's the color of the air in between presumably. It looks fake as shit in these movies.

@@politicallycorrectredskin796 but Arda, the world of middle earth is actually supposed to be flat, this is why you can see things very far away.

@@@dumusstarbeiten5063 Originally, yes. But the world was bent into a sphere after the Numenorian invasion of the west. That's why only elves can get there at this point in their magical, straight-sailing boats.

@@politicallycorrectredskin796 oh sorry i didnt knew that.

@@@dumusstarbeiten5063 No problem! I'm afraid I have wasted parts of my youth reading Silmarillion several times.

Sean Cooper this was 6 years ago when his videos were way shorter

Sean Cooper I think there’s one reason for that: this movie is so fucking great!

yeah and 90% of this sins are bullshits

It's a really bad movie. Snoozed through it. Couldn't care about any character. Highly overrated

Yet it's a 3 h long movie.

That and dwarves are incredibly stubborn. :)

that's just the thing, basically any question one can ask about the movies is answered by the books :D

But this is CinemaSins, not BookSins.

I thought the movie explained that pretty well. Not directly but through interactions as different races came in contact with the One Ring.

It did affect dwarwes.. and Elven rings were not made by Sauron

2%

3% I have to say I didn't find them.. I'm sad

Where the hell is Tom Bombadil in that shot?

@@clearlyeerie2431 What? You can not be a LotR fan if you do not know Tom Bombadil. You never read the books, did you? Sad, sad. 🤯😪🙄

@@amara8092 Don't you get me wrong, but I've read the books, I suppose that I just wrote comment a little bit incorrectly. The author of the video said that there was Tom Bombadil in this shot and sadly either we can't see him either it was a joke It's really good that I am not the only one who tried looking for him there😅 BoOkS aRe SoRt Of BeTtEr ThAn ThE mOvieS

Oh nooo! Islidur fell into the fire! what ever shall we do? OHHH THE HUMANITY!!!

the best part was it was about bilbo telling the story of the hobbit

Agree thankfully Peter Jackson was loyal to the source material

@@Skyebright1 He was far away loyal from the source material.

@@Skyebright1 He wasn't completely loyal to the source material but he had Respect for it something Percy Jackson's director didn't care for

What Percy Jackson movies?

@@RokuHanmar dont bother finding out. Its sad honestly.

Gimli is a jerk.

Somehow I knew that he would add a Matrix thing in there!

Also, Arwen didn’t conjure horses in the river, that was Gandalf. Arwen only caused the river to flood.

In the original novels it was actually Elrond who caused the flooding (he had a magical Nazgul proximity alarm or something like that)

@@channelknightfadran7901 I remember! (Huge fan of both books and movies) And they gave that ability to Arwen in the movies.

Eagles are not.. far more powerful than wizards

All correct but the eagles comment

Which is funny since if they actually knew about this channel they would know that the sins have nothing to do with the book but the movie which is why 90% of all adaptions the books are always better.

Yeah... no. I'm a Tolkien fanboy, and i absolutely loved this.

Best moment of my life :)

They are sinning movie not books. For example in the movie ringwraights power to detect the one ring is not properly explained so its sinable.

And the part where he is saying what the f is sauron reaching for.can be explained if you played the games sauron is obviously trying to dominate him.

Smith really changed...

"Tell me, how are you going to throw the ring into Mount Doom... with no hands."

+Luke Bowler Yes, but CinemaSins solely focuses on the movies (hence CinemaSins). It's explained in the books, but not in the movie, so that's why he counts it as a sin.

+Luke Bowler The dwarfs make a huge secret abaut their real names. Gimli, Thorin, Gloin, ect. are their "public" names. So the rings couldn't get in ther mind

+Luke Bowler Sauron teach the maker of the rings on how to make them, but then he did the elves ones on his own, so those arent infused with sauron power.

+Luke Bowler From the book, page 351 at the council of Elrond, Elrond says, "'The Three were not made by Sauron, nor did he ever touch them. ... They are not idle. But they were not made as weapons of war or conquest: that is not their power. Those who made them did not desire strength or domination or hoarded wealth, but understanding, making and healing, to preserve all things unstained. ... But all that has been wrought by those who wield the Three will turn to their undoing, and their minds and hearts will become revealed to Sauron, if he regains the One. It would be better if the Three had never been. That is his purpose.'"

+Sqqr If he solely focuses on the movies then why did he mention Tom Bombadil being left out of the movie?

Don't you think the magic of the Ring would make that impossible? Maybe it the molten metal wouldn't cling to it, or maybe it would just crumble away...

Iron steam? Your understanding of physics is cute ^_^

Because the Ring could only be destroyed in the fires of Mt. Doom. Meaning that NOTHING else could destroy it.

nobody mentioned destroying the ring here.read carefully.he wants to cover it in iron.

epicpolyphony wouldn't it be Chemistry and not Physics?

Jack Daone as he's said 1,000 times, THE BOOKS DO NOT FUCKING MATTER

Also, it's stated that the Ring did not have the intended effect on the Dwarves. It didn't control them but made them greedier and more gold hungry, causing them to dig deeper and unleash forces that ultimately led to the loss of the Dwarf rings.

Cresitan258 the movie is based on the book so it does matter.

NNNNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

***** If the movie is an adaptation of the book, then no, it's not supposed to be independent from the book, necessarily. Especially when the book itself didn't explain the origin of the Nazgul and how Sauron used the One Ring to enslave them, but the supplementary materials that came later on.

The dwarven rings did screw them over though. It gave them riches which attracted dragons. No bueno.

Sauron made them, and he is a MAIA!

The nine rings were made specifically for a certain nine kings of the time. In middle earth, humans are the most prolific race that is nascent as the dwarves and elves are dying out so it makes sense to make rings that would presumably allow Sauron first to control what the kings did when they were in power and then to control them as mighty wraith servants when they died. The rings for the dwarves and elves would be taken by them and used to build great works in all the places where men do not dwell, the depths of the greatest forests and the deeps of the world under the mountains. When the time came, Sauron would use the One ring to claim all of these realms. Much better this way than to get himself another ten wraiths. Also, if he did the same trick to the elves and dwarves that he did with the men, he would also have to manipulate those races leaders' every move which would be a pointlessly demanding endeavour given that he'll be able to claim all they create with their rings anyway.

+Puppywinkles Sauron made Celebrimbor, an elf, smith the 9 rings.

No, it was Cerebrimbor. An Elf.

A lot of this is just for fun.

True but I prefer when cinema sins do movies that are genuinely littered with sins. It's OK to have a few remarks like the making of triologies joke but it seems to just be a lot of basic sins with little thought put in. They are just going for big and/or classic movies for the bigger watching audience.

Gimli grabbed the axe from the dwarf next to him.

and ironically, the narrator herself, Galadriel.

Everything Wrong with 2001 in 2001 minutes or less

the Shining!!!

NintendoHighSchool it's going to be less

I think that might cause all of reality to come to a halt, and all of the atoms in the universe to explode at the speed of light...

It so perfectly fit, too!

How could they miss that?!

CinemaSins have to explain us something !

Even if that's true, that makes very little sense. Why would he pick up some other dude's axe, especially since these dwarves seem so dedicated to their weaponry? So it would still hold as a sin in our little world.

The Doors of Durin were built by both Elves and Dwarves and were made to help facilitate trade between the Elves and Dwarves of that region. The Doors were made in the Second Age, when there was great friendship and trading alliances between the two races in that region. Celebrimbor himself was one of the two main craftsmen who designed and built them. This entrance to Moria was a symbol of friendship and commerce between Elves and Dwarves. So with that in mind, the fact that the password to enter Moria would be the Sindarin word for "friend" (mellon) makes perfect sense, especially considering most people who enter Moria from the West of the Misty Mountains in that Age would have been Elves.

MmAWC333 Right, I remember reading about how the guy who made the rings of power himself Celebrimbor helped make it. But was that explained in the movie? That's all exposition in the book chapter when they reach the doors.

fwwaller The history of the Doors of Durin are not explained in the movie. It's just background lore that's there nonetheless. I'm sure many people have wondered why an Elvish password was used on a door to a Dwarf kingdom, and then looked up the history of the Doors and discovered this interesting backstory. Part of the allure to Lord of the Rings, in both book form and movie form, is the feeling that an incredibly complex history behind what is shown to be rather mundane is always in the background. It makes Middle-earth feel very authentic.

MmAWC333 It's kind of the movie's job to answer questions like that though, it's not like it would have taken more than few seconds of screen time to clarify that, hell it would've made for a nice addition to the extended cut, rather than Gandalf chewing Pippin out for getting on his nerves, or was that in the theatrical version too? I get the two mixed up sometimes.

fwwaller It's the job of the books and movies to tell a story, not describe all the details of every nuance of backstory. Explaining all the nuances of places, events, and people during the story would outright ruin it and bog it down. The backstory is there because it's backstory; things to learn about later and to wonder about until you research them. Explaining the details of Second Age Elf and Dwarf trade alliances and explaining who built the Doors serves no purpose to move the plot and Tolkien and Jackson left it ambiguous for a good reason. It's a fantasy story; mystery and hints at backstory are an integral part of this mode. Backstory is best when it's hinted at, not outright explained from the get-go.

not actual rhymes, the words are just identical (all & all, them & them).

Lucas Cottica Silveira I was referring to find them vs. bind them.

Sarah Bostrom Aren't "them" and "them" the same words?

Yes but "find" and "bind" are not.

+Sarah Bostrom Good point, but the words also rhyme in the language of Mordor, which Gandalf speaks at the council of Elrond "Ash nazg durbatuluk, ash nazg gimbatul, ash nazg thrakatuluk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul" Tolkien was a professor of languages who invented the languages of the elves and then wrote the stories so that his languages would come to life. So it's not a surprise that his poetry rhymes. But you are right, it is too convenient!

LOTR are classics though

Andrew Ryan Aren't 'classic's at least partially classed as 'classics' after some longevity? Fellowship isn't that old yet (it'll be 12 years since it's release in six days time).

misstrussteLgbTq Fellowship of the ring was published in 1954. Besides, the time a film/book has been out doesn't create how classic it is.

misstrussteLgbTq considering that many people have called it the greatest fantasy movie ever made, I'd call it a classic. Besides, twelve years might not seem that old, but nearly all the fantasy films you see nowadays try to take a piece out of LOTR.

The book could have been made in 1810, but that has no bearing on the film. Gulliver's Travels was written in 1726 but would you consider the 2010 film a classic? By definition a classic must have a vast number of years behind it. Most films are copying the shaky cam technique as used in 'found footage' horror films but that doesn't mean that what they're taking it from is classic or even good, it shows the lack of creativity and originality in those that have followed. You can call LOTR's good, you can call it acclaimed, but technically speaking you can't really call it a classic.

some of these aren't even sins... especially not the smoking weed one.

Hugo Harrabin This is literally the entire point of almost every sin he's done xD

I agreed with all the twilight ones...

@@winterleia9027 huh, good theory

Elrond, and Gandalf created the flash flood (not Tsunami) and Glorfindel had given Frodo his horse. Arwen doesn't even really appear in the books other than being mentioned a bare handful of times as being as fair as Luthien and Aragorns love interest. Other than that she does NOTHING but sew Aragorn's "Standard of the King" for when he finally enters Gondor. She's barely even in the story.

Yet he can use it on minor conveniences like teleporting and being all major doom on Bilbo? :3

Nerd!!!!!!!

but why did they forbid it?

He can use it all the time but he cant use it to save the World of intervine to much.

Carrot Gamang Yep. That's it.

That would take forever. Hell, I could name at least 20 on my own, and that was when I was a kid.

Tiger Lily This video proves otherwise

Andy Miller -__-' Don't you feel clever?

Tiger Lily Yes, yes I do.

No movie is without a sin

A lot of this is just bullshit

Why?

This is the internet, where people enjoy watching people pick on things until the things picked on are the ones they like. Then it's horrible and unfunny. You'll see this in more than half of the EWW videos.

It actually works better if you are a fan of the subject you're parodying. Otherwise, you end up in "Epic Movie" territory. Plus, it's more fun if you enjoy the material they're parodying. assuming it's a good parody, because a bad parody can rarely be saved from being crap.

agree

Smoke Longbottom Leaf Everyday

Long live Bilbo Swaggins!

Thank you. Someone who gets it. Fantards everywhere lol.

And pretty much none of the sins shouldnt be there

To make a fucking trillogi u idiot

they make a point of showing him not being able to hold the ring

Gobsmacked29 He could make Frodo wear it, then pick up Frodo on the eagle...

cr9527 Indeed, or have the eagle pick it up, whatever...

Reasons why the eagles didnt just take Frodo and the ring: 1) No affiliation between The Shire and The Great Eagles (Hobbits couldn't be like, "yo, fly me to mordor") due to geography and history. 2) Eagles are too proud to carry whoever the fuck asks, trust must be built, as seen in much lore - it's generally a life debt concept or a more mystical relation. E.g. Thorin being 'carried' - crucual word here - because he could potentially eliminate the threat of Smaug. Thoough he hasn't earned the right to ride. Or. Gandalf being an Astari, who links to the Valar sky lords. Finally 3) Bit dangerous for a few eagles to fly from the Shire to Mordor with the threat of the Fell creatures that the Nazgul ride (winged nazgul).

while this is true, i would point out that the axe he broke when he attempted to destroy the ring wasn't actually his axe; you will notice if you watch the film carefully that he takes it from where it rests against the seat of the dwarf next to him

Goblins are orcs.

They're the same thing in Middle Earth.

I thought goblins were mutated dwarves and orcs were mutated elves

SurrealKeenan Where did you hear that? I don't think that's in Tolkien's canon anywhere.

Poplopo I don't know. I'm pretty sure that orcs at least are twisted former elves.

The books don't matter, this is CINEMA sins. If it isn't explained even if it was explained in the book, it is still the movie's sin, so I don't get why your annoyed with it. I like being able to know the movie is inferior, and the book is better, and explain why.

It's called Cinema Sins, not books sins. If a book is entertaining enough to merge onto the big screen, then someone needs to ensure that the movie version is as cohesive as the book.

To be honest, if a movie doesn't make sense UNLESS you read the book, it's not really doing its job.

Aidan Parr Agreed!

Justin Zarian THE BOOKS DO NOT FUCKING MATTER -CinemaSins, 2013

No they're basically the same in Lord of the Rings

Oh god this is going to spark a huuuuuuuuuuuuuge debate.

***** I dunno man, I asked my Dad this question (he's a huge LOTR fan) when we first watched it and that was the answer he gave me.

***** kind of. It's a bit shaky in the movie mythos how connected they are and in the books they're completely unrelated

Even if they where Goblins, the sword should have turned blue.

Remember that in the Hobbit, Sting glows in Goblin Town until Gollum kills the goblin down the hole, then it goes out. All Elvish blades glow when 'enemies' are close.

TheChubbo55 Not all enemies... it can't identify who you think of as an enemy.... It glows near goblins,orcs and trolls therefore it is a sin.

Ah yes, Isildore, Dumbledore's twin brother. 🙄 I was cringing too.

EEESEALDOOR

Or Sauron

cinema sins did a really crappy job with this video clearly the person who made it never read the books

@@singleta do you mean soron?

Halla

+RachelVlogs nerd

+RachelVlogs Much said here is a sin.

agree😂😂

no

I don't care. I think this film is so so so great. I understand these videos are meant to be funny but any chance I have to talk up LOTR: FOTR, I will take.

youre wrong. there was plenty. but i guess cinemasins should thank you for watching their video anyway.

calicification I didn't watch it.

iforgot87872 you may not actually have watched it, but it matters not since you being here counts as a view. more importantly, do you not know how fucking stupid it is to try to save face for a movie on a video pointing out mistakes of said movie and say that you didnt actually watch the video criticizing the movie? seriously, you are like the worst person imaginable to try to talk up this movie right now.

Did you see my first reply to my comment? I just want to talk up the movie because I love it, I do understand that it's not perfect. But everytime I watch one of these cinemasins videos, half of the reasons are disproven within the film itself, or just nonsensical/ meant to be funny. But why does this upset you so much? I'm representing my favorite movie. I have a right to do that. I actually have seen this video, it was just a long time ago. And I remember, as always, half of the "Sins" are bullshit. But I don't feel like debating this with you. Some are good points, like Sauron reaching out, but the achievement of the movie itself is so much more valuable than a list of a few things that someone with very little effort can point out as "Flaws."

and most can be explained and are no sins. Except the glowing sword bug

Nickzorner the sword glows for orks, not goblins.

Orcs and Goblins are the same in Middle Earth

Orc is the Elvish word for goblin.

Philip Gwyn yeah but peter jackson differentiated the two. His "goblins" as you can see in moria are able to scale walls and walks and runs completely different from orcs. Although peter jackson fucked it up and made a new plot hole in the hobbit movies cause in the hobbit sting glow when both orcs and goblins are close by.

Agreed. The sentence for all these whiners: to share the last sausage hidden in Gandalf's beard.

Of course he does, who doesn't?

LOTR is one of those series you can't hate.

Of course, it's like Jeremy Scott regularly has explained, "No movie is without sin." With that said, regardless of whether or not it's a good movie means nothing when sins are being recounted

its bad

Jeremy Hooper I just watched the movie yesterday and honestly, it’s average at best. Hopefully the next two are better.

@@NOIZis2loud I read the books and could never force myself to sit through the movies. I tried again a year and a half ago and still can't. They are boring as fuck.

@@MentalAmanda you read a fucking book but a movie that is considered one of the best of all time is boring?

@@kirai8174 It isn't my fault that it couldn't hold my attention. And I typically love the genre and thought highly of the books. What more can I say ?

Psyxho Z well then im really sorry for not liking lotr. Because you know... fuck anyone’s opinion

One of the most interesting beings, I mean, is he Illuvatar himself?

its so sad that he wasn't shown in the movies

mobiggcro ... Why ? Tom Bombadil is a pointless character that stops the story dead. Yes, its lore is kinda interesting, but he doesn't contribute anything to the story, in a movie series with already so much to cram into, did we really need 10 minutes of nothingness with Jolly Ol' Bombadil ? The only concrete contribution he makes to the rest of the story is getting the hobbits to find the ancient blades that will, in term, help Merry injure the Witch King of Angmar. That's one bit that is not explained right in the movie, leading to everyone hating the Witch King's death... But really, that wouldn't make it ok for us to suffer through Tom Bombadil for it.

AcetylsaliciIique Some say TB is like Tolkien personification in the book, the love for nature, his joy for the world, actually very deep matter, but was just interesting in the book, I agree with you

YukiGibson There was actually a theory going around that TB is actually a vala just chilling around in Middle Earth. I think it was Aulë and his wife Yavanna. Not too convincing of a theory, but a fun one to entertain

Time?

Erich von Manstein 3:04

R Jackson I don't get it... Could someone explain?

Chance Miles & No, I'm not a boy. It's a joke. Tom was left out of the movies!

Tom Bombadil is a Tolkien character

Actually, the Dwarves that were given the rings didn't just resist, they ended up all dying. The Elves were actually the ones that resisted best.

to be exact: 16 rings were forged under saurons supervision. 3 were made by celebrimbor who happen to be the elven rings. after finding out what sauron planned they gave the 16 away. the 9 of the men turned them into nazgul and 7 to the dwarfes who were too strong to be mind controlled. instead their greed for gold was even greater due to the rings.

+Cedric Buchloh you mean 17. 9 for men, 7 for dwarves, and the one ring.

Ture tho :D #math

I think that the Three, held by the Elves, were made by the Elves without help from Sauron, which means Sauron wasn't able to put his will or magic or whatever into it. That made them less able to be manipulated by Sauron, I think. And then, yes, as soon as they put them on, they figured out Sauron's plan and never used them openly after that.

Following this logic, that were URUK-HAI in the scene later shown. URUK-HAI. NOT ORCS. Face it, both Goblins and Uruk-hai are orcs. Domestic cats and tigers are both felidae, or whatever example you want to use. I would consider the goblins being even more orcish since they are not a strange men/orc-breed.

Well, I wouldn't go as far to say that Goblins WERE Orcs, because they seem to be very differen't from Orcs, but even though they may be technically from the same Genus, I'm not sure that I would call them Orcs, but I get your point.

Feral Equinox Wow, a reasonable person on RU-vid. That's awesome! And to sum up what I know: Goblins and Orcs are pretty much the same thing. For example: I often saw "Goblins" getting called Moria-Orcs. I personally would know no way to explain were Goblins came from if they were not some kind of Orc. There are many many different Orc-breeds, I guess....

Hmm, I totally agree with you with that point. I guess you've changed my mind.

Agreed :D

The extended one is 3:48:00 But the credits take around 20 minutes. So it's like, a 3:25:00 somewhere close to that

most of those sins weren't correct, so I would say about 40 sins maybe

I'm guessing he liked the movie?? There should be lots more sins.

8-happiness nah, this was almost 7 years ago. all of his videos were really short back then.

@Lyric yes, he does like the movie

Ikr!

Even tho the movie didnt really have 54 relevant sins