My girlfriend watches The Fellowship of the Ring (Extended) for the FIRST time || PART 1 

I hope you could feel the beatiful track The Breaking of the Fellowship, during the last 5 minutes of the movie.

I'm pretty sure the extended editions are on HBO Max

Would love to see a dagonball or dbza series reaction

Would love to see a dagonball or dbza series reaction

do you also have the full reactions available on the Patreon, or only early access to edited videos?

Ikr

Yup atlast the best book adaptation ever in socio fantasy genre

Seen this so many times but my bf bought me this set last Christmas, we watch it every few months 😄

That’s not the 4K set, that’s only blu-ray extended

@@patricgmuer2988 Take a close look when he holds it and briefly opens it..

With good reason!

I cry every time. The basis of modern fantasy being second to derivatives 😭

There is no one on this planet that thinks that right?

@1993DJC that's not necessarily true, it just would have been different. There's plenty more fiction and lore that deal with these subject matters.

Yeah that's sad. Lord of the Rings came way before Potter. I love both franchises but Lord of the Rings is more epic.

@@joshhunt4146 I've heard maybe 3 people say that HP influenced LOTR, and I'm pretty sure 2 of them were being sarcastic. So no, it doesn't really happen that much, it's mostly just a strawman argument made up by a small group within the LOTR fandom

Pretty tight summary. There are videos that spend 30, 40 minutes *trying* to do that.

And Sauron increased his power using the ring as well.

Came here for this

Not to mention that Sauron took the form of an elf which I think was his true form and also lured them into a false sense of security into accepting the 3 rings of power and then betrayed them when he forged the one ring, i think that’s accurate, correct me if I’m wrong please

Sauron and Saruman used to be friends long ago. As for Sauron not being bound to a physical from... Sauron cannot take a body, without the ring he is too weak to do so. And bodies do not weaken the wizards, they are meant to teach, guide and help lead natives of the Middle Earth in their struggle, not fight in their stead. They could fight Sauron directly, but he was building Mordor up for centuries if not longer, it is his place of power, so they would have to use a lot of power to fight him... And last time something like that happened a huge chunk of Middle Earth sank into ocean. So the Wizards each have their own specific task in how to hinder Sauron, Radagast the Brown is mainly concerned with protecting nature that does not speak for itself like plants and animals, two Blue Wizards, Alatar and Pallando (or Morinehtar and Rómestámo, "Darkness-slayer" and "East-helper") who are such good friends they finish each other´s sentences and have pseudo foresight because they remember a lot of blueprints for the world and events in it, they went east to lands controlled by Sauron worshipers to cause long term disruption to his forces there and support the rebellions against him, Gandalf The Grey is meant to find, motivate and raise spirits of those who would fight against Sauron and Saruman the White was supposed to study Sauron and advise the rulers of Middle Earth on how best to oppose him. But while Blue Wizards succeeded in weakening Sauron in the East and South, they also caused magic cults to spring up in those lands (which is not good) and Sauron´s servants probably managed to kill them by the events of the movie, though Tolkien only strongly hinted that and evaded stating with any certainty what was their eventual fate. I can´t write more here without spoilers, but Blue Wizards are some of the best mysteries in Tolkien lore, because we know so little of what they did.

The score of this movies is one of the most beautiful things my ears have heard

A lot of people don't like the first half of the first movie I find. The whole time is spend introducing plot and characters but once you start to see these things in motion I find it gets way more interesting.

I used to listen to the sound track on long road trips as a kid

Awards don’t mean anything. Lot of great films and actors in them not nominated - let alone win

@@Humanipathic in some cases, yes but awards are a general point of grading a movie, and in this case i fell like its totally fair to look at the awards because they really are deserved

I am devastated but that’s just me 😆 LOTR is the Bible to me

I have 7 nephew and nieces, all of whom i've been dreaming of sharing this awesome fictional world with them ever since they were young. Now that they've all grown up and I've introduced the movies to them, none of them like it. They're more into the quick action of Marvel films, or thrillers or horror films. I guess it's always about the instant dopamine rush for them when it comes to movies (which shouldn't be the only way to enjoy films but I aint gonna stop them). Where as a movie like the Fellowship (my favourite) has at least an hour that all takes place in the shire and is mostly talking (my favourite bits). I just accepted that some people won't like it, unfortunately for me all my nephews and nieces are uninterested by it.

@@sameehkins5957 😭 Shame. I grew up reading about the Middle Ages, history, Greek mythology so Lord of The Rings was really really close to home

@@sameehkins5957 shame. Sorry to hear that. At least they have good taste in superheroes.

Literally everyone that has been ignorant to it that long says the same thing. But everyone loves it by the end. They are the closest things to literary and film masterpieces we have.

I would even venture to say there would be no GOT w/o the advances of LOTR. IMHO

This so much. I recently bought the 4k extended editions, and just want to sit down to watch them again after this!

@@ZeroFX1 i just got the day off and found this video. Know how I'll be spending my day ;D

I might call the wedding off

All they do is walk In these movies I don’t know why but I could never sit down and watch any of the lord of the rings without falling asleep or getting bored

@@mrgamerwatch100 fair enough, not everyone is gonna like all the same movies, i do appreciate their honesty in their reactions, rather have genuine people than fake reactions to gain likes etc

@@mrgamerwatch100 Short attention span?

@@YetiCoolBrother he's making a Clerks 2 joke reference. Hence his profile picture.

Bro let them finish the movies without knowing all that stuff. It kinda spoils some parts of what's next don't you think?

What does gandolf the white signify then?

Did you realize: gimli is the only character that performs an action intended to destroy the ring?

@@Bubba_1776 he died and then God said: go back down there your job isn't done yet, here's a little power boost.

Came to the comments to make sure someone had already jumped on this!

thx you for the explanation. I'm not a huge fan, but I've watched all three and because I'm a nerd in other fandoms, it's always good to know more about the lore and explanation nevertheless

Great comment and probably the most important one to make for this point in the movie.

@Suike Yeah, "ambition" might be a better word for it than "power." Appreciate the follow up.

@Suike Pretty sure that J K Rowling took the concept of the ring and applied it to Harry Potter, because the 'one ring' is essentially Sauron' Horcrux. It has part of his soul, it can corrupt others and only by destroying it, can you destroy Sauron as well.

This better get comment of the day

Ok bro, but who asked?

@@wooshbait36 it's an appreciation post, it doesn't have to be...

Basically Angels. Although Gandalf is something more like an Arch Angel.

Also gandalf shows alot of respect for Galadriel and Elrond as even though they are Elves, they have been inmiddle earth longer than gandalf who (correct me if I'm wrong) was sent to middle earth after isildur took the ring.

Also for when it come up in Part two: the reason Gandalf can take on the ‘foe on the bridge’ (spoiler) is cause they are both ‘Angel’ like beings, more or less on the same power level of existence… they just serve different sides and have chosen different forms in the mortal world.

They were forbidden to take any direct actions against Sauron. Their task was to guide the free people.

Their designation within Maiar was known as Istari, or wizards. There were five sent to middle earth. Gandalf the Grey, Saruman the White, Radagast the Brown, and the two blue wizards, Alatar and Pallando who not much is known as they were sent to the east of middle earth and weren’t heard of again.

I agree!

Oh wow. That is eye-opening. I should read up on Tolkien himself a bit more. I had assumed LOTR was a giant metaphor for his experiences with the war, and primarily so.

Me too haha

Lol I watched the Extended editions too and when I watch the non extended editions I'm like "wait, wheres that one scene?" Like through the whole movie. The extended editions really are the best to watch

@@nerdcantina5097 completely agree, I went to see them in theater recently but it was the theatrical versions and I felt like I did miss a good bit

I can never watched the theatrical versions anymore, Extended or nothing! 😂

Cool, thanks!

Do... people not know this?

@@Eidlones English is not my first language, and while I believe my vocabulary is great some things like this that come from earlier sayings etc. I might not know 🙂

@@CloudburnGaming Good point.

@@Eidlones: Most people know that "eavesdropping" means to overhear something; extremely few people know the etymological origin of the word.

Yer exactly it not really a film for young kids they prefer quick action films but saying that I first watched this film at 7 and I loved and become obsessed with LOTR world

@@declanhardie9273 my dad was obsessed with the books and so collected the original extended edition releases that came out in 02, 03, and 04. When he finally had the full extended trilogy, he sat me down at the age of 4 (in 2004) to watch them, and i was hooked.

I think as far as allegory goes it's best put that his Christian beliefs shaped his desires for his fictional world but that does not mean his fictional world is a Christian one. He wanted to write his own mythology that stood on it's own merits and disliked it being compared to other things because that was reductionist towards to the creativity and effort he put into it.

This is an excellent comment. Most such comments I see on videos take a very terse "Tolkien hated allegory" stance without any expansion. This does a good job of avoiding that trap and giving some commentary and interpretation on the thought. And I think it highlights some things that are odd to us -- or, at least, to folks like me. Tolkien certainly said many times that he despises allegory in all of its forms and that his works are not allegorical. He also said that his work is undeniably Catholic -- unintentionally at first, but consciously so upon revision. Which leaves [at least] me in a bit of a pickle. If the works are not allegorical, then how can they be undeniably Catholic? If they are undeniably Catholic, then how can they not be allegorical? As near as I can work out, it seems to be that Tolkien understood 'allegory' to imply that the author had a very direct, symbolic, one-to-one understanding of their work and attempted to tell the reader what the work means. In the Chronicles of Narnia, "Aslan is Jesus" is very direct and clear and it is undoubtedly Lewis' intent to communicate that to the audience. This is, as far as I can tell, what Tolkien meant when he referenced 'allegory'. He certainly hated that sort of thing, and he and Lewis actually had a rather sizeable falling out over Tolkien's dislike the Chronicles of Narnia. I find no such direct relationships between Tolkien's work and his Catholicism. The themes are certainly all there. The imagery is there. He seems to have written his own paradigm (which, as noted, is deeply Catholic) or scriptural text in different words and organized it in a way that made sense to him. After all, he set out to write a grand mythology for England to rival those that the Greeks or Romans lay claim to (and to see whether he was up to the task). But he does not direct the reader that "this means that" or anything of the sort. Which is, as you noted, the greatest thing about Arda; it invites everyone in and accepts them. The stories themselves impart meaning and wisdom, whether or not you share the ideas of the author. I find, personally, that the more I study the text, the more I come to see the world from Tolkien's point of view. But he doesn't force it on me. And this, I think, is the balance between Tolkien's dislike of allegory and the undeniable Catholicism of his text.

The funny thing is, I didn't make that connection with Aslan until this comment, as a Christian lmao.

I think the word “applicability” describes the relationship between Tolkien’s writing and the real world. The themes are universal and we keep seeing those themes play out around us.

@@chrisrundejr6293 Really? Did you not read "The Last Battle"?

At the time of the 1st movie Nazguls are weak. Later they become stronger. Their power grew up with Sauron's power.

@@hint1k They were also very far from Sauron, who is the source of their power (most evil things attached to him seem to grow in strength the closer they get to Mordor), and Sauron also likely hadn't housed a great deal of his power in them at that time, because he didn't believe it necessary.

Stormlight archive is much better

And Sauron was a Maiar as well but fallen and corrupted.

And Gandalfs ture Maia name is Olórin

Correct me if I'm wrong....but maiar can take any form right?....I read somewhere that the maiar took the form of old wizards cuz they were wise

It's worth noting though that Smeagol just wanted to keep the ring, he didn't try to use it to gain more power or conquer kingdoms, which is probably how he kept it so long.

Yes, this is about how I understand it too. The ring grabs hold of a person's ambitions and desires, amplifying them, and twisting them into a consuming need for the ring itself. To the affected the ring comes to represent the manifestation of their deepest desires, the most precious thing they can imagine. Because hobbits tend to be relatively content, benign, and have few if any aspirations, the ring needs more time to take root. There's more I'd like to write, but I feel like I'd be getting into spoiler territory.

Although they are very similar to Hobbits, smeagle and deagle were a slightly different race

Yea, as someone mentioned Smeagol was not a Hobbit, but one of the separate breeds of Hobbits with very different characteristics. There are bound to be variation within races as well, but generally speaking all Hobbits will be more resistant than other races - so the description is not inaccurate.

Agree but that would cause too much anger within the nerd-mob that insists the extended editions are bett0r in all teh wayz

I agree. I immediately said, “Poor Jen.” When I saw the title. I love the extended editions, but it’s not what you watch when you want to get someone into them.

Yep, definitely wouldn't have started a newbie on the extended cut.

@@danhalstead705 yup. There would def have been some backlash 😂

YOUR OPINION IS WRONG!

"I dislike Allegory - the conscious and intentional allegory - yet any attempt to explain the purport of myth or fairytale must use allegorical language." (Letter 131) He says he dislikes allegory, but specifically the "conscious and intentional allegory." This is why Tolkien didn't like Narnia, because it's a literal direct Christian allegory where Aslan is Jesus in every way shape and form for the entire time. Tolkien much preferred having several characters portray specific aspects of Jesus, not one character be Jesus for the entire story. This is because this type of allegory is much more indirect and less intentional and doesn't shove anything down your throat as a reader. Anyone who reads Narina can see what Lewis intended. Not everyone who reads Tolkien's work can see the Catholic symbolism in it, which is exactly what he wanted. So you're not technically wrong, but it's also still not wrong to say there's very direct and purposeful connections that can be found from Lord of the Rings to Tolkien's Catholic faith.

@@hc-04 Exactly. I'm an atheist and to see The Lord of the Rings and still say there is no allegory in it is just sticking your head in the sand. Jesus is embodied in the sacrifices of Frodo, Boromir, Gandalf, and so many characters in the greater body of works. Mary Magdelene is embodied in the character of Aragorn, when he helps clean and stitch the wounds of all of his soldiers after the battle of Minas Tirith as she did with Jesus' body before he was entombed. You can see aspects of patron saints in the Valar and Maiar; Denethor is allegorical to King Herod, who when he heard that a new "King of the Jews" had been born, did everything in his power to keep the power he had and prevent any dissention; Gollum is allegorical for Judas, who betrayed Jesus', and interestingly Gollum throws away what was supposed to be Frodo and Sam's Last Supper away. There are many more, but to say that there is no allegory because of some misinterpreted quote by Tolkien is absurd.

@@josephcerasuolo3563 I've heard Jesus is embodied in Aragorn, Gandalf, and Frodo. Aragorn because he's the king, like Christ is the King of Heaven. Gandalf cause Gandalf is basically a sort of priest, and Jesus was a priest. And Frodo because Frodo carries the Ring like Christ carried the Cross. The Ring is supposed to be sin, and Gollum isn't Judas so much as a representation of what happens to normal people when they become absorbed by sin, which is why Tolkien made Gollum a Hobbit who turned into Gollum. The Steward of Gondor is supposed to be like the Pope. Not the king, but simply a leader for the Church while the King is away. Eowyn and Arwen are both at different times the Virgin Mary, most obviously when Eowyn stabs the Witch-King in the head, much like Mary crushes the serpent's head. Lembas bread is the Eucharist, the Ainur (Maia and Valar) can be thought of as sort of angels, Melkor is Lucifer while Morgoth is Satan, and Sauron and other fallen Ainur are the fallen angels (demons). And the awesome thing is, unlike Narnia, these comparisons aren't always set in stone. For example Gandalf could be thought of as an angel since he's an Ainur I believe, but he could also be thought of as a priest. So the comparisons aren't like Aslan in Narnia, who is always Jesus and obviously so. The comparisons are much more complex and elaborate and subtle, which makes Lord of the Rings better than Narnia in my humble opinion. So yes, in summary, there's a LOT of comparison between LotR and Tolkien's faith. Not only by accident (although Tolkien did say it was by accident at first), Tolkien himself admitted he put those comparisons in purposefully.

@@hc-04 see I think the ring being a representation of sin is a little too much. I think the ring, as well as the creation of the Uruk-hai are meant as a representation of the impact of technology on war. The ring is devastating and shows how increasing technological capabilities of warfare can corrupt politicians while the common people who fight wars are the real casualties. The tearing down of all the natural things to create the Uruks is a representation of the rape of our planets natural resources and beauty in order to kill more of ourselves. Due to trench warfare in ww1 the ground was mangled and destroyed, artillery and mines are still being found from ww1 and ww2 today, and the demonization and portrayal of any country's "enemy" as less than human breeds hatred and resentment after wars are over and peace is trying to be reached. How many people today still say terrible things to modern Germans faces when as a society they have realized how horrific the acts of Hitler and the nazi regime was and their complicitenss in it and teach about it to never again follow the same ideology? There is Christian allegory for sure, but the heaviest allegory is of ww1 and the depression and ptsd that Tolkien himself faced, along with that of his friends.

@@josephcerasuolo3563 I disagree. Obviously WWI was a big influence in LotR but the Ring has nothing "technological" about it. It's literally just a Ring. It's only power is corrupting others (like sin). Your other points about the destruction of the world or whatever may possibly be valid but they have nothing to do with the Ring itself. The Ring is supposed to represent sin, because sin corrupts people in much the same way as the Ring. And just like Christ carried the weight of man's sin with the cross, so Frodo carries the Ring which represents sin. And once the Ring is destroyed, Sauron loses his power, just like once sin is defeated, Satan no longer has any power over us.

The series (books and movies) is always going to hold #1 top film/book ever

❤❤❤

The Best

Same

counting myself lucky that i've never seen the theatrical cuts but i fell in love anyway

Agreed, the theatrical cut is a much better way to introduce someone. If they jump right in and love it, you can always just restart with the extended. But asking someone to sit down and watch a 3.5 hour movie is basically asking them to go into it with the wrong frame of mind.

Yeah theatrical for me. Once you love them do the extended

The first Narnia was pretty sweet. The second one dispersed a bit, but I dug it. Haven't seen the third.

@@Rorujin The third is surprisingly decent. I enjoyed it the most of the all 3. The first one felt like it was going to be good at the start, and the casting was solid, it just meandered a lot. We need a labor of love.

@@sydhamelin1265 Perhaps... It's been a while since I've seen it, but I remember the special effects were amazing (specially the practical ones... Indeed they were done by WETA) and the final battle is pretty awesome.

@@Rorujin Tilda Swinton really stole the show in the first one as well.

The BBC did a version back in the 80s or 90s that I used to love when I was a kid. Definitely has no aged well though.

"Smeagol protects nice Potter, oh yes, precious. Nice Master is kind to Smeagol. Smeagol will always protect nice Master, oh yes."

That was so damn funny 🤣

Pacing was not Tolkien's strong point. Two Towers was where I stopped reading the books. They were just boring. The movie handled it much better.

@@MrGBH pacing of the movies and pacing of the book are 2 different things

@@SamuelSaveli Uhhh, yes. Exactly the same as what I pointed out when I said the movie handled it much better.

The pacing of the non extended editions are definitely better I think its mistake showing a first time watch the extended editions.

@@MrGBH we are talking about movies here, not the books 😁🤷