Debunking CinemaSins Everything Wrong With FOTR

CinemaSins, famous for its "Everything Wrong With" KZbin videos, has of course done some on the Lord of the Rings movies. But their criticisms are often misplaced. Here's how their video on the Fellowship measures up.
Part two, on the Two Towers, is now up: • Debunking CinemaSins "...
Part three, on The Return of the King, is now up: • Debunking CinemaSins' ...
CinemaSins' video is here: • Everything Wrong With ...
My video on the Rings of Power is here: • The Rings of Power in ...
Intro and outro music from "Amon Hen," on the Lord of the Rings Trilogy Soundtrack, copyright New Line Productions and Reprise Records.

[@Contrabass101]

I actually quite like the fact that the Nazghul go into a strange dark ceremonial procession when approaching the Ringbearer rather than just straight out kill him. They serve the Ring, after all, and so it makes sense to me, that their attitude towards the Ringbearer would be conflicted. A powerful wielder could probably command the Wraiths.

[@Richard_Nickerson]

Agreed

[@trailmixgang]

Maybe. It's an interesting idea.

[@zzodysseuszz]

To explain why the Nazgûl approached so slowly, that is because in real when approaching an armed opponent even if outnumbering them one must take caution as a fast approach grants more freedom in a counter attack for your opponent. The faster you move the more difficult it is to maintain a defensive position. Approaching slowly allows for a maintained defensive stance. The problem with moving faster is that you have less time to react but they have all the time to prepare, and so any random attack your opponent throws may land. If they manage to kill or harm a Nazgûl then they should allow themselves an opening to escape an undefended path (former defence for the path was the Nazgûl that hypothetical were hit)

[@chrisrubin6445]

also their main weapon is fear. So walking slowly, in formation like that is intimidating as fuck.

[@samfrazee7022]

I never even thought about that. In a way, Frodo did have some right to bear the ring so the Nazgûl would have definitely been a little uneasy about running up and killing him

[@BrettCaton]

Sauron: I will make this ring to rule everybody. Cinema Sins: But that plan didn't work straight away, therefore the movie failed. Me: No, it means Sauron's plan failed, thanks to the actions of the characters, who fought and sacrificed to make that happen, and because evil is ultimately self-defeating.

[@Raptorworld22]

Alot of the "Sins" are essentially: "This movie didn't spell everything out detail by detail, therefore plot hole!" Like holy shit, I fell asleep through all three movies and I have a better grasp of what happened.

[@wearethebomb42]

That's half of their "sins", the other half is them going, "This movie *did* spell everything out detail by detail, therefore overexposition!" That way, anything anyone says or does in a movie can be a sin, and CS can stretch their videos out past the 10 minute mark.

[@histguy101]

Or the movie does spell it out moments later, or moments earlier, and they sin it anyway because they're dishonest hypocrites.

[@oliveremmettknox7776]

How dare you fall asleep watching all three LOTR movie masterpieces, German Furman! >:(

[@Raptorworld22]

@@oliveremmettknox7776 I had to stay awake to "fix" my sleep schedule and figured "This series gets hyped up so much, it's gotta be entertaining enough to keep me awake" It wasn't. It's just people walking and talking.

[@se6369]

It's not meant to be taken seriously...

[@SeraphsWitness]

It's weird to criticize "tropes" when Tolkien was literally the AUTHOR of many of these tropes. He's the reason these tropes are popular in the first place. They work, they're awesome, and easily recognizable by western viewers.

[@TheSorrel]

I always thought the Morgul Blade dissolved because someone other than a Nazgul touched it.

[@vegeta8561]

I actually like this idea more then the novels

[@AnnekeOosterink]

You are being way too kind to CinemaSins. They lie all the time about what happens in films and in what order. They sin stuff that was actually explained in the film, just seconds before. At best they are dishonest. They are a horrible channel that pretends to be funny when they're not.

[@brucesnow7125]

Anneke Oosterink exactly. Not only that, but they cover it with bullshit statement like "It was just a joke" to hide their incompetence, and everyone for some reason believes it. I mean, it's fascinating that they believe them even though Jeremy uses same terrible points in his "real" reviews on his other channel. Let's be honest, Cinemasins found out how dumb they are, and they covered their asses off with that idiotic defense.

[@Tim4Tat]

then why do you watch it?

[@OneStarRating]

They don't anymore, probably. From my experience when they first came out CS were somewhat interesting and funny at times to me but they started getting dumb, lazy, hateful, and worst of all.... completely dishonest. For example they altered Tom Hardy's voice at the beginning of their Mad Max: Fury Road review to make him sound unintelligible when in the film he is easy to understand, so, how many more films have they altered to give a dishonest sin? They're not joking most of the time and it's not satire when you watch their other channel and they use the same criticisms that their cynical attitudes convey on the way home from a movie theater. They honestly believe a lot of their lies because when someone lies often they can't tell a right from a wrong and they can't keep up with all of their false narratives.

[@AnnekeOosterink]

When I found out how often they lie outright about films, I stopped. So I don't.

[@Dragoderian]

It became strange for me when they were doing genuinely good films but took longer than bad films, and gave them more sins.

[@souldreamer9056]

I don’t think that Cinema Sins adhere to the concept of intellectual honesty. Their process is not “We found some problems here, let’s point them out”, it’s “We need to fill our quota of 30 problems so that we can make a video, so let’s find 30 problems”. And as you point out, some are really contrived points. I’d respect them more if they pointed out 5 issues that really were problems, rather than scraping the bottom of the barrel and contriving ones that don’t make sense.

[@TheDarthbinky]

That's exactly their MO. They're originally a couple marketing guys who desperately wanted to find a way to make money off youtube, and now they take advantage of the algorithm to churn out an endless stream of garbage and rake in the cash. Check out "sustaining stupidity" by bobvids if you want to see the full story, it's pretty awful.

[@Crlarl]

I think that you give CinemaSins too much credit.

[@dragonstormx]

While the movies do cut out details from the books, the book is very exposition heavy so I feel they should be some slack for not running into a number of scenes that just everything to a halt. In fact a short conversation between Aragorn and Elrond nicely abridges a very long exposition dump from the book. To be honest I feel the Lord of the Rings movies don't get the credit they deserve for adapting the books given how there are a number of scenes in the books while the plot just slows or stops. I imagine that is why Bakshi decided to combine Fellowship of the Ring and Two Towers into one movie, for better and for worse. Also fuck the criticism of the hiding from the Nazgul scene. In the Bakshi film that was a very good and intense moment with the Hobbits hiding while some very tense music plays in the background. Jackson's homage does a nice new take that relies on absolute silence to create tension. Either way Cinemasins is too pretentious to appreciate a good scene like that.

[@Richard_Nickerson]

Like how Tom Bombadil made me put the book down for 2 months on my first attempt.

[@dragonstormx]

@@Richard_Nickerson Yeah I don't get why people act like he was some great character. He showed up to save our heroes from villains who weren't relevant to the rest of the book. Book purists really think it's more important showing us that than showing us Boromir's death?

[@MissCaraMint]

@@dragonstormx I actually really love the way everything plays out in the books. Things like Tom Bombaddil and the barrow wights are very much side stories that play out simmilar to how old legends and so on have these odd little adventures in the middle of longer more drawn out sagas. However, what works in a book doesn’t nessacerily work in a film. It would have been far too confusing to try to cram into a film, and then also have all the other back story. The pacing would have been way off, and every scene would have to become an exposition dump. No the movies did right in cutting Tom. This way we have a wonderfully told whole story arc in each film that also leads smoothly over into the next film.

[@pattheman3686]

Gandolf seeing the "Eye" isn't "proof" of anything. Let me explain; when he reaches for the ring and sees the Eye? (that is done for the audience) Gandolf himself probably got just a fleeting vague image, not something concrete like seeing an HD photo. He needed to do research, because he's not an idiot who jumps to conclusions before hearing the "Whole" question. He wanted to be ABSOLUTELY sure of his suspicions before causing a massive panic.

[@thefox1901]

I completely agree. I think Gandalf leaving to do research while keeping the ring hidden in a rather obscure place makes more sense than simply jumping to the conclusion that it is undoubtedly the One Ring. Obviously, I'm talking about the film portrayal.

[@thefox1901]

Furthermore, the shot of the Eye is a really fast cut. If you've never seen the film before and you don't expect it, you probably won't know exactly what it is the first time you see it. It's unnerving more than revealing. Once you've seen the film, you can easily tell it's the Eye of Sauron, but for us and Gandalf, it's more of a startling moment than a definitive snapshot of Sauron.

[@Bobba8590]

*Gandalf

[@Richard_Nickerson]

@@Bobba8590 Beat me to it haha

[@Bobba8590]

@@Richard_Nickerson nice

[@kdmichaels2310]

Fun fact: at 23:42 Gimli doesn't actually grab his own ax. If you watch the clip from the movie, you can actually see him grabbing his friend's ax

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

Good catch! I didn’t notice that!

[@Richard_Nickerson]

Either way, it's not like they left on the quest that day. Even if it was his own, it could easily be replaced before the journey begins.

[@jos_meid]

9:25 Not just centuries. In the Scouring of the Shire, I'm pretty sure Frodo says something along the lines of “no hobbit has ever killed another hobbit on purpose in the Shire.”

[@Vandervecken]

I think the reason "terrible as the dawn" confused CinemaSins comes more out of the screenplay being inferior to Tolkien in some places. Tolkien did not write "terrible as the dawn," he wrote "'terrible as the Morning and the Night!" "Dawn" has a strong connotation of hopefulness, joy, rebirth, etc--Eos is Rosy-Fingered Dawn, and that sounds pretty nice. It's the happy face of the earliest time of the day, and is a word difficult to associate with the at least somewhat negative connotation of "terrible," a sense of fearful awe, with fear being the negative. Tolkien chose the far more utilitarian and ambiguous "morning" to be modified by the adjective "terrible." What a surprise, JRR chose his words carefully. :)

[@Richard_Nickerson]

Also, look at it from the perspective of the Elves. They're the Eldar because they woke up when the only lights were the stars. Galadriel lived in Valinor, she got to see the trees of light. She was in Valinor when Melkor and Ungoliant killed the trees, she witnessed the very first rising of the sun. The sun is a terrible light when all you've had are the stars for millennia. The sun was also the harbinger of Men, technically. So, the first dawn actually would've been a terrible thing in the eyes of most Elves.

[@sambakich7494]

The problem with the Nazgûl not following the Hobbits over the Brandywine river can also be explained away by the simple fact that the river is too deep to ford. Hence the need for a ferry.

[@gintuner4371]

The one thing i've learned recently, becoming more immersed with the deeper writings of Tolkien's world, is that you should never underestimate Tolkien's forward thinking and immersion into his world. If I could think of anything that seemed odd with these books, there was always an answer I found, that doesn't seem farfetched, but planned by Tolkien for a very specific purpose.

[@Kartissa]

22:00 Perhaps Saruman simply didn't want to antagonise Manwe, leader of the Valar, by attacking one of his heralds.

[@gajjjoni5315]

20:30 As you said - This is no some kind of random river. This is river on the border of her state, or town, or city, etc... And she has power to cause tsunami of water. Because, it is her river

[@warriorcatskid003]

I love the insinuation that Elrond would murder his several times great nephew even for the destruction of the ring

[@agisuru]

A lot of your explanations are honestly way more complex than they need to be. Like, with the hobbits making a fire-- they've lived in a peaceful city their whole life, the scene is meant to show how unaccustomed they are to living life trying to hide from something. With the Nazgul not following them past Buckleberry Ferry, it's a deep river that he and his horse likely could not swim across. The elf stuff honestly plays less into it, we can tell, visually, that he doesn't want to cross the river, and for good reason since it's deep and likely has a strong current and he is loaded down with weapons and a cloak and other things that would make it immensely difficult for him to swim in.

[@Kagomai15]

Thank you!! That's what I was thinking too about the Hobbits and the fire. And with the Wraiths and the water. It makes sense just fine lol

[@leonardomarquesbellini]

Wraiths fear water and fire becausen in the Saxon traditions (and many others too) Tolkien was inspired by fire and water (alongside copper, silver and some herbs) were seen a potent wards against evil spirits, most likely because those things have antiseptic properties and can help you either avoid or recover from sickness.

[@pattheman3686]

The Tom Bombadil reference is proof that cinemasins at least read the book. So they now have NO excuse for sinning anything that can be answered form reading the book.

[@DarthBigBen]

In Cinemas Sins's defense, they're sinning the movie, not the book.

[@pattheman3686]

That is NO EXCUSE. They suck!!

[@ericwang3481]

pat theman they sin movies. This isn’t valid since they don’t have to know the book or anyone who watches the movie has to so him complaining about something resolved in the book makes sense since the sins are for the movies only , not for the movies and the books

[@pattheman3686]

Then why even make a book reference?? First he'll sin a movie with a reference to another source that actually disproves the reason for their sin. then in less that ten seconds they'll sin the movie again using the same reference material as an excuse as to why they don't know something. Cinemasins is famous for doing this, because they do it over an over and over. And this whole thing about it being "satyre" is bullshit!!! I've seen Jeremy's podcast after having watched Avengers Age of Ultron. Every single criticism he gives there is repeated in cinema sins. Proof that his "Sins" are actual criticisms and not a joke in any way. And even when they Contradict themselves - which they do a lot. They still leave the sin. Which leads me to believe they watch a movie, sin it while it playing and then say they have a video ready for you tube. These guys are the worst trash in existence, but you're still free to like them if you want. NOTHING you say will convince me that they're only "joking" or parodying. This shit is NEITHER funny nor copying anything.

[@ericwang3481]

pat theman fair enough

[@wyrmoffastring]

Hold up. Weren't these eagles chosen creatures of Manwe? That would really explain why Saruman couldn't do anything to them, he'd probably piss off Manwe and I don't think he'd want that.

[@dalellll]

On that first point, even though it is not explained in the movie, and even though I had not read the books, I still understood from the way the different characters were portrayed that humans were generally more susceptible than the Elves or the Dwarves, that there is something in the character of humans that meant they couldnt resist and became Nazgul while the dwarves and elves didn't. So yeah, the movie leaves the explanation out, but it was still pretty clear to me that the higher susceptibility of humans to corruption was one of the main themes of the story.

[@oliveremmettknox7776]

I really like that Peter Jackson had decided to beef up Arwen's role by not having her just being Aragorn's love interest.

[@MissCaraMint]

I mean didn’t Luthien join Beren in his quest at some point? It would mach with the theme of Arwen being Luthien come again to have some part in Aragorn’s journey too. The amount of layers to this is just perfection.

[@gajjjoni5315]

7:25 Maybe Gandalf did not see the Eye of Sauron at all. Maybe this was just for US, some kind of director-cut... Also, all the other rings are connected to OneRing, and when someone touches any other ring, Eye of Sauron appears...

[@failtolawl]

Cinema Sins is absolute trash with literally nothing enjoyably, but surely people who are true Tolkein fans realize that the real lore is absolutely massive and not suitable for everyone. The movie, in itself, should not contain major plot/lore gaps which could only be understood by reading the books. That being said, yes, many of the Cinemasins gripes were actually explained in the movie, explicitly or not.

[@exantiuse497]

failtolawl Exactly. There are enough real flaws and straight up lies in the "Everything wrong with" videos, nitpicks like this aren't necessary to criticize them

[@patrickglover7506]

I mean, to be fair, if you watch the videos about cinemasins themselves, they say they arr a**holes.

[@NotANameist]

OK Gandalf not knowing it’s the one ring. Saruman is the expert on the rings and he has convinced Gandalf that the one ring isn’t in circulation.

[@tiggergolah]

CinemaSins gripe about why Sauron didn't kill Gandalf shows that CS's maker either never read the books, or has poor reading comprehension. Gandalf is a Maiar; he's not mortal in the sense that killing him would permanently eliminate him as a threat. Also, perhaps Saruman hoped to turn Gandalf.

[@Makkaru112]

tiggergolah The second born are also free to leave arfa when they pass on from their bodies, possibly even shedding their former name. Hense the word *gift*

[@JustFlemishMe]

Long standing CinemaSins policy: THE BOOKS DON'T MATTER

[@nintyfan1991]

@@JustFlemishMe Other victims of this: Harry Potter series, MCU films

[@TwoCatsInLondon]

@@JustFlemishMe Then why do they bring up Tom Bombadil?

[@willtheprodigy3819]

JustFlemishMe He’s not sinning the books, he’s sinning the movies.

[@michaelrogersiii3858]

I was ok with the Nazgul not knowing the ring was under the tree because they aren't metal-detector accurate. They needed Gollum to know the location of the ringbearer and they didn't realize the ring wasn't in the hobbit's room at the Prancing Pony.

[@taylorwiseman8078]

19:39 Also, he says they're afraid of water and fire, so earth is the only major element they can handle. Did he forget that there are four (or more, depending on the source) major elements? He does realize the Naz-gul have been walking around in the AIR for the whole time, right?

[@gajjjoni5315]

5:10 "Gandalf using magic more often" Gandalf is from Valinor, Maiar, Istari. He was sent to Middle Earth to confront Sauron, and he took a form of an old man. Maybe because of his form of ordinary man, whenever he uses some kind of magic, he wastes his energy or health. Maybe he uses magic with caution and only for right purpose, because he does not want to waste it, and he saves energy for more dangerous things..

[@geek8555]

When it comes to Sauron reaching for Isildur, the way I see it: at that point Sauron had killed the king and crushed Narsil. At that point he let his ego get the better of him that he wanted to pick up Isildur and crush him in front of the men and elves, making them lose their morale, while also providing morale to the Orcs. It was his ego that gave Isildur the advantage.

[@Everik-ct6pg]

Funny how all of these videos are better than the ones Cinemasins makes

[@EuroUser1]

I used to have an interest in CinemaSins, because I don't watch movies and I took at face value everything that CinemaSins said. However, after seeing how they presented as sins situations that are perfectly explained in LOTR movies, I stopped watching CinemaSins.

[@gajjjoni5315]

25:12 What is the problem? Of course that has to be Frodo's decision! He is the one who carries the ring, and he shoud decide where they must go

[@powerofberzerker9487]

I always thought that the blade shines blue as to warn you but when the orcs are right in front of you, it stops glowing.

[@Siegbert85]

Funny, they don't address the actual problem with the Sam drowning scene: he is depicted as sinking several meters and apparently losing his consciousness yet Frodo can simply reach down with his arm and grab him. Then Sam merely coughs a little water but is fine otherwise.

[@michaelkenner3289]

Actually that's not so unlikely. When someone breathes in a small amount of water, an automatic reflex kicks in and the body closes off its airway to protect the lungs. It's not until very near death that a person actually starts breathing again and fills their lungs with water. The person drowning would be very light headed from lack of oxygen, but if they're brought out of the water and their body switches off the drowning reflex (which doesn't always happen) then they'll get through it more or less unharmed.

[@BEZERKSTUDIOS718]

The pitfall thing was probably just an artistic liberty taken to make the scene more tense

[@TwoCatsInLondon]

I really appreciate you doing this/having done this. The trilogy has always been close to my heart, as I grew up with the books and the movies came out as I was going through angsty teenage years and provided some comfort. There are so many people who think they're clever complaining about things that are explained if they only bothered to learn something about the lore. And I know that you shouldn't have to read the books to get the movies, but that doesn't mean that the answer to apparent mysteries in the movies can't lie in the books, and refusing to look them up even when it's pointed out than an answer exists, just makes the person complaining lazy. I know it's not coming from a bad place and the CS people love movies, but it just irks me that they complain about things not being spelled out for them, except when things are spelled out for them and they then explain about those things being spelled out.

[@evaat2321]

Idk if someone already said that, but: You can see that when Gimli tries to destroy the ring, he uses the axe of the dwarf sitting next to him.

[@JacobScott0000]

I suppose if you're cinemasins, you've made a career out of finding 'sins' in movies and you've gotta keep churning out the content even if there's nothing left to find.

[@zzodysseuszz]

To explain why the Nazgûl approached so slowly, that is because in real when approaching an armed opponent even if outnumbering them one must take caution as a fast approach grants more freedom in a counter attack for your opponent. The faster you move the more difficult it is to maintain a defensive position. Approaching slowly allows for a maintained defensive stance. The problem with moving faster is that you have less time to react but they have all the time to prepare, and so any random attack your opponent throws may land. If they manage to kill or harm a Nazgûl then they should allow themselves an opening to escape an undefended path (former defence for the path was the Nazgûl that hypothetical were hit)

[@joot4949]

1:50 the elvish rings weren’t even tainted by Sauron, and they did still wear their rings afterwards! Gandalf even has one and he wears it. They were still bound however due to Celebrimbor using Sauron’s forging methods

[@gajjjoni5315]

14:40 Maybe Saruman wanted to keep Gandalf alive to convince him once more to join him... Maybe Saruman was thinking "He will change his mind, I don't want to kill him, I'm gonna need his power"...

[@Kagomai15]

Plus they were friends before, he could also just be sentimental and not want to kill his friend?

[@gajjjoni5315]

23:40 Yes, Gimli has two axes. And maybe Gimli took someone else's axe to try destroying the ring, because there is another dwarf sitting next to him

[@Cal6009]

Those are the hobbits woods they're hiding in too, they've been running around in them since they were kids of course they know how to hide there better than the Nazgul know how to find them.

[@77mpickett]

How am I just now noticing these. I've seen channels that debunk cinemasins but no one did lotr and to have it done by an expert thank you kind sir I needed this

[@Shaden0040]

Isildur is Elrond's many times great nephew. You don't kill family.

[@brigidtheirish]

And here's my take on your points. Murdering the guy thing: Maybe the ring wraiths are being sneaky in a 'leave no witnesses' way. They could have taken the body and hidden it somewhere so no one knew the guy died. By doing things this way, the movie emphasizes how unnatural the ring wraiths are, maintaining suspense and avoiding questions like 'how could a bunch of evil ghosts walk around talking to people without freaking everyone out?' The tree thing: ... Maybe the attraction is really weak because of how far they are from Mordor? Yeah, that's the best I've got. Putting the ring in a box *and* it falling perfectly onto Frodo's finger: The impression I got from reading the books is that the ring *can* move itself very slightly. Like how it conveniently fell out of Golum's pocket right where Bilbo would find it. So putting it in a box wouldn't work because it might end up outside the box, or the box could conveniently end up in, say, Boromir's pack (you can probably see where that would lead). Just plugging the ring so it can't be worn (something I suggested as a kid) wouldn't work either because of it can change size. Whatever plug is used would just fall out and you're back to square one. Putting the ring at the bottom of Frodo's pack wouldn't work because it'd cause him constant anxiety about it getting lost, making him check his pack at every opportunity and putting him in physical contact with the ring again. About the fire thing: Did Frodo *know* Aragorn had them light the fire? He work up and seemed surprised that they had, so it would seem they lit it after he fell asleep. In which case his reaction is completely justified because he didn't know fire is a ring wraith repellent. Looking around: Was he looking around for hours? I've seen this movie a few times and I don't remember that being an issue. Besides, wouldn't it make sense to do a sweep of the perimeter? Maybe make sure the ring wraiths weren't sneaking up from the other side of the hill? Not killing them right away: Because it'd be easier to make the one carrying the ring reveal himself than just slaughtering them all and searching their bodies for a small artifact of doom. Dissolving blade: They did it this way because the way it happened in the book would take more time to show and just leaving it there would mean people would complain about them leaving an obviously evil weapon out in the open. And if they had the sun rise right away people would complain about conveniently timed sun rise. There's just no winning here. Mount Doom flashback: Or, short answer, straight up *murdering his friend* just to destroy a probably evil piece of jewelry never crossed Elrond's mind. Regardless of any other character motivations or changes from the book, I really don't see what the problem with this scene is. Pass or Mines: Why does this put Gandalf in a weird position? It's reasonable to assume he knows something unpleasant happened, but there's nothing to indicate that he knew about the balrog or anything specific about the dangers there. He just knew it was dangerous. But the pass is also dangerous. They could all die either way, so why not let the ring-bearer decide? News of Balin's death: Better in the book? Well, it's Tolkien, so yeah. This is a movie, a different format, and they have time constraints. This way gives Gimli some characterization he might not have gotten otherwise and provides us with some information on what Moria is supposed to be like, which is pretty easy to miss in the book when everyone's going in expecting some flavor of TPK. Plus, didn't you say that the way the movie handled things puts Gandalf in an awkward position? Wouldn't *knowing* that something stopped communication with Moria and taking the Fellowship there *anyway* be *more* awkward? And Gandalf is anxious about what's down there because he's *Gandalf.* You know, an incredibly ancient wizard who's actually a maiar tasked with protecting and guiding the world? How is this a problem? Telepathic communication: Don't see where any credit should be given. This helps establish Galadriel as powerful, mysterious, and, let's be honest here, elves are not known for giving straight answers. It's totally in character for her to be a bit vague. Terrible as the dawn: looking up the etymology, terrible in the 14th century could mean "causing terror, awe, or dread; frightful." It comes from a French word for 'fear' or 'shivering.' Might want to do a little more research so you don't flounder so much.

[@gajjjoni5315]

22:05 Elrond has high moral. He could never push Isildur into the fire, or fight with him. After all, Isildur is son of a dead King Elendil, and it is just imposibile for Elrond to kill him, or push him, or fight him... And, yes, for Isildur, ring is now the only thing that reminds him of his dead father

[@leonardomarquesbellini]

Also Isildur is kind of his nephew, thinking Elrond of all people would partake in Kinslaying is a big stretch when his mother was driven out of Doriath during the Second Kinslaying and out of Sirion during the Third Kinslaying, with Elrond and Eles witnessing the latter.

[@lionlord8784]

I don´t think that when the nazgul hasn´d find Frodo under the Tree that it was a PlotHole. The thing is that the One Ring had no power at this moment over Frodo, it was just an "ordinary"ring. The nazgul must actually use some magic to strengthen the ring´s-power to push Frodo´s willigless to put the 1 Ring on and just then the Nazgul start realize that the 1 Ring is there nearby. The Logic in the Movie: Because Bilbo has voluntarily given up the 1 Ring (never ever happend such thing to the 1 Ring) the ring got almost entirely to sleep and must slowly be awakened again. Because his power was very weakened.

[@benevans6583]

I always thought the deal with the ring was that Gandalf thought it might be a ring of power, but he didn’t think it was the one ring. I mean this universe is lousy with magic rings I wouldn’t blame him for thinking the ring bilbo got from a dude in a cave wouldn’t be the big bad apocalypse tool

[@gajjjoni5315]

13:57 Yes, they feel presence of the ring. Maybe only when someone put the ring on finger..

[@grandgibbon2071]

the eldrond not destroying the ring by force, can be summed up simply as elrond not wanting to destroy the alliance between man and elves. Given he is an elf he probably figured he had time to sort out the whole thing.

[@schwarzerritter5724]

The books actually does explain why Nazgul are afraid of fire. When Frodo could see into the spirit world, fire was one of the few things that still had colour. Nazgul can be harmed by fire, because it exists in the spirit world.

[@robynreanimates3503]

Thats actually really interesting, middle earth shadow of war is one of my favorite games ever made but more knowledgeable people on Tolkien lore have told me it's not super lore accurate. When you look into the spirit world in that game fire does not retain its color

[@arikgershon]

18:21 Also, CinemaSins forgot all about the element of air. If they're gonna be facetious douches, they should at least get their facts right :P

[@Kagomai15]

Some of these "sins" are just complaining about style choices over logic. I honestly think they're perfectly fine?? Like it's not that big a deal if it doesn't make perfect logical sense, if it serves a dramatic or thematic purpose instead. Even if that purpose is just Rule of Cool.

[@DoubtedPumpkin]

only cinema sins could criticize a movie for the bad guy being weak to fire. Cause fire is harmless right?

[@Gamechuck]

Finally someone debunked it!!! Awesome debunk. But I think that you were too lenient on those CS guys at these points: - when Sauron is reaching for Isildur, maybe it's his ego and pride making him so self-assured; e.g. Sauron thinks Isildur is scared and is going to do nothing to stop Sauron from breaking his neck... But then in a sudden show of valor, Isildur cuts his hand off. It's cinematically good. - When we see the Eye as viewers, it doesn't mean Gandalf also sees it. Maybe he only feels a sort of evil force, but 'feeling' can't be translated well to a visual medium so we are shown the eye (remember: we also don't know what this eye represents exactly as viewers this early in the movie). Also, there are many magic rings, probably some of them are evil, so why would Gandalf touching this ring and feeling something weird be an automatic guess that this is the ONE RING? The ring Saruman vouched was lost forever in the sea? I mean... Makes no sense. - Killing someone who is in their way makes sense for the movie Nazgul since they're shown to be physically drawn to the ring and don't need to be asking around about Frodo so much as they do in the books. - If the Nazgul can feel the general presence of the ring being close, it doesn't mean they can pinpoint it exactly... The hobbits were hidden, and he didn't know the tree was hollow... He was looking around and then he heard a noise and went to look somewhere else... Makes perfect sense... - I think the point of Saruman putting Gandalf up in Orthanc was to torture him until he changed his mind. It's not really torture if you know nothing bad can happen to you on the top of Orthanc... Like if Saruman installed some nice fence and a lightning rod, and got him some nice books to read... He could, but that's not really the point... - Aragorn is probably hunting for food and patrolling... And when he saw the fire, he came running back, but Nazgul horses are faster than Aragorn's feet so that makes sense it takes him more time to come back... - The eagles are not so much 'ex machina' since we have a scene where Gandalf calls to them via the butterfly, so we know they were part of Gandalf's plan, so it's not really a plot device... If they just showed up without a setup, that would be 'ex machina' - Gandalf is afraid of Moria in the movies because he's not so sure as Gimli on how the dwarves have tamed Moria (of course Gimli is so sure, since he's a dwarf). There's nothing specific to talk about though... It's not like Gandalf is 100% sure Balin awoke Balrog again... - I'm guessing the dawn is terrible to orks and goblins and other creatures of the night... Makes sense in the type of ruler she'd want to be (destroying evil aggressively and so on)

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

Good points. Always nice to get another perspective!

[@thegoodfather1177]

11:30 For that you'd need a box without hinges, key or a lid, that you can hide golden treasure inside

[@Panthror]

First off: I'm NOT a CinemaSins fan, I loathe them as much as anyone watching a 'CinemaSins debunked' video probably does. However, the first point you make doesn't really hold ground. I should not have to read a book to pick up plot points that should have been addressed in the movie. The argument "It was in the books" should never be made for a movie. If it was in the books then it should also have been in the movie if it was important to the plot. You can't expect everyone to read the books, some people can't even read, and are glad they can finally enjoy the same story their 'reading' friends have been telling them about for years. I've read the books and this one even escaped me.

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

Check out my reupload of this video for a better explanation of what I was trying to say.

[@Panthror]

@@TolkienLorePodcast Maybe you should take this one down then. So people like me get the better video right away.

[@obiwankenobi9141]

You’re giving allot of credit even though you’re supposed to be debunking it.

[@BadgerPride89]

RE: 'you know of whom I speak' Boromir is literally the one who gets the focus on what the Ring is doing to him, he's the only one who gets an entire scene about him picking up the Ring. Like, it's completely obvious who Galadriel is talking about from a cinematic perspective.

[@pattheman3686]

Don't quote me on this one, but I think, in the novel Sam gets a fleeting glimpse of Frodo's legs being carried away by Strider and runs after him with Merry and Pippin right on his heels. But like I said I could be remembering that part wrong.

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

Frodo doesn’t get carried by Strider in the book. He crawls to Strider’s table, they chat, Frodo goes back to the other Hobbits, and when they go to their room Strider is already there.

[@pattheman3686]

Dude, for someone trying to debunk Cinemasins, you're giving them an uncommon amount of credit for their stupidity. I haven't seen you once NOT agree with them. I thought this was DEBUNKING cinemasins??

[@jibigcahoona5876]

The nazgul actually do cut down the guards but it happens alot later then the movie, after they attack the house in crickhollow. I think Frodo's already in Bree or near Bree I can't remember off the top of my head.

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

Actually the “rode down” the guards, which doesn’t imply any harm was done.

[@jibigcahoona5876]

Maybe you're right but in the books it did sound like the guards were killed. The nazgul left in a fury, and i just see it going down the same way they slew the guardsmen in the movie.Thanks for replying sir. Love your channel. Usually watch your videos to help me ralax after work. big lotr fan myself

[@noneofyourbeeswax01]

Why would seeing the eye when going to pick up the ring @ 7:26 let Gandalf know it was Sauron's Ring? At this point Sauron has yet to expose himself or his own Mordor Orcs marked by the eye - the last time Gandalf saw him he was corporeal, so why would Gandalf associate a fiery eye with him at this point? If the ability to make its wearer invisible didn't faze him - and he's known about that for years - why should he be overly concerned with a brief flash of an eye? Its true that with what he already knows about the ring he ought to be more concerned, but I don't think seeing the eye would have added that much more significance to it.

[@Freyafanboy90]

Just saying that a when Galdariel mentions he will take the ring. There was a prelude earlier in the movie when Frodo drops the ring and Boromir picks it up and the way he speaks and looks at it makes it clear it has some influence over him.

[@gajjjoni5315]

28:31 You are 100% right! Where do they get this idea - "only couple of hours"

[@fornamnefternamn1532]

2:55 I can assure you that if they presented the answer, CinemaSins wouldn't be happy anyways; they would probably say that the information is unnecessary.

[@GRasputin91]

This is supposed to be a debunking but I notice more often than not that you're agreeing with CinemaSins. Maybe you should instead call it an "examination" of their videos, rather than a debunking.

[@oliveremmettknox7776]

Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings Trilogy movies are a masterpiece and are faithful to the books that they are based on! >:(

[@samfrazee7022]

If the lowly hobbit Samwise looked like a tall figure clothed in white holding a ring of fire while bearing the ring at the tower of Cirith Ungol, I can only imagine how powerful the high king of Men Isildur would have been while holding the ring in the heart of Samnath Naur. I really don’t think Elrond could have won that fight lol

[@taylorwiseman8078]

Also, can someone please tell me what that little carrot-arrow-thing on the u in Isildur does for the pronunciation? How do you say the u with that symbol?

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

I don’t think I’ve ever seen it like that-where did you?

[@taylorwiseman8078]

@@TolkienLorePodcast Or maybe not in Isildur, but it's in Naz-gul.

[@jeambeam3173]

@@taylorwiseman8078 it might just be a difference in the meaning of the word depending or not if the accent is above the U or not

[@gajjjoni5315]

16:25 Maybe he was on the other side of watch-tower...

[@TheDarthbinky]

A couple comments (great video, btw): 1. About the ring - it does have its own malign intellect. Both in the books and the movies it's shown to act in the interest of getting back to Sauron. It dropped from Gollum to escape him, and it "betrayed" Isildur at Gladden Fields. The movie even shows it shrinking when Isildur claims it from Sauron. That said, it's shown no ability move under its own power as CS suggests. 2. With regards to "terrible as the dawn", I'm not aware of any other meaning of "terrible". It derives from the Latin word for "frighten", and as far as I know, it's always meant "causing fear". As you're surely aware, Galadriel's speech in the movie is a truncated, slightly weird version of what she says in the book- and her speech in the book has her crafting a metaphor for the dichotomy of beauty and horror that she would've embodied if she accepted the ring (and in the book, Gandalf says something fairly similar when Frodo likewise offers the ring). There's one line in both versions- "all shall love me and despair"- that sums it up pretty well, actually. You may be thinking of "terrific" which now generally means "really good" (or, less frequently, "really big" or "a lot") but actually is derived from the exact same place as "terrible". 3. Gimli's axes - if memory serves, Gimli does indeed have more than one. I dimly remember that when they fight the cave troll in Moria, Gimli throws an axe at the troll and then has a second one later while still fighting it. And then in the extended version of Return of the King when Aragorn and Gimli kill Gothmog, Gimli's clearly carrying two axes: kzbin.info/www/bejne/a4SZh62ohtlne8k

[@sanuelkessler8435]

I always figured that the ring was actually messing with the Wraiths at the tree hiding scene, because the ring kinda has its own semi-mind that it wanted to have the opportunity to corrupt frodo, and not be taken by the wraiths.

[@erickpoorbaugh6728]

15:15 Wasn't it stated somewhere that Orthanc is the core of a long-eroded volcano that the Numenoreans carved into a monolithic tower? If so, Orthanc is made of some sort of super-strong volcanic stone that's apparently too tough for ents to damage.

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

Don’t think it says that anywhere.

[@misss.o.j.]

The only thing wrong with FOTR is the Tomato Scene.

[@Palmieres]

CinemaSins is clickbait designed specifically for profit, nothing more. The creators of the channel have a profissional background designing viral content for the internet and they hit the jackpot with their youtube videos. They especially resonate with an audience with an attention span of a fruit fly hungering for easily digestable quips made at the expense of tired clichés and lazy humor that often contradicts itself. They're inconsistent in their motivations (sometimes it's satire, except when they decide it's not) and harm the industry by discouraging people from watching movies who take their negative views as serious and objective criticism. The same people who defend them for being satirical also say they won't watch the movie because CinemaSins' video showed them it wasn't worth their money. Don't bother dissecting their crap because you'll still end up with crap all the same.

[@christiegreenwood2642]

Cinema Sins is clickbait garbage that mixes deliberate misinterpretations, honest mistakes, dumb jokes, and real criticism, to the point when you can't tell any of it apart. Then, they resort to the usual "IT'S SATIRE" nonsense, because the criticism channel cannot stand being criticised. They also seem to have the attention span of a gnat. Also, is Jeremy deaf? He keeps mispronouncing names.

[@ryanratchford2530]

3:20 tbf Sauron’s hands are extremely dangerous weapons in and of themselves. That’s how Sauron killed Gil-Galad

[@gajjjoni5315]

12:03 Earlier in the movie, just after Hobbits exit the hole in the tree, Mary aksed Frodo "What was that?". And, yes, you are right about that we do not know how long Nazgul chase them...

[@grazareth]

Hey, I just discovered your channel and love your vids! Just 1 detail I have to mention: The mind-sharing thing IS actually fitting the legendarium. There's Tolkien's essay called "Ósanwe-kenta", originally I think part of "Laws and Customs among the Eldar" published in Parma Eldalamberon I believe. The Valar and Maiar and all Mirröanwi (incarnates) have that ability, especially elves. The natural state of minds is "open", unless you close it by will. That skill grew ever more rare and less powerful among the elves of middleearth and was replaced more and more by actual speach, but I would think a powerful and old Noldo/Teleri/Vanya-Elf like the great Nerwen Alatariel, come from Valinor would have the power and skill (especially with Nenya) to do what she did. And I mean... doesn't she basically do the same in the book?

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

Interesting. It’s been a while since I read that so I had forgotten. However, the only evidence of that sort of thing happening in LOTR is the feeling each of companions got, as if being examined (none said there was any specific dialogue) and at the very end where Gandalf, Galadriel, and Celeborn are said to converse with their minds. So they certainly did it between themselves, but it’s not clear that could have happened between Galadriel and Frodo (though I can’t rule it out either). Thanks for the input, and glad you like the channel. :)

[@grazareth]

Tolkien Lore Yeah you're right, I just thought that's one deviation that I'm actually ok with just because it kinda works out in my imagination 😅 catching up right now with other vids 😊

[@TheToohey10]

The sin for Gandalf being unsure if it's the Ring of Power, I think a reasonable explanation for that is that the Ring of Power had control over all the other rings so in the movie it may be possible that Gandalf believed this may have been one of the rings therefore went to research if this was the ring of power or just one of the other rings that was forged

[@fermintenava5911]

31:15 This is actually something discussed in "The Nature of Middle Earth" under the name "Osanwe-kenta", and it was possible even to someone like Denethor (whose will was strong enough): to infer something from another's mind, though only when the recepiant is somewhat open to it, and even then only the more shallow thoughts. Internal conversation (both-sided) was probably only possible for the Elves and the Ainur. But all of this is clearly very special knowledge and was only published in an issue of Vinyar Tengwar (1998), so it was legit to just look upon The Lord of the Rings, where it's portrayed ambigiously.

[@thectheb]

I always wanted to see something like everything wrong with cinemasins lotr and now i did thx

[@mAnGaLoVeR4eV2536]

I LIVE for this these cinemasins debunking vids :D

[@raimat66]

I suppose they ate sausage the same day as they reached Hollin and that is 8th of january. They leave Rivendell 25th of december. So, 14 days old sausage. Could work. I'd give it a try in the wilderness. :)

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

Doubtless it was smoked for preservation anyway!

[@jlburilov]

It could have been some other magick or ring of power that has been twisted by Sauron or other evil.

[@DisKorruptd]

Part of Cinema Sins shtick is that any information about what's going on in the film should be in the film, they shouldnt be required to read the books to understand the films (that said, Cinema Sins does get a LOT of shit wrong even in that department by omitting things they literally just saw)

[@RedDragonForce2]

CinemaSins: I don’t know what’s going on! Tell me!! Also CinemaSins: Why are you telling me these obvious things? Don’t tell me!! They are literally hypocritical on both sides of the spectrum. They sin Exposition, but when something “comes out of nowhere”, there like “I would have liked to have been informed about this ahead of time (aka exposition).”

[@stormreaper7]

I think that the point made by cinemasins when you say “if you read the books”.

[@davidfehn6023]

While you sit there and calmly and objectively tear apart CinemaSins in a grat way, I still find you way funnier in your responses than any video of CinemaSins i have ever seen. THose guys could not make anybody laugh if their life depended on it

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

I think some of their stuff is funny, particularly when their criticisms are accurate and they can give a short, pithy line, but that seems increasingly rare....

[@davidfehn6023]

To me, it seems like most humor today ... walking the same paths over and over. just like memes. They bring the same jokes every time: roll credits, "i came" jokes, the same running gags and the same cliches over and over.

[@arte0021]

How do the nazgul go around asking about Baggins if they look like creepy faceless spooks? Or do they not look like that in the book? I read it a very long time ago and dont remember

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

They keep their hoods up so no one tell their faceless. Lol

[@bobsbigboy_]

why is it only half the movie

[@pookiebear364]

As you know, the one ring DID have a bit of effect on Dwarves as the gold becomes all prevailing to them. At least it seems so to me...am I wrong...

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

I don’t think there’s anything that connects that to the One Ring. Perhaps to the Seven, but they were always pretty into gold anyway lol.

[@Catalistic]

What I thought about Dwarves is that they are already corrupted in a sense that they are already so greedy. So when it's activated, they just keep doing what they are doing.

[@sonnytapman]

I will say, I appreciate a man with swords as decorations.

[@powerofberzerker9487]

The worst sin in the first film is Sauron getting destroyed by reaching for Isildur but you can say that his arrogance got the better of him. And we do see Gil-Galad in a couple of shots so maybe he fought Sauron and weakened him, thus when Isildur cut his ring off, his magical power that killed many men, elves, Elendil and Gil-Galad was spent almost entirely. The last bit of magical energy that he had, he maybe used to prep up a final blow where he wanted to burn Isildur with his hand which he used in the books as well.

[@barrymanning4861]

Is this video 3 years old by now, and this comment is completely irrelevant now. Absolutely, but I still feel like I want to say that maybe cinema sins is being taken a little too seriously. It’s not just a critic channel, it’s also meant to be a comedy. They actually really love the trilogy, but I would have been disappointed if they hadn’t made a video on it. It’s also one of the shortest videos they’ve ever made for a movie, likely because they feel like there wasn’t much wrong to say about it in the first place. And of course, CS does not take information from the books when critiquing movies, but since this is from three years ago, they may not have said this explicitly back then.

[@rhondahoward8025]

The only thing I don't agree with you on is the "Oh, just read the book when questions aren't answered in the movie!" I think that's just an excuse to skimp on details. I mean come on, I shouldn't have to delve into TWO mediums when everything can be explained in the first.

[@Diamondmustang]

Gotta start by saying if you are just educating or doing this for fun disregard. It seems like you're genuinely upset by cinema sins and obviously very passionate about LOTR. They are not a critic channel they are a comedy channel. Everyone's so pissed it blows me away. I suggest you go watch everything wrong with cinema sins which kinda explains what their channel is about. On a different note I'm stoked to have found your channel, I love people who deep dive lore and can't wait to explore more thoroughly.

[@queerlydeparted7650]

To add to the Nazgül being afraid of water and fire; They are very fairy like with being omens/harbingers of death. And many of the fae folk were afraid of crossing rivers, or being touched by fire. So Its less of cinema sin, and more of just not liking a piece from collected story telling.