The Battle of the 5+ Armies

[Michael Murry]

For some reason, my computer connection to the Barrow Downs failed several months ago and has only now (in early May, 2015) magically resurrected itself. Since I saw this dreadful film at the theater back in December of 2014, I have forgotten most of what I disliked about it, which leaves me with hardly anything left to say, except that I liked the fact that it eventually ended. Still, I had begun several years ago to do a series of poems lampooning the Elf-Chick / Young Elf Lord fan-fiction romance thing but I had to wait for the third film in order to complete the cycle. Of course, along the way, the name of the elf-chick character changed, as did the identity of the actress chosen to portray her. Then, too, the immortal Young Elf Lord character had to step aside and watch the elf-chick fall for a doomed dwarf instead – from mediocre ménage à deux to moronic ménage à trois, so to speak.

Anyway, now that I have a restored connection to the Barrow Downs discussion forum, I can try to wrap up this guerrilla lampooning in verse, especially since it had no effect on the producers and director of such trash. To refresh my memory, I read through the many comments by other posters and settled on the following two, which seemed appropriate for my purposes:

“Tauriel and Kili's romance was made very shoddily and unrealistically, and the whole Hey I just met you and this is crazy drama seems like something that could only happen to, or be taken seriously by, indiscriminate teenagers. Then again they seem to be the target audience.” – Aganzir

and

“Meanwhile, over at ToRn, they are high-fiving each other joyously with happy Hobbit erections, fluffed, as it were, with Jacksonian enthusiasm.“ – Morthoron

So with the fan-boy erections and the indiscriminate teenage mall-maiden demographic in mind, I remembered from the second film of this interminable trilogy how the dwarf Kili had challenged the Elf-Chick Security Guard to look in his trousers where she might find "something." To which she glibly retorted, "or nothing." So, as I sat through the third film, I waited to find out whether Itaril/Tauriel would ever look in the dwarf Kili's trousers. If so, I wondered, would she find anything, something, or nothing there? In other words, did the smutty innuendo in the previous film actually have a purpose in setting up the real cause of the Elf-Chick Security Guard's "regret" and "pain" at the dwarf Kili's unconsummated passing? I mean, would she feel terribly bad that she had missed out on her one "big" chance or would she feel cheap and stupid for imagining satisfaction from anything that insignificant? I mean, even a realy stupid plot premise ought to have some logical kind of development to conclusion.

But no such luck. The film answered none of these pressing questions, and -- to add insult to injury -- once he no longer had the dwarf for romantic competition -- the Young Elf Lord simply dumped the lower-class Elf Chick and went off to look for "a ranger named 'Strider'" at the behest of his father, the Evish King Thranduil. Strider, of course, as we know from Tolkien's Appendices, had barely reached the age of ten at that time (2941) and would not aquire the nickname "Strider" from the local inhabitants at Bree for another seventy-seven years (3018). Then, too, as we know from Tolkien's "Council of Elrond" in the Fellowship of the Ring, Legolas only shows up as a messenger from his father to report the fact of Gollum's escape from the Elves' custody. So much for Peter Jackson's ham-handed attempt to link The Hobbit to The Lord of the Rings.

With the above in mind, then, I'll try to wrap up the Elf Chick Security Guard Cycle with:

Unrequited Elf/Dwarf Libido

How did this interspecies film romance
Have anything amounting to a chance
If he, the dwarf, had nothing in his shorts
And she, the elf, knew only glib retorts?

We know that elves and men can mate, it's true,
Because Professor Tolkien said they do.
But how do elves and dwarves refute the rule
That horses crossed with donkeys make a mule?

Or does this tacky, tawdry, tame affair
Appeal (with not a hint of savoir faire)
To boys in bed, both hands beneath the sheets,
And girls who've yet to grow a pair of teats?

And what of that young elf lord -- You-Know-Him --
Whose face emotes expressions fell and grim
Who left the elf-chick in his dad's employ
To go in search of one ten-year-old boy.

Michael Murry, "The Misfortune Teller," copyright 2015

[LordPhillock]

Hey everyone! I am happy that the forum is back, and since it was all gone for so long, I was going to link up a podcast I and my brother run, and one where in December 2014, we dedicated three episodes discussing our "Hobbit Trilogy" experiences. I'd rather love it if you could maybe listen to that to get a glimpse of what my feelings to the films are and were -- and some experiences I, my brother, and our cousin had during these "turbulent times" from 2012 to 2014. Needless to say, we did not like the films... but felt that they were so utterly bizarre, we were morbidly excited seeing how they would turn out.

If that's alright with all of you.
Part 1 (where we discuss the previous films, and predict what will happen in part 3),
Part 2 (reviewing the whole third film), and
Part 3 (concluding our discussions).

Excuse me if I'm blatantly abusing forum rules, it was not my intention in the least.

I love all of your conversations, and it kept me sane during 2012 through 2014 when the hobbit-hype died down. Thanks, all of you. Truly.

[Zigûr]

Originally Posted by LordPhillock

Hey everyone! I am happy that the forum is back, and since it was all gone for so long, I was going to link up a podcast I and my brother run, and one where in December 2014, we dedicated three episodes discussing our "Hobbit Trilogy" experiences. I'd rather love it if you could maybe listen to that to get a glimpse of what my feelings to the films are and were -- and some experiences I, my brother, and our cousin had during these "turbulent times" from 2012 to 2014. Needless to say, we did not like the films... but felt that they were so utterly bizarre, we were morbidly excited seeing how they would turn out.

Hi Phil, I'll definitely check these out when I next get a chance. I watched your commentaries on the first two films and they definitely amused - your exaggerated impersonation of Ian McKellen saying "Saurrrron! Rrrringwrrrrraiths!" has become a kind of personal joke of mine... I may have stolen it for use in my own conversations about the films. I think at the end of the first commentary you said something about how anyone who watched the commentary should email you to prove he/she had watched it (I forget what the password was) and I was going to, but I realised I wasn't sure of your email address (beyond the one mentioned in the commentaries which I got the impression you were going to make but I wasn't sure if you actually did make it).

By the way it was a shame about that notice on the YouTube channel regarding the audiobook LotR but I'm glad it has nonetheless survived, I was listening to some later chapters recently and really enjoyed your reading of "Durin's Folk" in particular.

[Nerwen]

Lord Phillock, your Part 2 & 3 appear to link to the same page. Just letting you know.

[LordPhillock]

Zigûr, wow thanks so much for that! I'm just proud someone of your strong opinion (your blog is so fun to read!) actually is willing to take the time to listen to us talk on our podcast.

I'm still trying to finish our commentary on "Five Armies" on video, but I'll post that somewhere else. I'm just flattered someone is marginally interested!

Also thanks for telling me, Nerwen. I have fixed it

[Zigûr]

Originally Posted by LordPhillock

Zigûr, wow thanks so much for that! I'm just proud someone of your strong opinion (your blog is so fun to read!) actually is willing to take the time to listen to us talk on our podcast.

Thanks Phil. I'll be lining up your podcast to listen to ASAP. I meant to listen last night in fact but got a bit distracted.

On another note just now I made the mistake of visiting a large, popular "Tolkien forum" that shall go unnamed and one thing struck me in particular: the recurring sentiment of "wait for the Extended Edition."

At the end of the day, isn't the Extended Edition just the Theatrical Edition with a bit more padding shoved in? At least, that's what the EEs of "The Lord of the Rings" felt like to me - points of interest that hadn't made it to the cinema, but ultimately nothing terribly significant. Everything I know about the Extended Edition of the first two "Hobbit" films has seemed to be the same (Dwarves inexplicably washing in the fountain at Rivendell and other pointless vulgarisms).

I think if the "The Battle of THE Five Armies" Extended Edition ends up having tonnes of additional concluding content like Thorin's funeral, the restoration of Dale, the coronation of Dáin, etc, etc, it doesn't make the Extended Edition a more "valid" version of the film, it'll just make the Theatrical Cut seem even more wishy washy and incomplete, and the entire project (in my view) come across as more badly compromised.

I realise something like Blade Runner is an example generally speaking of a situation in which the "Director's Cut" is considered to improve upon the original, but it seems to me that that derived from drastically overhauling the manner in which the narrative was presented, rather than just jamming in a bunch of extra footage which the faceless men at Warner Bros. didn't think was necessary to make back their dough in the winter holiday market last year.

[Aiwendil]

Yeah, the last thing Jackson's Hobbit films need is Extended Editions. If anything, they should come out with Contracted Editions.