Overview

The segment features a tongue-in-cheek debate between Matt Walsh and Ben Shapiro over the merits of "The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King," with Walsh criticizing its excessive length, multiple endings, and plot conveniences like the Eagles and ghost army.

Walsh mockingly characterizes Shapiro's fandom while claiming Shapiro responded emotionally by creating a YouTube video with "experts" to defend the films, highlighting the passionate nature of fan communities.

Street interviews reveal that many viewers find the films' length prohibitive and question plot elements like the Eagles' limited use and Frodo's capabilities as a protagonist, suggesting a gap between critical acclaim and casual viewer experience.

Despite acknowledging some legitimate criticisms about plot devices like the army of the dead, defenders argue the films' length is justified by the source material's complexity and the films maintain engaging pacing throughout.

Content

Matt Walsh begins by critiquing "Return of the King," presenting arguments that have apparently upset Ben Shapiro. His key criticisms include:

- The excessive runtime (3.5 hours) - Too many endings (four total) - Plot inconsistencies, specifically: * The Eagles' convenient appearance at the end * The army of ghosts making the entire battle seemingly unnecessary

Walsh mockingly characterizes Shapiro's intense Lord of the Rings fandom, suggesting he:

- Attends Lord of the Rings conventions - Has Elijah Wood posters - Dresses as Aragorn at Renaissance fairs - Speaks Elvish - Owns a Lord of the Rings lunchbox

Walsh notes that Shapiro reportedly responded to the critique by:

- Becoming emotionally upset - Creating a YouTube video - Bringing in "experts" to counter the arguments, including: * The Critical Drinker * Dr. Malcolm (described as looking like a "Gandalf in a Boca Raton retirement community")

The discussion then shifts to a defense of the Lord of the Rings films' length and pacing:

- The entire book series is over 1,000 pages, justifying the long runtime - Extended cuts provide a more complete experience - Despite their length, the films maintain a quick pace

Character analysis is presented, contrasting:

- Gandalf as a wizard who advises without exploiting power - Saruman as a cautionary example of potential corruption

Some criticisms are acknowledged:

- The army of the dead in Return of the King feels like a "deus ex machina" - Their involvement oversimplifies the Battle of Pelennor Fields - The potential plot shortcut of using eagles to quickly resolve the quest is debated

Street interviews are then presented, revealing:

- Many people have not seen the entire series - The length of the movies is a significant deterrent - Mixed opinions about Frodo as a protagonist: * Perceived as somewhat whiny * Heavily dependent on Sam * Likely unable to complete the mission alone - Most interviewees questioned why eagles weren't used to travel to Mordor - While not considering the movies completely overrated, many acknowledged potential overhyping

The segment concludes with Walsh claiming victory in the debate, declaring the film "overrated" and using provocative language targeting Shapiro with Lord of the Rings-related imagery (pillow, Gollum beanie baby)

Walsh ends with a mocking tone about the "expert class" and democratic validation, making a dramatic, tongue-in-cheek proclamation of ending the debate and blessing "the King"

Matt Walsh DESTROYS Super Nerd Ben Shapiro (And His Silly Little "Experts")

Overview

Content

More from The Matt Walsh Show

Listen smarter with PodBrief