Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - - Part 16

[Roose Bolton]

So, who did Azog do the nasty with to father Bolg? And more importantly, why didn't Jackson show us this cinematic event?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

its the logical story arc and one me and you and a few others have suggested or assumed would take place since the AUJ days. I guess now we know Jackson didnt do it so he could have both Bolg and Azog play a part in BTFA. If it was between Bolg and Azog having a part in BTFA and Thorin not looking like a total ***** at the end of AUJ I choose Thorin not looking like a total *****.

Thorin looked so crap there. God I hate it. I never understood why Azog had to be live still. Just make Bolg look like him, to put the fear of God in Thorin.

 

[Brother Jack]

The Lurtz/Aragorn fight in Fellowship is just incredible. The whole Amon Hen sequence is amazing. It felt grubby and personal, especially when compared to the other climactic battles in the trilogy.

 

[Boom]

****, meet pants.

 

[ThePhantasm]

So you don't like The Avengers or LotR? You won't be watching AoU either I presume.

You don't think that Avengers and LOTR had good dramatic storytelling? Why are you bringing those up as examples? I'm baffled that you could miss the point that greatly.*

*and I say that because I usually have a high opinion of your arguments, even when we disagree

 

[Marvolo]

Thorin looked so crap there. God I hate it. I never understood why Azog had to be live still. Just make Bolg look like him, to put the fear of God in Thorin.

The scene reminds me of those MMA fights where the hyped up guy who's being called "the next great" gets knocked out from a single punch. They win a bunch of fights in a row and they get hyped up and talked about and they come marching out to the ring like a god. The crowds cheering. The lights are flashing. And then WHAM! Goes out from the first punch.

 

[ThePhantasm]

The Lurtz/Aragorn fight in Fellowship is just incredible. The whole Amon Hen sequence is amazing. It felt grubby and personal, especially when compared to the other climactic battles in the trilogy.

Precisely. It had grit and weight to it. Honestly Legolas' best moments were in that fight, not surfing cartoonishly down an elephant and defying all physical laws of Middle Earth.

 

[Warhammer]

I just read a review that said that this The Five Armies is legitimately entertaining. Not surprising whatsoever since it's the climax of the book, but man, that sure does excite me. I still feel like the first two were a waste of my money. They dragged out 100 pages so thin, I feel asleep during the first one and fought my sleep in the second.

 

[Herolee10]

Speaking of replacing real character (on-set) with CGI models, I've been meaning to ask everyone this question in order to hear their thoughts about the matter.

Awhile back, I had learned that in the original shooting script (along with what they had filmed as well), Aragorn was supposed to fight a Sauron, in full form, at the final battle outside the black gates in ROTK but that it was later decided to turn it into a CGI troll.

How would you guys have felt if Jackson had actually stayed with his original decision to have Aragorn take on Sauron in ROTK instead?

 

[ThePhantasm]

It would have been a godawful idea.

 

[Warhammer]

The storyboards were interesting to see, but I am so glad it didn't happen. I don't really fancy the idea of Sauron creating a physical manifestation due to it opening up questions like "Why didn't he do it sooner?" or "If he had that kind of power, why didn't he have a bunch of himself walking around running s***?"

On a related note, I do wish they kept the Mouth of Sauron in the theatrical cut.

 

[Herolee10]

It would have been a godawful idea.

The storyboards were interesting to see, but I am so glad it didn't happen. I don't really fancy the idea of Sauron creating a physical manifestation due to it opening up questions like "Why didn't he do it sooner?" or "If he had that kind of power, why didn't he have a bunch of himself walking around running s***?"

On a related note, I do wish they kept the Mouth of Sauron in the theatrical cut.

Fair points.

Yeah, though I wish they would have found a better opponent to have put Aragorn in such a life threatening situation in the final battle than a simple armored up troll.

Instead of killing off the "Mouth of Sauron" so easily, he would have been a great visual/aesthetic replacement for the troll to fight off Aragorn in that bout.

 

[Warhammer]

Yeah, I agree. Aragorn versus the Mouth of Sauron would have been a great deviation. In hindsight, some random troll is pretty lame.

 

[Marvolo]

It would have been a godawful idea.

Agreed. Glad they put a troll in that scene.

About the Mouth of Sauron, is he capable of fighting? I dont know much about him. Like is he just a mouth piece or capable of independent thought and action?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

You don't think that Avengers and LOTR had good dramatic storytelling? Why are you bringing those up as examples? I'm baffled that you could miss the point that greatly.*

*and I say that because I usually have a high opinion of your arguments, even when we disagree

You specifically bring up "CGI slugfest" as if that negates the possibility of good storytelling. If that were the case movies like Fellowship, TWS, etc couldn't be good films. Which is clearly not the case.

Read what you wrote,

Exactly. Its all about visuals and not about the story. Stories have drama and suspense. CGI sludgefests have cartoon physics and boring, pointless battles.

By the way, there is no drama and suspense in the final act of The Avengers, and it has nothing to do with the cartoon physics.

 

[Marvolo]

Avengers 1 was never gonna have much tension. We knew they wouldnt kill any of the main cast.

Avengers 2 is gonna have a similar problem since Marvel has announced 6 years worth of sequels and new films in advance." There is little threat to Thor, Cap, or Iron Man in Avenger 2. Sure they might get banged up but we know they can't die or stay dead.

There are other threats to them and other characters, but mortal threat is off the table for those three characters, and even when people die they can always come back if Marvel needs them to.

Still enjoy the heck outa those films tho.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I never said CGI negated good storytelling. I said CGI sludgefests (when "its all about the visuals and not about the story") did. I've repeatedly said over the past few pages that well used CGI can complement the story or battle nicely...

The Avengers is a mediocre movie to me, but I'm hopeful the sequel will be better. But that's neither here nor there.

 

[jmc]

Speaking of replacing real character (on-set) with CGI models, I've been meaning to ask everyone this question in order to hear their thoughts about the matter.

Awhile back, I had learned that in the original shooting script (along with what they had filmed as well), Aragorn was supposed to fight a Sauron, in full form, at the final battle outside the black gates in ROTK but that it was later decided to turn it into a CGI troll.

How would you guys have felt if Jackson had actually stayed with his original decision to have Aragorn take on Sauron in ROTK instead?

From a general storytelling perspective to not have the big bad turn up at some point during the final act of what was a 9 hour journey kinda sucks the air out of how big a threat the bad guy is. That said, it kinda works for LOTR. I guess what it probably boils down to is that by the time Aragon and co march to the Black Gate we've just spent the best part of an hour epicly battling our way through Gondor and that the focus needed to be on the destruction of the Ring not the fight going on outside the Gate. To have Sauron turn up would mean having to spend far more time on the battle than the destruction of the Ring. I think the original plan would have worked, but it may have been rather anticlimactic to have Sauron show up in the end as it probably would have been not much more than a glorified cameo appearance, and if it's not much more than that the question you have to ask is whether there's any point in changing it from the book.

 

[titansupes]

I never understood how Aragorn was supposed to be fighting that troll the way he was. Lucky he was suddenly granted super strength.

 

[Marvolo]

From a general storytelling perspective to not have the big bad turn up at some point during the final act of what was a 9 hour journey kinda sucks the air out of how big a threat the bad guy is. That said, it kinda works for LOTR. I guess what it probably boils down to is that by the time Aragon and co march to the Black Gate we've just spent the best part of an hour epicly battling our way through Gondor and that the focus needed to be on the destruction of the Ring not the fight going on outside the Gate. To have Sauron turn up would mean having to spend far more time on the battle than the destruction of the Ring. I think the original plan would have worked, but it may have been rather anticlimactic to have Sauron show up in the end as it probably would have been not much more than a glorified cameo appearance, and if it's not much more than that the question you have to ask is whether there's any point in changing it from the book.

And a plothole. Sauron can't take physical form until he has the Ring.

I never understood how Aragorn was supposed to be fighting that troll the way he was. Lucky he was suddenly granted super strength.

Well Jackson put himself in a tricky situation. Ninety percent of the footage they shot of Viggo in the battle the battle involved him fighting some 10' being. So Jackson had two options when he decided to cut Sauron from the final battle: cut out all the footage of Viggo fighting something large and having very little Viggo footage left to use in the battle or insert some other giant creature in the place of Sauron so that he could salvage the footage. He chose the lesser of two evils, and it's not ideal, but it's better than Aragorn having no actual scenes in the battle itself.

I guess if a person wants an explanation for how Aragorn was holding his own against the troll they could think that Andrúil possess the strength to take on a fully grown troll and somehow gives the King the strength to also withstand a troll attack. It's not perfect but that's about the best I can come up with.

 

[sueb1863]

I don't get why PJ felt the need to use Legolas so much anyway. It's not as if Orlando Bloom still has legions of fangirls who are swooning over him. RotK was eleven years ago and those girls have grown up and moved on while his film career fizzled. I can see him getting one set-piece fight in the whole trilogy, maybe, but that's it.

 

[regwec]

Speaking of replacing real character (on-set) with CGI models, I've been meaning to ask everyone this question in order to hear their thoughts about the matter.

Awhile back, I had learned that in the original shooting script (along with what they had filmed as well), Aragorn was supposed to fight a Sauron, in full form, at the final battle outside the black gates in ROTK but that it was later decided to turn it into a CGI troll.

How would you guys have felt if Jackson had actually stayed with his original decision to have Aragorn take on Sauron in ROTK instead?

It would have been a terrible idea. Firstly, PJ would have almost certainly have given Sauron the same form that he had in the prologue, despite it explicitly being said that losing the ring extinguished that form altogether. Secondly, it would have made it seem as if Sauron was at bay; he wasn't. Rather, he was sitting behind a freshly sprung death trap, laughing his daemonic arse off. Had he taken to the field of battle, it would have been less clear that the only chance the goodies had of victory was the destruction of the ring. Thirdly, either Sauron would have had to have been shown to be weaker without the ring, making Aragorn seem feebler than Isildur, or the whole point of the ring would be blown out of the water. Fourthly, if Sauron had appeared, it would have been Gandalf alone who stood much chance against him. That would have sidelined Aragorn's ascent in the narrative, or left a plot hole.

There is no way that showdown could have been crafted to have worked.

And a plothole. Sauron can't take physical form until he has the Ring.

Wrong: Sauron simply couldn't take the same form again. Gandalf and Pippin discuss the possibility of Sauron leading the assault on Minas Tirith in ROTK (the book): it is made clear that he wouldn't make that choice, not that he couldn't. We will probably see some manifestation of Sauron in TBOFA.

Heaven help us.

Let me add here that Aragorn's murder of the Mouth of Sauron was the single most baffling and least appropriate moment in the ROTK EE. It towers over anything in the Hobbit movies as an inexplicable choice that completely ruined a principle character.

I don't get why PJ felt the need to use Legolas so much anyway. It's not as if Orlando Bloom still has legions of fangirls who are swooning over him. RotK was eleven years ago and those girls have grown up and moved on while his film career fizzled. I can see him getting one set-piece fight in the whole trilogy, maybe, but that's it.

I suppose he was the only recognisable Elf from LOTR that had a connection to Mirkwood.

If I can try to arbitrate the debate on Legolas: I can see both arguments. Legolas effectively shadows Bilbo's party throughout their journey, so he is not such a consummate distraction as Detective Gandalf tracking down the Necromancer. That is only a argument for relative merit, however. He would have been a recurrent annoyance in a more streamlined and better structured adaptation. It was nice to see more of the Elves while we were in Mirkwood but, in a perfect world, we should have left them there until Thranduil led them to battle.

 

[Marvolo]

It would have been a terrible idea. Firstly, PJ would have almost certainly have given Sauron the same form that he had in the prologue, despite it explicitly being said that losing the ring extinguished that form altogether. Secondly, it would have made it seem as if Sauron was at bay; he wasn't. Rather, he was sitting behind a freshly sprung death trap, laughing his daemonic arse off. Had he taken to the field of battle, it would have been less clear that the only chance the goodies had of victory was the destruction of the ring. Thirdly, either Sauron would have had to have been shown to be weaker without the ring, making Aragorn seem feebler than Isildur, or the whole point of the ring would be blown out of the water. Fourthly, if Sauron had appeared, it would have been Gandalf alone who stood much chance against him. That would have sidelined Aragorn's ascent in the narrative, or left a plot hole.

There is no way that showdown could have been crafted to have worked.



Wrong: Sauron simply couldn't take the same form again. Gandalf and Pippin discuss the possibility of Sauron leading the assault on Minas Tirith in ROTK (the book): it is made clear that he wouldn't make that choice, not that he couldn't. We will probably see some manifestation of Sauron in TBOFA.

Heaven help us.

Let me add here that Aragorn's murder of the Mouth of Sauron was the single most baffling and least appropriate moment in the ROTK EE. It towers over anything in the Hobbit movies as an inexplicable choice that completely ruined a principle character.



I suppose he was the only recognisable Elf from LOTR that had a connection to Mirkwood.

If I can try to arbitrate the debate on Legolas: I can see both arguments. Legolas effectively shadows Bilbo's party throughout their journey, so he is not such a consummate distraction as Detective Gandalf tracking down the Necromancer. That is only a argument for relative merit, however. He would have been a recurrent annoyance in a more streamlined and better structured adaptation. It was nice to see more of the Elves while we were in Mirkwood but, in a perfect world, we should have left them there until Thranduil led them to battle.

I was referring to the film and whats established in it. Not the book. Its established in the film that "Sauron has regained much of his former strength. He cannot yet take physical form, but his spirit has lost none of its potency." So it would have been a plot hole for him to show up in any physical form in ROTK.

And he hasn't shown up in physical form in the previous hobbit films so I doubt he will in BTFA. He will likely be the same black non corporeal specter spirit thing he was in AUJ and then reveal himself wreathed in fire like in DOS, but even in that state he is still spirit and not physical.

I thought Aragorn decapitating the Mouth of Sauron scene was a nice "**** you" moment to Sauron and the Mouth had it coming. He was a fascinating character tho and Id like to have seen more of him.

Edit: Im hitting the hay. If you respond to me but I dont respond to you its not cause Im ignoring you or anything like that. Ill pop back in later today.

 

[Vartha]

I like the movies.
I can understand the fans of the books don't like PJ's version because it's not exactly the same, but can you imagine how many more times the Professor would have added to EACH book and story had he lived longer?


EDIT: I won't be avoiding this last film because it IS somewhat the end of a Historic Tale and I refuse to miss out on the experience of the Big screen even if it's not one opening night

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I like the movies.
I can understand the fans of the books don't like PJ's version because it's not exactly the same, but can you imagine how many more times the Professor would have added to EACH book and story had he lived longer?

I would have liked the first two Hobbits better if they were simply good films. Being a fan of the books is one thing. Being a fan of film is another.