Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - - Part 16

[ThePhantasm]

I think the wyrm look is what they should have gone for. It would have been both unique and faithful to Tolkien's mythos.

 

[Boom]

Have you watched the smaug doc? I only ask because the weta team put the spikes on, but it was Jackson's idea to have them flair up and emote when smaug was getting riled up so they became more pronounced.

If you haven't watched the doc, its funny you mention the harry potter and reign of fire dragons...they show those dragons in the doc.

About him being reptilian. Smaug is a reptile. Tolkien used the old english word Wyrm and Smaug is serpent like. Im not sure there's anyway to avoid that look with a dragon without losing the scales. I wonder if it might have been better to go for the worm snake look. They drew a snake like design very reminiscent of the dragon on the original 1937 cover of the hobbit book, but decided against using it in the film.

I should have elobarated a bit. I mean he was too reptilian in the traditional sense. I was able to watch that documentary, and they looked at Komodo Dragons, alligators, crocodiles, and snakes as references. The final Smaug design borrowed key physical characteristics from these real-world reptiles. And you can clearly see that in the finished film.

If you google "Medieval dragon painting," you get some pretty interesting stuff. It really is fascinating to see how these ancient cultures visualized these creatures. They were reptilian, yet they were not, if that makes sense. They really looked like they belonged to their own animal kingdom. Pure fantasy.

 

[Boom]

Removed the picture because I'm fuzzy on SHH's policy regarding paintings featuring the male buttocks . It's an extraordinary painting depicting two followers of Cadmus being devoured by a dragon.

Then there's Tolkien's own illustration of Smaug. That should have been the starting off point.

 

[jf300]

Smaug is one of the true highlights of this trilogy. He has a beautiful design, a great voice performance from Cumberbatch and amazing CGI.

I'm not sure your average filmgoer is going to care whether Smaug is reptilian or not. He's a dragon at the end of the day. He's a great character, that's the main point.

 

[Marvolo]

I should have elobarated a bit. I mean he was too reptilian in the traditional sense. I was able to watch that documentary, and they looked at Komodo Dragons, alligators, crocodiles, and snakes as references. The final Smaug design borrowed key physical characteristics from these real-world reptiles. And you can clearly see that in the finished film.

If you google "Medieval dragon painting," you get some pretty interesting stuff. It really is fascinating to see how these ancient cultures visualized these creatures. They were reptilian, yet they were not, if that makes sense. They really looked like they belonged to their own animal kingdom. Pure fantasy.

Yeah I see what you mean and something more original (yet not outlandish) definitely could have worked too. I'm thankful we didn't end up with one of those "brutes" they showed in the concept art. Some of those things were very very komodo-like with a massive fat roundish head and were just god awful and fugly. If they had went that route i don't even know how I would have taken that. Probably would have soured the whole film for me.

 

[regwec]

I'm not sure your average filmgoer is going to care whether Smaug is reptilian or not.

No offense to you, but it annoys me when people take this line. We are fans discussing our relative appreciation of the books and films, not marketeers running a focus group. The "average filmgoer" perspective implies that the lowest common denominator is always the best approach.

As for Smaug: I think the design was a reasonable compromise between tradition and innovation. It wasn't quite "my" Smaug (or Tolkien's), but it could have been much further away. The only major gripe I have is that, having only two dedicated legs, it is not actually a European dragon.

I was far more troubled by Smaug being portrayed as a bungling fool.

 

[Vartha]

Removed the picture because I'm fuzzy on SHH's policy regarding paintings featuring the male buttocks . It's an extraordinary painting depicting two followers of Cadmus being devoured by a dragon.

Then there's Tolkien's own illustration of Smaug. That should have been the starting off point.

huh? pm me a link, normally any actual nudity is a nono

 

[ares834]

I actually loved Smaug's design. When I first heard he would use his wings as forelimbs I was absolutely pissed. Especially since we saw his arms in AUJ. But when I saw the film I thought it worked incredibly well. More than anything though, it was nice to see a dragon based more on a serpent than a lizard or dinosaur.

 

[regwec]

I never knew that JRR Tolkien had made an (unfinished) sketch of Sauron.

It seems that the shape of the outstretched (five fingered?) hand was of particular importance.

 

[Boom]

I never knew that JRR Tolkien had made an (unfinished) sketch of Sauron.

It seems that the shape of the outstretched (five fingered?) hand was of particular importance.

I believe that particular painting was of the moment when the Ring is destroyed. When that happens, they see a large black cloud in the sky that seemed to take the shape of a man with an outstretched arm.

 

[regwec]

That would make sense, but then shouldn't the hand be four fingered? For that reason I had assumed it was supposed to depict Sauron just prior to losing the Ring.

 

[Boom]

Hmm.. that's a good point.

You're right. It couldn't be post-ring if he has all five fingers.

 

[terry78]

That's pretty cool.

 

[Vartha]

Man I need to look these art books up at B&N

 

[jf300]

No offense to you, but it annoys me when people take this line. We are fans discussing our relative appreciation of the books and films, not marketeers running a focus group. The "average filmgoer" perspective implies that the lowest common denominator is always the best approach.

As for Smaug: I think the design was a reasonable compromise between tradition and innovation. It wasn't quite "my" Smaug (or Tolkien's), but it could have been much further away. The only major gripe I have is that, having only two dedicated legs, it is not actually a European dragon.

I was far more troubled by Smaug being portrayed as a bungling fool.

Oh, I meant no offense by 'average filmgoer'. I was just stating that people who aren't huge Tolkien fans or dragon enthusiasts wouldn't know whether it was reptilian or not. They probably wouldn't know that it wasn't a European dragon either.

I'm not saying that the average filmgoer should be who Jackson was aiming for, and there are many gripes that I have with this series of films. However, Smaug is, in my opinion, one of the trilogy's triumphs.

 

[Marvolo]

LOTR Saga Legacy Trailer
[Yt]CimPWFadVsU[/MEDIA]

 

[Quasimod0]

Really enjoyed that.

 

[Drizzle]

Awesome shot of Thorin and company charging into battle at the end of that trailer.

 

[Spider-Ock]

Anyone know how much screen time Sauron/Necromancer is gonna get in this movie? I find the whole prequel thing with Sauron really interesting and was hoping to see him in full physical form for a change.

 

[regwec]

You saw him in full physical form in FOTR, though he seemed to be an imitation of Morgoth.

 

[Boom]

I don't think Sauron was intended to be as armored as he is in the FotR prologue.

 

[regwec]

Hard to say. Morgoth certainly was, which makes me say it was an imitation. Tolkien's sketch seems to show Sauron with bare arms.

 

[Boom]

Plus the mention of Sauron's "black hand." And I believe his eyes were also visible and he had a face described as being very terrible. Which could suggest an open-faced helm.

 

[regwec]

Good catch

 

[Silvermoon]

Don't know if this has ever been posted, even if it has - I think it deserves reposting (showed up on my facebook feed earlier today). Thranduil looking badass in his armor