Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
My point is its not too bad for a random Goblin.

That wasn't your point at all. Read your post.

It isn't a random goblin. Pretty sure it is the Goblin King's "assistant". We have seen the "random" Goblin's in action. The quality varies.
 
Bolg looks like the best Goblin but I am a bit confused but which becomes the leader of the Goblins book wise. If ask me Bolg looks bit like Lurz type of leader.
 
If memory serves me both Azog and Bolg are played By actors I think. Manu Bennett and Conan Stevens

Azog has been widely reported as cg and some say quite sketch CG at that.

Bolg though we've seen pictures of a person in costume and he looks super gnarly.
 
Bolg looks like the best Goblin but I am a bit confused but which becomes the leader of the Goblins book wise. If ask me Bolg looks bit like Lurz type of leader.

That is because he is practical and not a cgi creation.

Apparently Bolg starts the story in Dol Guldur. I don't know what that does for his story, but I am thinking he was meant to confront Gandalf in the original cut of the first film and that is why he is now no where to be seen even with all the merch he is on. Once the decision to change to 3 films, he probably got pushed back to the second film.
 
Talk about generalization. Please stop complaining about critics because you don't like what they said. You want to make up your own mind, do so. But your attempts to influence other makes you no different then the critics you are complaining about.
Not complaining about the critics i am just saying Critics have been out of touch with movie goers and like everyone else it just seems like they made up there own mind it will be bad before they watched the movie. You can convince your own mind that a movie is bad before see a trailer or what not.
 
That is because he is practical and not a cgi creation.

Apparently Bolg starts the story in Dol Guldur. I don't know what that does for his story, but I am thinking he was meant to confront Gandalf in the original cut of the first film and that is why he is now no where to be seen even with all the merch he is on. Once the decision to change to 3 films, he probably got pushed back to the second film.
My understanding is both Bolg and Azrog are at the Battle of the Five Armies.
I am not sure how Azog had kids because aren't they made from Mud. Movie wise they never really explained the whole Orc and Goblin thing very well. Breeding Orcs with Goblin Men was the passage but they call them both orc and goblins at different times.
 
Not complaining about the critics i am just saying Critics have been out of touch with movie goers and like everyone else it just seems like they made up there own mind it will be bad before they watched the movie. You can convince your own mind that a movie is bad before see a trailer or what not.

So a critic not liking Bayformers, while audiences flock to see it, means critics are out of touch now?

I call bull. A good movie is a good movie, whether it sells 50 million tickets or 100. I don't take critics on face value on whether I will like a film or not, nor do they influence my view on a film. But a good critic can write some very interesting, thought provoking criticism on any film.
 
Last edited:
My understanding is both Bolg and Azrog are at the Battle of the Five Armies.
I am not sure how Azog had kids because aren't they made from Mud. Movie wise they never really explained the whole Orc and Goblin thing very well. Breeding Orcs with Goblin Men was the passage but they call them both orc and goblins at different times.

Azog and Bolg are full blood Orcs not Uruk. Orcs arent created from mud, and neither are Uruks. What you saw in FOTR was Uruk emerging from their pods. The way Jackson intended it they are a cross breed of goblin men and orcs then they are put into an incubator of sorts in the ground where they emerge fully grown or some such ****. It isnt clear but they arent mud people.
 
Last edited:
My understanding is both Bolg and Azrog are at the Battle of the Five Armies.
I am not sure how Azog had kids because aren't they made from Mud. Movie wise they never really explained the whole Orc and Goblin thing very well. Breeding Orcs with Goblin Men was the passage but they call them both orc and goblins at different times.

Well that is the third film, so I am not sure how that is relevant here. Also, if the latest TV spot is to be believed, [BLACKOUT]Azog[/BLACKOUT] is not long for this world.

Pretty sure Orcs and/or Goblin's can reproduce.
 
Very interesting. How was this conversion made?

I was reading on it last night. It is an algorithm that is used to smooth and convert it. It is only an approximation of what Jackson's film will look like. Jackson had the ability to crank up and down the motion smoothing and frame rate when he chose. This algirithm doesnt allow that.
 
Well that is the third film, so I am not sure how that is relevant here. Also, if the latest TV spot is to be believed, [BLACKOUT]Azog[/BLACKOUT] is not long for this world.

Pretty sure Orcs and/or Goblin's can reproduce.
Well yes i assumed that mordor created females orcs from female elves. Or maybe Goblins kidnap human and elf women. I am just saying Tolkien kinda made all that a bit confusing and considering you see Urakai being made from Mud. Also calling Orcs and Goblins the same race gets confusing. Kinda wished they were 2 races and Just keep one like Hobgoblins as the Orc type and Goblins the other race.
 
So a critic not liking Bayformers, while audiences flock to see it, means critics are out of touch now?

I call bull. A good movie is a good movie, whether it sells 50 million tickets or 100. I don't take critics on face value on whether I will like a film or not, nor do they influence my view on a film. But a good critic can write some very interesting, thought provoking criticism on any film.
I am dropping this topic part because hate conflict but my point is that am not surprised that its not getting 90%. Yes Avengers was loved and they got it right but TDKR got around 86 and thats where i figure The Hobbit will end up.
 
I am dropping this topic part because hate conflict but my point is that am not surprised that its not getting 90%. Yes Avengers was loved and they got it right but TDKR got around 86 and thats where i figure The Hobbit will end up.

Points and scores are meaningless. It is the content of the reviews that matter. Read the reviews. It isn't like they are simply pooping on this film for no apparent reason.
 
I am dropping this topic part because hate conflict but my point is that am not surprised that its not getting 90%. Yes Avengers was loved and they got it right but TDKR got around 86 and thats where i figure The Hobbit will end up.

I think they were pretty much right on the money with how well the general audience received TDKR.
 
Yeah No Joker or Ledger is why 3rd act was less really. And Connery Bane.
 
I think they were pretty much right on the money with how well the general audience received TDKR.

Which is so wrong. TDKR is so awesome. The Hobbit would do well to be as good.
 
Anyone got this image in HQ?
isYXC5u0AnW0U.jpg

Anyone?
 
I really wish people would stop dwelling on what Critics say. Sure they effects the oscar race but critics hate anything new or fun.

That explains why the Matrix, Avatar, and Inception have rotten scores.
 
Which is so wrong. TDKR is so awesome. The Hobbit would do well to be as good.
To be honest TDKR and Avengers are equally good but for different reasons. But I predict that The Hobbit will be as Good but again for different reasons. that being The Hobbit can be the sweeping epic that Rings was and I have no doubts that it will be well worth my ticket price.
 
That doesn't address jmc's other point, that 48 fps will make wounds and killing appear fake. That actually seems to be the single biggest criticism of the new tech; it takes you out of the movie because it makes it so obvious that it is a movie.

I did address that in that post or the last one but the same issues were brought up when hd tv first came out. The people behind the scenes simply stepped their games up and adjusted for the new clarity they had to deal with.

Make-up and prosthetic, set-designs became much better.

If anything this tech could be a boon to the movie make-up and prosthetic industry, something that has probably been lacking with the switch to cg for so much. From what some have described it as this could be just the natural progression to the HD stage of film making. 24 fps is not some golden figure it was something decided upon 80 years ago purely for cost reasons. FPS could have been much higher from the get go had film-stock not been so pricey back then.
 
Just saw the goblin Chase clip. The goblins look really fake but the scene was fun, love the inventive killing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,288
Messages
22,080,417
Members
45,880
Latest member
Heartbeat
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"