The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Spoilers: AZOG and or BOLG?



Ave Moria
Rivendell

Dec 4 2012, 7:53pm


Views: 2072
Spoilers: AZOG and or BOLG?

SPOILER WARNING-

..............





Are both Azog AND Bolg in AUJ? Or does Bolg come in later films? Bolg is a practical character played by an actor, yet Azog has been said to be CGI. Some people are suggesting they are even the same character?

How can Azog have such a prominent role if he is dead (beheaded) per The Battle of Dimrill Dale?

Does anyone know?


redgiraffe
Rohan

Dec 4 2012, 7:58pm


Views: 1225
Both


In Reply To
SPOILER WARNING-

..............





Are both Azog AND Bolg in AUJ? Or does Bolg come in later films? Bolg is a practical character played by an actor, yet Azog has been said to be CGI. Some people are suggesting they are even the same character?

How can Azog have such a prominent role if he is dead (beheaded) per The Battle of Dimrill Dale?

Does anyone know?



Apparently a few months ago there was a game workshop character list released or something and the description they had for Azog was that he was presumed to be dead but had shown up again.

People have theories that he may have been raised from the dead by the necromancer. Don't know though.

All we know is that he and Bolg are both in.

-Sir are you classified as human
-Negative, I am a meat-popsicle


dave_lf
Gondor

Dec 4 2012, 7:59pm


Views: 1152
Not the same character

Aside from the CGI vs. actor difference you mentioned, Azog is described as one-armed, and Bolg clearly has two. So unless Bolg ends up being the reanimated corpse of Azog with a new arm Frankensteined on or something like that (which is at least a little possible Unsure), they are two separate characters.

I don't know whether Bolg appears in Journey or not, but no review I've seen has mentioned him, while several have talked about Azog.


(This post was edited by dave_lf on Dec 4 2012, 8:00pm)


redgiraffe
Rohan

Dec 4 2012, 8:00pm


Views: 1091
Also


In Reply To
SPOILER WARNING-

..............





Are both Azog AND Bolg in AUJ? Or does Bolg come in later films? Bolg is a practical character played by an actor, yet Azog has been said to be CGI. Some people are suggesting they are even the same character?

How can Azog have such a prominent role if he is dead (beheaded) per The Battle of Dimrill Dale?

Does anyone know?


I'm a little disappointed by this change. I don't know why they feel the need to change parts to the dwarf history when it was already set up for such cool cinema storyling to begin with. Why add in the appendices material if you are just going to change it?

Either way, we haven't seen it yet so let's not make a full judgement.

On the upside, almost every reviewer I've seen Azog mentioned in has said he is freaking awesome!!!

-Sir are you classified as human
-Negative, I am a meat-popsicle


YaznegSouth40
Rivendell

Dec 4 2012, 8:01pm


Views: 1104
Have not seen...

the movie yet as it is not out yet , but in my opinion I believe Bolg is the main antagonist in this first movie installment (thus his action figure being out, pictures everywhere) so you know he will be prominently featured. But Azog I believe will just be in an introductory role and not as active as he will eventually be in the next two films.


dave_lf
Gondor

Dec 4 2012, 8:05pm


Views: 1181
Azog is the main villain in film one

according to multiple reviews.


Shagrat
Gondor

Dec 4 2012, 8:06pm


Views: 1124
Yazneg?

Is he indeed Azog? The fact that John Rawls is still, I believe, credited, would suggest not. I'm confused what Yazneg's role is now with the changes to Azog's fate.


YaznegSouth40
Rivendell

Dec 4 2012, 8:17pm


Views: 1100
Yazneg is...

supposed to be a created by Jackson and Co. character who is in league with the Dol Guldur hordes that will ultimately be the vast menace by film three. However I believe he dies before There and Back Again. John Rawls who portrays him is not slated for TABA.


backpackin'man
Registered User

Dec 4 2012, 8:38pm


Views: 997
I just dont get it

As per the history of ME, Azog is clearly dead! What is the deal w his apparent resurrection? Also, Bolg is Azog's son...

Somebody please help to clarify the meaning of all this. It has me worried...


Macsen
Lorien

Dec 4 2012, 8:41pm


Views: 991
Azbolg

Putting Azog and Bolg in google images seems to turn up the same character? Crazy


Azog
Bree


Dec 4 2012, 8:42pm


Views: 951
im confused

Isn't the white orc Azog?,when image search Blog the same character comes up,have pictures of both surfaced or has PJ combined the characters?


Macsen
Lorien

Dec 4 2012, 8:43pm


Views: 990
But...

It's Bolg written on the toy box? Crazy

http://media.comicbookmovie.com/images/users/uploads/8073/hobtoy2.jpg


DanielLB
Immortal


Dec 4 2012, 8:46pm


Views: 966
We've only seen Bolg

But both are described as big pale orcs.

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



Azog
Bree


Dec 4 2012, 8:50pm


Views: 932
Ahh thanks

like the above poster I was drawing a blank with Google search,so all the reviews calling him Azog are incorrect?,he's Bolg?


YaznegSouth40
Rivendell

Dec 4 2012, 8:52pm


Views: 915
That's right...

Bolg is the only one whose been seen SOOOOOO...he is THE antagonist for film one and Azog will be a menace on down the road.


DanielLB
Immortal


Dec 4 2012, 8:52pm


Views: 915
That's Bolg in Macsen's link. /

 

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



dave_lf
Gondor

Dec 4 2012, 8:54pm


Views: 914
Two characters

No. There are two different characters--Azog, who is pale, 100% CGI, and missing an arm, and Bolg, who is also pale, a guy in a suit, and has two arms. Multiple reviewers have stated that Azog is the main villain of film 1. There were earlier indications that that role would be filled by Bolg, but not a single reviewer has mentioned him yet. So either something changed, or both are present but no one has seen fit to mention Bolg for some reason.


backpackin'man
Registered User

Dec 4 2012, 8:59pm


Views: 911
BUT HE IS SUPPOSED TO BE DEAD

Azog was killed by Nain. Beheaded in fact. His head was put on a stake outside the gates of Moria and his mouth was stuffed with a bag of coins.................how can he possibly be the main antagonist in film one?????????????


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Dec 4 2012, 9:01pm


Views: 891
I would imagine they have changed things?

 


redgiraffe
Rohan

Dec 4 2012, 9:01pm


Views: 886
Well


In Reply To
Azog was killed by Nain. Beheaded in fact. His head was put on a stake outside the gates of Moria and his mouth was stuffed with a bag of coins.................how can he possibly be the main antagonist in film one?????????????


The elves weren't supposed to fight at Helm's Deep. And yet.. there they were.

-Sir are you classified as human
-Negative, I am a meat-popsicle


Azog
Bree


Dec 4 2012, 9:03pm


Views: 880
Thanks

Ive been confused by this for a while


Macsen
Lorien

Dec 4 2012, 9:07pm


Views: 866
Bozo

But if Azog is the main antagonist and Bolg isn't in it... why have they released a Bolg toy rather than a Azog toy? Unimpressed


Macsen
Lorien

Dec 4 2012, 9:10pm


Views: 855
Aha

This may explain things... http://thorinoakenshield.net/2012/08/20/will-azog-the-orc-be-in-the-hobbit-movies/


dave_lf
Gondor

Dec 4 2012, 9:14pm


Views: 837
You and everyone else!

And these reports only make things more confusing since, as mentioned right above, Bolg AUJ toys have been released. I think the explanation has to be that the orc heroes were reworked as part of the two to three film revision.


DanielLB
Immortal


Dec 4 2012, 9:18pm


Views: 874
There were last minute casting and design changes to Azog

That will explain some of that. As to why he is the main villain, I haven't a clue!

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



Azog
Bree


Dec 4 2012, 9:21pm


Views: 732
Hmm

The plot thickens,not long to wait I suppose!


backpackin'man
Registered User

Dec 4 2012, 9:26pm


Views: 729
i suppose it is all sort of exciting

the idea of the necromancer resurrecting Azog


DanielLB
Immortal


Dec 4 2012, 9:27pm


Views: 726
Incredibly irrelevant to the plot, and the original story though. /

 

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



backpackin'man
Registered User

Dec 4 2012, 9:29pm


Views: 723
agreed BUT

I will always love the books....the question is will i love the movies as well? these deviations have me a bit concerned


YaznegSouth40
Rivendell

Dec 4 2012, 9:39pm


Views: 716
I wonder why....

they decided to make Azog a CGI character and have an actor(Conan Stevens) for Bolg? Manu Bennett portraying Azog has a muscular athletic body as Stevens does, only he's no where near as huge a guy ( 5'11 to 7'1 ) . I figured that Azog's head or face was CGI to make use of Bennett's body. I read somewhere where he said it's only his face being CGI. They would need special effects to make him as huge as Bolg much like they will have to do to make Persbrandt a huge Beorn and in reverse a 6'2 Armitage a 5' dwarf.


Ave Moria
Rivendell

Dec 4 2012, 9:40pm


Views: 733
Possible answer to the riddle?

Based on what people are saying, I think I have a solution-

Bolg was originally meant to be the primary Orc villain and was played by Conan Stevens. When 2 films became 3, PJ realized to give the Orc villain better motivation and a personal vendetta against the dwarves, particularly Thorin, he replaced Bolg with Azog, allowing him to become maimed instead of beheaded. This gives him the motivation to go after Thorin and Co, instead of just being an evil Orc out to kill Dwarves in a generic sense.

Then, PJ realizes with this Orc having such a presence, he needs to be able to have some dialogue and emote beyond what Conan Stevens was able to do, hence the recasting? of Manu. Hence the CG, allowing for custom character performance based off key frame animation and motion capture.

In short, Conan perhaps lacks the chops to play Azog like PJ wanted, so he opted for motion capture CG to flesh out his personality more, once PJ expanded the films realizing that since Sauron will have a small presence in Dol Guldur, he needed a more impactful villain since Dol is full of Orcs anyway, so why not have a bad to the bone Orc leader?


YaznegSouth40
Rivendell

Dec 4 2012, 9:52pm


Views: 683
Hmmm....

So Azog perhaps will have more agility as in riding Wargs(albeit a much more massive white warg) and such and Bolg will be a foe faced one on one in Dol Guldur as Azog's really second in command. However I do believe both will be at the Battle of Five Armies in There and Back Again as both are slated to appear in the next two films as well.


redgiraffe
Rohan

Dec 4 2012, 9:55pm


Views: 698
This is what I don't really understand


In Reply To
Bolg was originally meant to be the primary Orc villain and was played by Conan Stevens. When 2 films became 3, PJ realized to give the Orc villain better motivation and a personal vendetta against the dwarves, particularly Thorin, he replaced Bolg with Azog, allowing him to become maimed instead of beheaded. This gives him the motivation to go after Thorin and Co, instead of just being an evil Orc out to kill Dwarves in a generic sense.


This is just me assuming that your er... assumption is correct.

Again, I will reserve judgement until I've seen it all but here's my opinion on this so far:

First, I don't see how adding on another movie would create a need to change it. If it would have worked for 2 movies, then why wouldn't it work for 3?

Secondly, PJ could have easily played up the personal vendetta between Bolg and Thorin without the need to change the story. Bolg's father (Azog) killed Thorin's grandfather (Thror). And the end result of it (after the personal vendetta inducing orc/dwarf wars) was that Thorin's kinsman (Dain) killed Bolg's father (Azog). This could be a perfect setup for personal vendetta between Bolg and Thorin. Both of their kinsmen killed the others' kinsmen. It also could set up a great personal hatred for the Bo5A when Bolg sees Dain on the battlefield.

If anything, PJ should have just changed it to where Thorin kills Azog at the battle of Azanulbizar. It seemingly doesn't matter at this point if he had made this change because Thorin is apparently going to kill him later anyway.

Either way, I think PJ's change was unnecessary.

-Sir are you classified as human
-Negative, I am a meat-popsicle

(This post was edited by redgiraffe on Dec 4 2012, 9:56pm)


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Dec 4 2012, 9:57pm


Views: 693
Of course it is unnecessary....

But why does that mean it is bad?

LR


shadowfaux
Bree

Dec 4 2012, 10:01pm


Views: 754
Sounds right (Spoilers)

I'm not as current on the history of the changes and the Tolkien canon, but from what I read in the reviews, it has been adjusted so that Azog was not beheaded, his arm was cut off by Thorin (at the battle where he uses the oak-shield), so he is out to avenge his arm (hunting the dwarves down). I would think full CGI Azog would help with the no-arm thing, especially if he has some significant screen time.

Sounds good to me! I won't care much if the appendices' material is skewed to better serve the adaption, as long as the main story sticks pretty close I will be happy. This is a terribly difficult story to adapt, and I can imagine adding the appendices verbatim might not aid in the adaption as much as what they ended up doing.


redgiraffe
Rohan

Dec 4 2012, 10:07pm


Views: 655
I'm not saying it's bad


In Reply To
But why does that mean it is bad?

LR


Again, I can't make a judgement until I've seen the final product. So I'm not saying it's bad.

It's just that, in my opinion, if you can do it just as effectively w/o changing it then why do it?

-Sir are you classified as human
-Negative, I am a meat-popsicle


YaznegSouth40
Rivendell

Dec 4 2012, 10:11pm


Views: 648
redgirraffe.....

I do believe you are right...the change was unnecessary. I 'm not one to complain about these films, but you hit the nail on the head for me anyways! If Bolg would have been left as the main orc evil commander as in the book to lead the assault in the BO5A it would have played out better and not created as much confusion...Peter Jackson's changes were probably irresistable to him to pass up, but it would ve been more simpler and just as effective if left as was in the story arc ...but Oh well!


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Dec 4 2012, 10:16pm


Views: 642
Ah but there's the question.

One version we have very little idea about and the other we can only imagine in filmic form, without a current context.

However they are imagined it is unlikely that any imaginer would deem both to be exactly as likely to succeed as each other. So one bets...

Of course if you believe all Tolkien is basically oven-ready cinematic gold then that might put you instinctively in one camp rather than the other!

LR


(This post was edited by Lacrimae Rerum on Dec 4 2012, 10:22pm)


redgiraffe
Rohan

Dec 4 2012, 10:38pm


Views: 617
And of course this is a good point


In Reply To
One version we have very little idea about and the other we can only imagine in filmic form, without a current context.

However they are imagined it is unlikely that any imaginer would deem both to be exactly as likely to succeed as each other. So one bets...

Of course if you believe all Tolkien is basically oven-ready cinematic gold then that might put you instinctively in one camp rather than the other!

LR


This is certainly a good point. Just because Tolkien's writing is well written for cinema doesn't mean that PJ's change isn't. I actually do really like PJ and what he did with LOTR even with the changes (which I did complain about a lot, initially).

I'm hoping that PJs changes will turn up well on screen. While I would have preferred the original story line, I don't think PJ's change is a bad idea.

Most importantly, is that the change won't ruin the film for me. I will be a little disappointed that it was changed from the story but it's certainly not a bad enough change to ruin it for me.

-Sir are you classified as human
-Negative, I am a meat-popsicle


redgiraffe
Rohan

Dec 4 2012, 10:39pm


Views: 617
On the up side...


In Reply To
I do believe you are right...the change was unnecessary. I 'm not one to complain about these films, but you hit the nail on the head for me anyways! If Bolg would have been left as the main orc evil commander as in the book to lead the assault in the BO5A it would have played out better and not created as much confusion...Peter Jackson's changes were probably irresistable to him to pass up, but it would ve been more simpler and just as effective if left as was in the story arc ...but Oh well!


I've heard nothing but positive stuff about Azog. So I'm sure however he is portrayed, it will be cool.

-Sir are you classified as human
-Negative, I am a meat-popsicle


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Dec 4 2012, 11:17pm


Views: 619
Short answer...


In Reply To
Azog was killed by Nain. Beheaded in fact. His head was put on a stake outside the gates of Moria and his mouth was stuffed with a bag of coins.................how can he possibly be the main antagonist in film one?????????????



The simplist explanation is that, in Jackson's version, things probably turned out different. Azog is still Bolg's father and he still dies--but in film one by Thorin's hand.

Oh, and Azog killed Nain, not the other way around. Dain was the one who beheaded Azog in revenge.

'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring


YaznegSouth40
Rivendell

Dec 4 2012, 11:45pm


Views: 597
Dain Ironfoot...

do you all think he will still be the slayer of Azog at the BO5A as I believe Beorn still crushes Bolg there. If so the matching slayers will still be intact as in the book (Dain kills Azog/Beorn kills Bolg) except at the time of the Hobbit for Azog's death.


backpackin'man
Registered User

Dec 5 2012, 12:50am


Views: 545
Dain n Nain


In Reply To

In Reply To
Azog was killed by Nain. Beheaded in fact. His head was put on a stake outside the gates of Moria and his mouth was stuffed with a bag of coins.................how can he possibly be the main antagonist in film one?????????????

True, and yea i remembered i screwed that up after I posted

The simplist explanation is that, in Jackson's version, things probably turned out different. Azog is still Bolg's father and he still dies--but in film one by Thorin's hand.

Oh, and Azog killed Nain, not the other way around. Dain was the one who beheaded Azog in revenge.



Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Dec 5 2012, 5:13am


Views: 472
Bo5A


In Reply To
do you all think he will still be the slayer of Azog at the BO5A as I believe Beorn still crushes Bolg there. If so the matching slayers will still be intact as in the book (Dain kills Azog/Beorn kills Bolg) except at the time of the Hobbit for Azog's death.



At this point I am not even trying to second-guess how Jackson will stage the Battle of the Five Armies or the deaths of Azog or Bolg.

'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring


Ave Moria
Rivendell

Dec 5 2012, 5:16am


Views: 465
Good thought

Sempai (master)


joec_34
Rivendell

Dec 5 2012, 8:35pm


Views: 386
Crossing My Fingers

Given all that I've read on the Azog & Bolg subject, I'm hoping that we learn about Azog and all the stuff that went down in the Dimrill Dale, then Azog is rumored to be back from the dead, but it turns out to be his son, Bolg. If in the movie Azog is back from the dead, I'm going to try my hardest to pretend that he is Bolg.

"Happy painting and God bless, my friend." - Bob Ross