|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Half-elven
Dec 28 2012, 9:04pm
Views: 384
Shortcut
|
Very true, and well stated by you.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I might add to the underlined, it adds something new by completely changing what is written, and severly diminishing the story. There are some changes I was fine with. The cliff business, for example. . . many people complained, but I thought it made the scenario more plausible. We have seen, in the novels, that Gandalf is quite adept at both starting and enhancing fires, as well as at snuffing them out (all the torches and fires in The Goblin King's lair being silmutaneously snuffed. . . and torches don't snuff easily). Having the Wizard fighting gravity and trying to keep companions from falling to their dooms, makes a plausible excuse for why he would not lay an enchantment to do more with the fire below, including putting it out if necesarry, or at least shifting its direction so that it would fan out at his foes. Azog is not a helpful change. The alteration of the backstory greatly devalues a powerful tale. I understand the comparisons between Azog and Lurtz, as they serve a similar role in each film. But for me the analogy doesn't work. Lurtz was simply giving a name to something that was already in the book -- the orcs who kill Boromir. For the sake of a cool visual and a dramatic fight scene, the movie gave the lead orc a name. As for "potato face," that was intended to be Gothmog, a character from the book. So again, it's adapting an existing aspect of Tolkien's story. Azog is a different situation. He's taken from Tolkien lore, yes, but in way that contradicts what Tolkien wrote. His addition to the film doesn't expand on something that was already present. It adds a completely new element. I think that's why I disliked Azog so much. His very presence is a reminder of my issues with an otherwise awesome movie. He contradicts Tolkien, he adds a new unnecessary element to the story, and he exists to give film 1 a strong villain, something that wouldn't have been needed if Jackson hadn't decided to do a trilogy. To be honest, if they had left the Azog plotline the same but used Bolg as the lead antagonist, I probably would have been okay with it. I know that's nitpicky and silly but to me, it would have felt more organic to the Hobbit story. It would have expanded an aspect of the book, rather than insert a dead character from a completely different story. "Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!" "Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."
|
|
|
Subject
|
User
|
Time
|
I do not get the.....
|
YaznegSouth40
|
Dec 28 2012, 4:39pm
|
So-tell us what you liked about Azog!
|
Aragalen the Green
|
Dec 28 2012, 4:43pm
|
All I am saying....
|
YaznegSouth40
|
Dec 28 2012, 4:54pm
|
Welcome to the internet.
|
sauget.diblosio
|
Dec 28 2012, 4:58pm
|
Azog badass
|
Ęleniel Tindome
|
Dec 28 2012, 5:02pm
|
Bravo!
|
painjoiker
|
Dec 28 2012, 5:05pm
|
I like his design and ...
|
DanielLB
|
Dec 28 2012, 5:09pm
|
Sadly, that's the nature of a comment thread.
|
Aragalen the Green
|
Dec 28 2012, 6:50pm
|
If this were the case
|
DanielLB
|
Dec 28 2012, 4:43pm
|
I can suggest it
|
Ardamírë
|
Dec 28 2012, 5:06pm
|
EY!
|
painjoiker
|
Dec 28 2012, 4:47pm
|
i sorta get it
|
unexpectedvisitor
|
Dec 28 2012, 4:48pm
|
Not quite the same as Lurtz
|
Fredeghar Wayfarer
|
Dec 28 2012, 8:38pm
|
Very true, and well stated by you.
|
AinurOlorin
|
Dec 28 2012, 9:04pm
|
Azog and Arwen
|
Mahtion
|
Dec 28 2012, 10:12pm
|
Personally
|
GothmogTheBalrog
|
Dec 28 2012, 11:07pm
|
In general
|
Lindele
|
Dec 28 2012, 5:02pm
|
Exactly...Lindele...
|
YaznegSouth40
|
Dec 28 2012, 6:56pm
|
Or it could be...
|
Ardamírë
|
Dec 28 2012, 6:58pm
|
Well if you are going to make the argument
|
Lindele
|
Dec 28 2012, 7:08pm
|
He looks worse than all of those
|
Ardamírë
|
Dec 28 2012, 7:09pm
|
I'm saying
|
Lindele
|
Dec 28 2012, 7:16pm
|
Perhaps it's....
|
YaznegSouth40
|
Dec 28 2012, 8:16pm
|
Well, that's the nature of the world
|
Eledhwen
|
Dec 28 2012, 5:03pm
|
Oh that is perfect.
|
Ataahua
|
Dec 28 2012, 8:12pm
|
No one says they hate him like Hitler...
|
Kassandros
|
Dec 28 2012, 5:22pm
|
Kassandros I understand that....
|
YaznegSouth40
|
Dec 28 2012, 7:07pm
|
"The Warrior's of Nain, Gror's son, drove through the orcs. . . all the while they cried 'Azog! Azog!"
|
AinurOlorin
|
Dec 28 2012, 7:59pm
|
On The Dwarves having Azog's name on their axes. . . I attempted editing this post
|
AinurOlorin
|
Dec 28 2012, 8:18pm
|
Azog work for me
|
Simon
|
Dec 28 2012, 5:22pm
|
I don't hate him,
|
sauget.diblosio
|
Dec 28 2012, 5:25pm
|
I will say again, the character is fine, as I see him. His placement is horrendous, and is part of a larger flaw.
|
AinurOlorin
|
Dec 28 2012, 6:12pm
|
I highly agree!. I just can't tear myself away from that canon which is ingrained in my head :(. -that's- exactly what I've found wrong
|
Xanaseb
|
Dec 28 2012, 6:35pm
|
Not a purist either.
|
sauget.diblosio
|
Dec 28 2012, 6:53pm
|
I think one can sum up the Azog-hate quite easily:
|
Iowaboy
|
Dec 28 2012, 6:44pm
|
Couldn't have said it better Iowaboy
|
IDLookout
|
Dec 28 2012, 8:25pm
|
I agree with you Iowaboy
|
Elenorflower
|
Dec 28 2012, 9:20pm
|
edit: this comment had small beginnings
|
unexpectedvisitor
|
Dec 28 2012, 10:29pm
|
Thank you for being so wonderfully insightful & optimistic! //
|
RhodeCamelot
|
Jan 1 2013, 11:58am
|
How about Jar Jar Binks?
|
Ardamírë
|
Dec 28 2012, 6:56pm
|
I liked Azog - wayyy more than Gothmog from ROTK
|
morgul lord
|
Dec 28 2012, 11:04pm
|
I loved the film
|
Rostron2
|
Dec 29 2012, 12:35am
|
I too loved the movies and thought Azog was cool
|
Ziggy Stardust
|
Dec 29 2012, 1:37am
|
|
|
|