|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elessar
Doriath
Sep 20 2012, 11:49pm
Post #51 of 83
(830 views)
Shortcut
|
Can take one with my iPad if you'd like.
Edit: it was just the head shot from the annual like above.
(This post was edited by Elessar on Sep 20 2012, 11:51pm)
|
|
|
Vangalad
Menegroth
Sep 21 2012, 12:04am
Post #52 of 83
(818 views)
Shortcut
|
you don't have to.
I just thought there could be something we hadn't already seen.
All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost,
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by the frost.
|
|
|
Elessar
Doriath
Sep 21 2012, 12:13am
Post #53 of 83
(853 views)
Shortcut
|
|
My bad. I was thinking you might not have seen the pics.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
MouthofSauron
Dor-Lomin
Sep 21 2012, 2:03am
Post #54 of 83
(811 views)
Shortcut
|
i think your trying too hard there bud to prove its the great goblin, looks more like a troll to me. there was also light-heartedness in LOTR's, and plenty of it. Sam hitting orcs with his pan in moria?
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Doriath
Sep 21 2012, 4:39am
Post #55 of 83
(804 views)
Shortcut
|
Was not exactly a highlight in the film (never heard anyone describe it positively, really) and was a brief, and very minor, moment.
This involves one of the key major villains of film 1 being part of an implausible gag, all for the sake of setting up a bad joke.
Big difference.
And it is almost certainly the Great Goblin, due to the very simple fact that he's wearing a crown...
|
|
|
MouthofSauron
Dor-Lomin
Sep 21 2012, 5:10am
Post #57 of 83
(759 views)
Shortcut
|
sam hitting orcs with his pan was the highlight of the film?? so i suppose your saying that the great goblin falling on-top of the dwarves will be the highlight of the film...? also The Hobbit was a children's book was it not? so why are you guys so upset that its not as dark/mature as LOTR's which was geared for the adult demo?
|
|
|
MouthofSauron
Dor-Lomin
Sep 21 2012, 5:16am
Post #58 of 83
(782 views)
Shortcut
|
|
sorry i did not freeze frame the entire trailer
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
i thought the goblin king was that thing on the german card released a few weeks ago, nevertheless i'm not disappointed in the least bit, after all he is the "great" goblin.
|
|
|
Intergalactic Lawman
Nargothrond
Sep 21 2012, 5:20am
Post #59 of 83
(767 views)
Shortcut
|
Alexander the "great" when portrayed on film should weigh 6000 kilos and have a chin down to his knees? I mean it's not as if we don't know the size capabilities of a man...
I mean in Rings we saw hundreds of orcs bigger than a troll...didn't we?
No matter how you spin it -he looks terrible. His hand is bigger than Dwalin!!!
|
|
|
MouthofSauron
Dor-Lomin
Sep 21 2012, 5:30am
Post #60 of 83
(774 views)
Shortcut
|
well if i'm not mistaken alexander the great is part of 'real' life history not fiction, and if i'm not mistaken again there is no fossil record of a 6000 kilo man or am i wrong? Tolkien describes the great goblin as a "great" goblin, meaning big/huge in size and also he is very very old, so why couldn't he have reached that size over a long period of time of just sitting around eating and eating..?
|
|
|
Intergalactic Lawman
Nargothrond
Sep 21 2012, 5:36am
Post #61 of 83
(775 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Clearly that went over your head...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I was pointing out that just because someone has a "great" tacked onto their name doesn't mean they can suddenly be as big as King Kong 
And yes it is fiction -but Jackson already layed down the "rules" with the rings films...
Now as to The Great Goblin getting that big from "sitting around eating food" I say this -sure! It could affect his waistline but NOT his height!
You can argue the point all you like, but ask almost every poster whether they thought that was a troll or the big man himself?? Indeed.
|
|
|
leonmuse
Ossiriand
Sep 21 2012, 5:45am
Post #62 of 83
(767 views)
Shortcut
|
I'll be very frank here and say i didnt like to see him dead on a trailer. I wanted to see him dying on the movie. Such a pity :P
|
|
|
totoro
Menegroth
Sep 21 2012, 5:55am
Post #63 of 83
(771 views)
Shortcut
|
I thought the Great Goblin was supposed to be giant. I would have been surprised if he was no larger than any other goblin. The artwork has always portrayed him as large, and the book portrayed him as large, too, though it did not describe exactly how large. He is supposedly a relative of the Balrogs that took the form of a huge goblin, but is not actually a goblin. Kind of like how Gandalf took the form of a man, but is not really a man.
I don't understand what the big deal is. You wanted the Great Goblin to be smaller to suit some psychological need? Get over it. You wanted PJ to read your mind as do as you demanded? Get help.
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Doriath
Sep 21 2012, 6:21am
Post #65 of 83
(751 views)
Shortcut
|
Your tone has been hostile and rude. Please read Silverlode's thread on the subject of forum etiquette, and try to stick to debating issues, not attacking persons.
|
|
|
duats
Hithlum
Sep 21 2012, 6:27am
Post #66 of 83
(735 views)
Shortcut
|
"He is supposedly a relative of the Balrogs that took the form of a huge goblin, but is not actually a goblin. Kind of like how Gandalf took the form of a man, but is not really a man."
Er... I don't know where you heard that, but it's inaccurate to say the least. He is what he is: a large goblin.
(This post was edited by duats on Sep 21 2012, 6:28am)
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Doriath
Sep 21 2012, 6:31am
Post #67 of 83
(756 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Could you provide the source you are referencing for that?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I have never heard anything about the Great Goblin actually being a Balrog...
|
|
|
totoro
Menegroth
Sep 21 2012, 6:35am
Post #68 of 83
(740 views)
Shortcut
|
I did not intend the remark to be a personal attack, but it does come across that way. What I should have said is I think the portrayal of the Great Goblin as large in artwork and potential, though not explicit, huge size in the book led me to think the Great Goblin was the size he is portrayed in the trailer. I think that those involved in the GG's movie debut were perfectly reasonable in following that tradition.
Your tone has been hostile and rude. Please read Silverlode's thread on the subject of forum etiquette, and try to stick to debating issues, not attacking persons.
|
|
|
totoro
Menegroth
Sep 21 2012, 6:39am
Post #69 of 83
(740 views)
Shortcut
|
I am surprised you did not know he was a relative. I'll give you a hint: it starts with an M.
I have never heard anything about the Great Goblin actually being a Balrog...
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Doriath
Sep 21 2012, 6:45am
Post #70 of 83
(732 views)
Shortcut
|
But you have been almost certainly misinformed. Nowhere does Tolkien suggest that the Great Goblin is one of the Maiar.
Did Rateliff suggest something along these lines in the Annotated Hobbit?
(This post was edited by Shelob'sAppetite on Sep 21 2012, 6:48am)
|
|
|
totoro
Menegroth
Sep 21 2012, 6:57am
Post #71 of 83
(769 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I am not suggesting this is proof, but quoting wikipedia
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
There are hints in the History of Middle-earth series of books, (especially in Morgoth's Ring in the section "Myths Transformed"), that some Orc leaders, such as the First Age's Boldog, or the Great Goblin encountered by Bilbo and the Dwarves, may in fact have been fallen Maiar which had taken Orc form:
I know my Hobbit and LotR pretty well, but must confess I have not read much of the other materials. I thought this was well-known and accepted.
|
|
|
stormcrow20
Mithlond
Sep 21 2012, 8:20am
Post #72 of 83
(743 views)
Shortcut
|
Good ol' Sam, that hobbit has more than a few skills with a skillet!
I thought Sam's use of his frying pan in battle was a nice touch. I seem to remember others here had positive opinions of it, as well. It certainly makes a practical weapon in a pinch! And it looks as if Bombur will use his ladle and cleaver in a similar fashion. I'd wager he's rather clever with that cleaver! Goblin-cleaver, that is. 
Now, despite my own bad jokes, I totally agree about the Great Goblin (if that is him).
Sam hitting orcs with his pan...was not exactly a highlight in the film (never heard anyone describe it positively, really) and was a brief, and very minor, moment.
This involves one of the key major villains of film 1 being part of an implausible gag, all for the sake of setting up a bad joke.
(This post was edited by stormcrow20 on Sep 21 2012, 8:26am)
|
|
|
entmaiden
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Sep 21 2012, 1:23pm
Post #73 of 83
(679 views)
Shortcut
|
Saying someone should "get help" is very personal and against our Terms of Service. Further violations result in a formal warning, and after three warnings, the user is banned. Reading Silverlode's post might help clarify our rules for posting here.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Gondolin
Sep 21 2012, 1:49pm
Post #74 of 83
(677 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Perhaps the Great Goblin should not be played as the arch villain some of you desire.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
First off the Great Goblin is not called King in the text. Secondly Goblins are not too bright. Keeping with the lighter nature of the Hobbit in general the Great Goblin should not be taken seriously as an enemy. How ever I am curious as to what has been worked out to cause his death. If not a thrust from Glamdring then what?
Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.
At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
|
|
|
triptrap
Menegroth
Sep 21 2012, 3:02pm
Post #75 of 83
(632 views)
Shortcut
|
if we're only talking about his design: i love it and it comes pretty close to what i had imagined him. in the end he is what he is - a big, fat, nasty orc
what i didn't like was that he fell on the dwarves, not because of humor(i found that ok), but because this way it takes out a scene of the book i loved - Gandalf splitting the GG into halfs or at least beheading him seems much cooler and also ads to the opinion of gandalf that the viewer may have: a mighty wizard, who just disappears and then turns up to instantly slay that beast.
on a side note: what do you guys think about the general design of the orcs? In general i like that new "breed" of orcs if you want so(especially their heads and long arms), but i think (of course based on the few glimpses in the trailer) they are much too small and not terrifying enough. I mean seriously, most of them have the maximum height of a hobbit and are smaller than even dwarves http://www-images.theonering.org/images/hobbittrailer02/hobbittrailer02-064.jpg
whereas in the book they are described as "giant, goblin-like creatures"
also, they lack some armor i think
|
|
|
|
|
