|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Radagast's Lead Bunny
Ossiriand
Jan 21 2013, 6:50pm
Post #1 of 13
(1327 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes Azog was cool
|
Can't Post
|
|
Imagine the film without him : no recurring villain.
An avalanche of scenes : bag end, trolls, rivendell, misty mountains, goblin towns, warg chase without coherence
Hats off Mr Azog !
|
|
|
stoutfiles
Nargothrond
Jan 21 2013, 7:14pm
Post #2 of 13
(992 views)
Shortcut
|
Imagine the film without him : no recurring villain.
Don't have to imagine it, there's already a similar story without him. (picks up book called The Hobbit, read and loved by millions.)
Besides, there were plenty of other villains in the story. Goblins, orcs, Goblin King, Witch-King, Smaug, trolls, wargs...how many do you need? Note that the important tree scene still would have happened, just without the cliched slow motion fight scene.
An avalanche of scenes : bag end, trolls, rivendell, misty mountains, goblin towns, warg chase without coherence
I wasn't aware walking from Point A to Point without being chased by something was a lack of coherence. Tension may be the word you were looking for, but I'd argue that as well.
(This post was edited by stoutfiles on Jan 21 2013, 7:14pm)
|
|
|
Ardamírë
Doriath
Jan 21 2013, 7:37pm
Post #3 of 13
(914 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I agree completely with you, stoutfiles.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It was never a problem in the book. There is no main villain in the book at all. Smaug is no more the main villain than the goblin-king is. He's just another obstacle that the dwarves have to overcome to reclaim their treasure and homeland - just like the trolls, the goblins, the spiders, etc.
If the story needed a recurring villain, the book would not work at all since it doesn't have one. And if Smaug were the ultimate villain as many suggest, why does killing him not end the story? Because the death of Smaug was never what the story was about. It's about the dwarves reclaiming their treasure and homeland, and mixed up in all that is Bilbo who goes through his own journey over the course of the book. It's about Bilbo's personal story as much as it's about the dwarves - another reason that Smaug is not the ultimate bad guy, because his death doesn't signal the end of Bilbo's story anymore than it does the dwarves'.
There's a sad sort of clanging from the clock in the hall and the bells in the steeple, too.
And up in the nursery an absurd little bird is popping out to say coo-coo (coo-coo, coo-coo).
|
|
|
Lieutenant of Dol Guldur
Mithlond
Jan 21 2013, 7:43pm
Post #4 of 13
(913 views)
Shortcut
|
|
There would have been a better candidate and a reason for the warg riders too
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Imagine the film without him : no recurring villain Well... there are enough villians in the book. And there is enough room for a villian that would be a better main antagonist and even more suitable with the book. He is called BOLG.
Why didn't Azog just got his great moment at the Battle of Azanulbizar killing one of the dwarven leaders there and Letting him die there (okay against the books) by the hands of Thorin perhaps. Instead of a reborn/surviving Azog we would have a very, very angry son of Azog who swears to take revenge on Thorin?
[..] warg chase without coherence Hmm... if I remember it correctly the warg chase in the "Out of the Frying Pan" chapter appears as a consequence to the "murder" of the Great Goblin, killing of lots of goblins and also the escape from Goblin Town. So there is a reason why this happens. It you want to connect it with a main villain there's still the possibility of informing Bolg in Gundabad that Thorin is in Goblin Town. That would explain why Bolg and his warg-riders appear after the escape from Goblin Town to attack Thorin and his company.
It's all about the Necromancer... I tell you that. Looking at AUJ without knowing what happens in DOS and TABA Azog is cool but unnecessary 
"There is only one Lord of the Ring, only one who can bend it to his will. And he does not share power."
|
|
|
Radagast-Aiwendil
Mithlond
Jan 21 2013, 8:31pm
Post #5 of 13
(850 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I'll give your point some support
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
No, Azog was not necessary (as has been pointed out more than once on this thread already), but he did add something to the film version at least-whether or not Bolg could have adequately filled his shoes for this non-canon plotline is debatable since we don't yet know what movie Bolg will be like exactly as a character (...because obviously we haven't seen him prominently onscreen yet...).
The only thing I don't get is why they had to make him into this super-great hulking Orc when a Goblin (as per the book) would have done as well-he could have been a large Goblin, who in many ways could have been more effective. Goblins seem to come across as more mischievous and more typically evil/cruel than Orcs, who are just brutes that kill because they can. The Great Goblin was an example of this: rather than just kill Thorin and Company outright he intended to make them die slowly and painfully via torture.
If they had made Azog into a larger, man-sized version of this guy, he could have looked fairly good and canon-accurate:
http://www.games-workshop.com/...mp;_requestid=290349
"These are Gundabad Wargs! They will outrun you!"
"THESE are Rhosgobel Rabbits! I'd like to see them try...."
(This post was edited by Radagast-Aiwendil on Jan 21 2013, 8:32pm)
|
|
|
Rostron2
Mithlond
Jan 21 2013, 8:41pm
Post #6 of 13
(851 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, if you want to talk technical
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Azog was a major leader in the fight to take back Moria because he's like the king of the orcs, sort of. Now he's pretty much reduced to a squad leader. Now maybe that's justifiable since he lost so many hundreds of years ago, but it does seem a bit of a come down for the guy.
Other than that, I don't have a huge problem with him. On subsequent viewings you just get used to him being around, and maybe we'll find out more about him.
|
|
|
Lio
Menegroth
Jan 21 2013, 10:17pm
Post #7 of 13
(815 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Although I feel like yelling "That's not what happened!" at poor Balin every time he narrates that flashback...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...overall I don't mind the survival of Azog and his appearance in the present-day story. In fact I think it's an interesting decision, although I'm not sure I would argue that it's necessary for the movie. Of course, depending on how his story plays out in the next two films that might change.
Anyway, it is amusing that a character who appears for, maybe, ten minutes throughout the entire movie has generated so much debate! I guess his inclusion really is one of those love-it-or-hate-it things! Well, if I had to choose sides, I'd go for the "love it" camp. Hats off Mr Azog indeed!  (Yeah, I just like him for some reason.)
Want to chat? AIM me at Yami Liokaiser!
|
|
|
Ziggy Stardust
Mithlond
Jan 22 2013, 1:45am
Post #8 of 13
(751 views)
Shortcut
|
but he worked out okay. They were able to tie him in well enough, and he techincailly is a canon character. (At least he exists in Tolkien's legendarium.) It's non-canon characters like Tauriel and Alfrid (Alfred?) and any added non-canon character that concern me. And before anyone accuses me, no it's not because Tauriel is a female. I just wouldn't like it much if somebody added characters that didn't exist in my own work.
|
|
|
irodino
Nevrast
Jan 22 2013, 6:51am
Post #9 of 13
(729 views)
Shortcut
|
|
yes but a movie does not need a villain
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
As magnificently proven by the legendary director Hayao Miyazaki in such a classic as "My Neighbor Totoro". Entirely captivating, yet no antagonist anywhere to be seen. In contrast, Hobbit has plenty baddies, including recurring villains (orcs, Smaug, Saruman) to not really need Azog. He was cool, true, but not needed. Tolkien has also provided something a lot better than an external villain - he made us like or hate the dwarves and Thorin, from scene to scene, something that was not completely utilized in the movie so far. PJ could have used this instead of Azog, using the dwarves themselves as recurring "villains", intensifying their greed and hate towards elves and outsiders. Thorin does appear nasty to Bilbo at times, but not so the others.
"The past tempts us, the present confuses us, and the future frightens us. And our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that terrible in-between."
|
|
|
Roheryn
Dor-Lomin
Jan 22 2013, 10:48am
Post #10 of 13
(713 views)
Shortcut
|
We heard him speak several times.
|
|
|
Bauglir100
Nevrast
Jan 22 2013, 4:07pm
Post #11 of 13
(679 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Azog's not so much a squad leader...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
As much as, as TV Tropes would put it, "Royal Who Actually Does Something". He's still the leader of the Orcs of Moria/Gundabad, but he's more active as a field leader. And you could see the hunting party of Orcs and Wargs he commands as his own elite guard.
|
|
|
YaznegSouth40
Ossiriand
Jan 22 2013, 9:24pm
Post #12 of 13
(693 views)
Shortcut
|
his elite we should wonder what Bolg's Bodygaurd would be...more like Azog and Bolg?
(This post was edited by YaznegSouth40 on Jan 22 2013, 9:24pm)
|
|
|
Êleniel Tindome
Ossiriand
Jan 30 2013, 6:43pm
Post #13 of 13
(679 views)
Shortcut
|
...the more often I watch the movie. Love his quotes/articulation and his looks - more evil elvish than any other orc so far
|
|
|
|
|
