Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
The Problem with Superflously Altering Azanulbizar and all that lead to it.
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Macfeast
Rohan


Nov 23 2012, 2:28pm

Post #26 of 43 (233 views)
Shortcut
True, that's a possibility. [In reply to] Can't Post

But then, that would qualify as a logical reason for going to war (and possibly how it plays out in the movie). I was questioning the suggestion that Thrór deliberately went to Moria to get himself killed to spark a war, which seemed contrary to the idea that a good enough reason (like, as you say, wanting to claim their home) would suffice; Why would Thrór go through with such a gambit, if he could just rally the dwarves behind something as simple as "let's reclaim our home"?


(This post was edited by Macfeast on Nov 23 2012, 2:35pm)


Fardragon
Rohan

Nov 23 2012, 3:41pm

Post #27 of 43 (208 views)
Shortcut
This is what I would imagine. [In reply to] Can't Post

The point I'm trying to make, is to modern, non-dwarf audiences revenge is generally not considered an a good motive for war, and to present the dwarves in that way is unlikely to win them much audience sympathy.

See Bilbo's little speech.

tdlr: Getting your home back = good motive, revenge or greed = bad motive.

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


Shagrat
Gondor

Nov 23 2012, 4:05pm

Post #28 of 43 (200 views)
Shortcut
That depends... [In reply to] Can't Post

If Thror was brutally torn apart and desecrated, I think the audience would sympathize with the Dwarves, especially given the sheer foulness of Orcs.


Fardragon
Rohan

Nov 23 2012, 4:12pm

Post #29 of 43 (202 views)
Shortcut
Not me. [In reply to] Can't Post

If you do something that stupid, you deserve whatever comes to you.

And anyway, he was already dead.

Moral high ground = resisting taunts and insults

Moral low ground = giving in to desire for revenge

(Blame Star Wars)

A Far Dragon is the best kind...

(This post was edited by Fardragon on Nov 23 2012, 4:12pm)


Faenoriel
Tol Eressea


Nov 23 2012, 4:40pm

Post #30 of 43 (198 views)
Shortcut
If that is the only change [In reply to] Can't Post

I at least can deal with it. However, Thror's murder must be the reason behind the War of Dwarves and Orcs. Why? It's much, much, much better story that way, and I'm always of the side of the better storytelling. Dying in battle? What so dramatic about that, it's a common cause of death in M-E.

AinurOlorin, how do you know Thror isn't murdered but dies in the battle?

But every word you say today
Gets twisted 'round some other way
And they'll hurt you if they think you've lied


Faenoriel
Tol Eressea


Nov 23 2012, 4:44pm

Post #31 of 43 (202 views)
Shortcut
Possible, but still not as good [In reply to] Can't Post

Thror being a jerk? Thrain not mourning for him for 7 days? The Dwarves of all kins gathering from all over M-E to avenge him? Me no gusta. Frown

But every word you say today
Gets twisted 'round some other way
And they'll hurt you if they think you've lied


Fardragon
Rohan

Nov 23 2012, 5:01pm

Post #32 of 43 (189 views)
Shortcut
It's not a better story [In reply to] Can't Post

If it causes the audience to loose sympathy for the dwarves.

and murder? Really!? It's the equivalent of going to the zoo and climbing into the lion cage. The lions aren't guilty of murder for doing as their nature dictates.

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


Ardamírë
Valinor


Nov 23 2012, 5:16pm

Post #33 of 43 (182 views)
Shortcut
Excellent story [In reply to] Can't Post

I completely agree that they're running the risk of ruining a completely excellent story.

They had the opportunity to flesh out an already existing and compelling story without resorting to needless changes.

"...and his first memory of Middle-earth was the green stone above her breast as she sang above his cradle while Gondolin was still in flower." -Unfinished Tales


Ardamírë
Valinor


Nov 23 2012, 5:18pm

Post #34 of 43 (176 views)
Shortcut
That's what I'm saying [In reply to] Can't Post

They could have just as easily made up their own history. But I guess they were probably hoping to make it sound more like they were using Tolkien's work, rather than just fabricating it.

"...and his first memory of Middle-earth was the green stone above her breast as she sang above his cradle while Gondolin was still in flower." -Unfinished Tales


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Nov 23 2012, 5:40pm

Post #35 of 43 (171 views)
Shortcut
Begging your pardon, but they didn't get Moria back, even though they won the battle. Goblins didn't drive The Dwarves from Moria. A Balrog did. [In reply to] Can't Post

Goblins would never have managed to drive the Dwarves out. They were a much more numerous and powerful nation (the Dwarves) in 1980 of the Third Age than they were even when they gathered together for The Battle of Ananulbizar. What is more, some of the Dwarves who fought in that war were not from Moria, and only came because of the severity of the desecration commited by The goblins against the foremost of The Seven Fathers of The Dwarven People, no less than The Heir of Durin. Sauron, even at the height of his power in Middle-Earth, had been unable to break Khazad-Dum from without, but the dwarves were overwhelmed by the power of the dreadful Demon Lord who awoke within their fortified nation.

The dwarves did NOT want that war. It was terrible and grievous, and they lost countless warriors, and they are not a race that reproduces easily. But Thrain was their king and Durin's heir, and the brutality shown to his father was something he could not and would not abide. Did the dwarves want Khazad-Dum back? Sure. But that had long been the case. As has been said, they could have trumped up any excuse to go after it long before. They went to war on principle, and the Moria gate was the last stage of that war, which was fought for more than a year, mostly in the deep places of the mountains far from Moria itself. Moria was the last battle and the final push. And, of course, the Dwarves did not reclaim Moria anyway, because even with the goblin horde routed and mostly destroyed, there The Balrog remained, waiting, as Dain observed, to slay another of Durin's direct heirs, and still quite beyond the reckoning of The Dwarves.

In Reply To
The the dwarves wanted Moria back. People always find excuses for wars over territory.

If they hadn't wanted a war anyway they would have given Thror a Darwin award and left it at that.


"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."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Nov 23 2012, 6:24pm

Post #36 of 43 (161 views)
Shortcut
I think most people with beloved family and friends would understand revenge quite well [In reply to] Can't Post

and if they had armies at their disposal, and some cretins brutally murdered a relative of theirs and sent the desecrated remains back with taunts, most people would be very tempted to put that army to use. That is a reason why The Jedi didn't start families (or weren't supposed to), because of the potential for emotional compromise (since I am blaming Star Wars for your Vulcan reasoning, though even the Vulcans could be effected by emotion for kith and kin).

The Dwarves made a home in The Blue Mountains. By the time Thorin comes to Bilbo, they were still exiles from their Fatherland of Khazad-Dum and from Erebor, but they were no longer destitute and had not been for some time. Vengeance lay heavy on Thorin's heart as much as any desire for gold. You speak with great flippancy about something most people would regard as a grievous injury. Thror was half mad and behaved foolishly, but he was still a beloved king, and more importantly he was Thrain's father. I will say that again, he was Thrain's FATHER. And I know of few people who wouldn't understand being moved to wrath over the brutal slaying of a father. Assassinations have sparked wars before. There were many circumstances, territorial ones included, that set the foundations for World War I, but it was the assassination of Arch Duke Ferdinand that actually lit the spark. If the dwarves were so zen as to be unmoved by the butchering of a father and king (something over which even the lofty Elves would seek retribution), then surely they would also be too pious to go to war over long abandoned territory. There were still Blue Mountains and Iron Hills, after all.

Yet, we know they were not so Zen. And the same emotions and pride and fierce patriotism that made them long for Khazad-Dum and Erebor, THEIR nations, when other territories would have sufficed, is what made the brutal slaying of Thror, their king and National Father (and Thrain's literal father, never forget that. . . he was Thrain's dad) absolutely intolerable. No bloodless response would suffice. These are Dwarves, not androids.

And, aside from all that, the story as it is told is just AWESOME, and much better dramatically than the hodgepodge, bowdlerized, makeshift substitute Jackson et al seem to want to put forth. The madness of Thror, driven by the stress of exile and by the insidious powers of a Great Ring, The grief and wrathful rage of Thrain, the war of vengeance, the triumph so thorough it seemed that the unthinkable had become certain and that Khazad-Dum could be reclaimed, and then the Terror, the horrifying reality, the ancient Demon Lord, still haunting, dwelling, reigning in the ruins of the kingdom from which he first drove the Dwarves a thousand years before. . . the dispiriting fear and despair of The Dwarves. . . the Great Ring, working upon Thrain the same spell of burning dissatisfaction that it had worked upon his Father before, and the horror tale of misadventure he embarked upon because of it.

Why turn gemstones into junk? Why mess with such a riveting tale when there is no need to do so, and offer in its place some hackneyed, jumbled mess/

In Reply To
If you do something that stupid, you deserve whatever comes to you.

And anyway, he was already dead.

Moral high ground = resisting taunts and insults

Moral low ground = giving in to desire for revenge

(Blame Star Wars)


"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."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Nov 23 2012, 6:30pm

Post #37 of 43 (165 views)
Shortcut
I am actually hoping the report I heard was wrong, but the quote [In reply to] Can't Post

came from the Richard Taylor, the chief designer at weta, that Thror would be killed in the battle. But I am hoping it was either a misstatement or a misquote. I would be happy to have my concerns prove to be ado about nothing.

In Reply To
I at least can deal with it. However, Thror's murder must be the reason behind the War of Dwarves and Orcs. Why? It's much, much, much better story that way, and I'm always of the side of the better storytelling. Dying in battle? What so dramatic about that, it's a common cause of death in M-E.

AinurOlorin, how do you know Thror isn't murdered but dies in the battle?


"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."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Nov 23 2012, 6:49pm

Post #38 of 43 (146 views)
Shortcut
It is a MUCH better story. [In reply to] Can't Post

And what audience would loose sympathy/ Do you work for WB or something? Lol. What people do you know who have more sympathy for territorial disputes than for butchered relatives? As to Thror's folly and the consequences A) Sauron had peopled Moria in secret after the Dwarves were exiled by The Balrog, so it cannot be assumed that Thror knew how infested the place had become. B)Thror was half mad, and thus more deserving of sympathy. C) Goblins are not lions, and it was not a casual killing, it was indeed, murder, full of the malice of forethought and intended to wound the dwarves as deeply as Azog could manage (and he succeded all to well, much to his chagrin) C) It is a callous suggestion that Thror should be wholly ridiculed for even wanting to lay eyes on Moria. Galadriel understood far better. "Who among the Galadrim, even Celeborn The Wise, would pass nigh to our ancient homelands and not wish to look upon it, even though it had become an abode of dragons/" Her words. D) Considering the vastness of Khazad-Dum, Thror would doubtless have assumed that he and Nar could pass unnoticed by Demon Thanes and whatever else might abide there.

Above all else, however, I think you will find yourself very much in the minority, if your response to Thrain is to show him less sympathy for being moved to wrath over the butchering of his father, than you would show him for deciding he wanted to expand his territory. For centuries audiences have derided Hamlet for his indecisiveness and slowness to take action for the murder of his father, even against his own uncle. Well, Thrain is no Hamlet, and Azog was neither Thrain's uncle nor his king, so it made the decision all the easier to make, and I don't think any audience with a shred of emotion will fault him for making it. Feanor, who loved Finwe more than any child has loved a father in all the ages since, would have understood. Eowyn would have understood. And most audiences will sympathize.

In Reply To
If it causes the audience to loose sympathy for the dwarves.

and murder? Really!? It's the equivalent of going to the zoo and climbing into the lion cage. The lions aren't guilty of murder for doing as their nature dictates.


"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."


Fardragon
Rohan

Nov 23 2012, 7:09pm

Post #39 of 43 (134 views)
Shortcut
"goblins are not lions" [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes or no?

If goblins are inherently evil - nothing but loathsome monsters, then they are incapable of murder, in the same way as an animal is incapable of murder. They are simply doing what their nature requires them too. On the other hand, there are no moral objections to killing them. You can mow them down by the dozen, just for existing.

On the other hand, if goblins are capable of murder, then they must be able to understand the difference between good and evil, and make either choice. Ergo, not all goblins are evil, which makes killing them indiscriminately morally questionable.

A Far Dragon is the best kind...

(This post was edited by Fardragon on Nov 23 2012, 7:11pm)


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Nov 23 2012, 7:40pm

Post #40 of 43 (142 views)
Shortcut
Gandalf did say he pitied even Sauron's slaves. [In reply to] Can't Post

They are the wretched products of terrible torments, after all.

But animals are not considered competent to stand trial, if you will. They are sentient, but not in an advanced way. Animals are capable of acting with malice, and of abstaining from it, and have been seen to do both. But they are, generally, not capable of any advanced reasoning as to the right or wrong of their actions at a level sufficient for reasonable accouontability.

Not so, a goblin. Goblins, wicked as they are, are not incapable of fully understanding the wrong nature of their actions. They are also not wicked machines with no choice but to do the wrong thing all the time. Were that the case, they could never abide for long, even amongst themselves, let alone enter allegiances with any Dwarves, wicked or otherwise. It is competence that decides murder versus, say, manslaughter. Otherwise no psychopath could ever be convicted. But you have to be entirely insane, to the point of being deemed incompetent, in order to evade full criminal prosecution. Being evil is not a pass. Azog cannot have claimed to have "had" to kill Thror, as dictated by his nature. Even a troll like Bill ( or was it Tom), was, after many an ale, able to show some sympathy to Bilbo, and advocated letting him go. Even absent any good feeling, Azog might have decided that nothing but trouble would come of killing Thror. He decided to kill him, just as he decided NOT to kill Nar, so as to send a hateful message back to Thrain. It was all very deliberate. Too deliberate for the butchering of Thrain to be called anything other than murder, a crime commited with malice of forethought, rather than with the casual amorality of an irate big cat.

But aside from all the philosophy of it, I think most people understand that the basic reaction to someone deliberately slaying and mutilating your parent is not "hmmmm. . . do you have the proper moral disposition to have made a different choice than this?", rather it is, "You killed my father. Prepare to die."

"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."


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Nov 23 2012, 7:51pm

Post #41 of 43 (129 views)
Shortcut
AO I hate to pause you mid flow but [In reply to] Can't Post

"And, aside from all that, the story as it is told is just AWESOME, and much better dramatically than the hodgepodge, bowdlerized, makeshift substitute Jackson et al seem to want to put forth."

We don't actually know what the story in the films is do we? So unless we say story version A is good therefore story version B must be bad, aren't we starting to discuss and evaluate a partly imaginary thing?

LR


Elessar
Valinor


Nov 23 2012, 11:34pm

Post #42 of 43 (84 views)
Shortcut
Just rumors [In reply to] Can't Post

We won't know until someone leaks something from the premiere or for a couple more weeks when it launches.



Ardamírë
Valinor


Nov 23 2012, 11:37pm

Post #43 of 43 (148 views)
Shortcut
Thank goodness we'll know [In reply to] Can't Post

But then we'll move quite quickly into speculation of Film 2. Tongue

"...and his first memory of Middle-earth was the green stone above her breast as she sang above his cradle while Gondolin was still in flower." -Unfinished Tales

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.