My favorite parts was: "And then Legolas did a sick backflip and decaptitated like fifteen orcs at once, it was gnarly." - JRR Tolkien.
"...but there was no way Legy could run up to Ravenhill in time. So this giant bat goes flying by and he leapt 15, maybe 20 feet - vertical I'm saying - mounted the bat and piloted that sumbitch up to a tower upon the Ravenhill where he did some major Elf Sniping. Pew, pew, pew! It was fetch." - JRR Tolkien
"And then Legolas totally rides this troll, and controls its nerves and it is totally seriously so sick" - JRR Tolkien
"And Tauriel saw that and literally couldn't even!"
A timeless Classic you guys... I love the book... Jackson did a great job putting this on screen. God damnit.. Whats your favorite parts?
How could the stoniest heart fail to melt at the touching scene where the bereaved Tauriel gives birth to Kilrond Half-Dwarven, in a cave in Mirkwood not far from Radagast's abode, from whom she has sought help. Of course they couldn't include that scene in the film, it would jeopardize the PG rating....
"And then the majestic Eagles arrived, summoned by the wise wizard Radagast. It was he who lead their attack right into the midst of the orcish horde, the bird poo in his filthy hair ever so awe-inspiringly glistening in the sunlight. He was never seen again.
But he and the Eagles had not not come alone, for they brought Beorn, the... greyish beast-person?! You know, the were-bear whose house they invaded? He was in the story already, I swear! Anyways... From the back of an Eagle he jumped into the battle, transforming himself into his bear form during the fall of no less than a hundred feet. After hitting the ground completely unharmed he charged into the ranks of the foul orcs, never to be seen or heard of... ever again.
Also I guess the Eagles totally won that battle, or something."
I forgot about this awesome thread. I guess I can try my hand:
"And then the mighty and powerful Smaug saw his enemies running about his domain and was utterly clueless. Should he attack the ones in front of him? Sadly, to his great shame Smaug suffered from ADHD and thus was easily distracted from his course of action by the tiniest noises. Thus when he was about to pounce upon the weak little enemies before him, the other dwarves across the way made a sound, which meant he had to leave the easy to kill enemies. He ran toward his quarry that a was like barely sticking out of an area he knew he couldn't get them. And this happened over and over again. Seriously, it was like 20 minutes of Smaug flailing about like a moron, unable to cause even the most minor of damage. Can you imagine what it did to his self-esteem? What mean dwarves!"
You're concluding, that if someone is unable to cause even the most minor of damage, that someone looks like a fool - it makes him look weak.
It's funny how you fail to mention the outcome of dwarves' attempt to kill the dragon.
Ultimately the dwarves were "unable to cause even the most minor of damage" on Smaug ... which means, that Smaug made the dwarves look weak and totally harmless.
But this fact doesn't support your argument, and that's why you aren't mentioning it.
Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards. reply share
(Quote from arutha10002) Seriously, it was like 20 minutes of Smaug flailing about like a moron, unable to cause even the most minor of damage.
(Quote from you) You're concluding, that if someone is unable to cause even the most minor of damage, that someone looks like a fool - it makes him look weak.
It's funny how you fail to mention the outcome of dwarves' attempt to kill the dragon.
Ultimately the dwarves were "unable to cause even the most minor of damage" on Smaug ... which means, that Smaug made the dwarves look weak and totally harmless.
But this fact doesn't support your argument, and that's why you aren't mentioning it.
See? You're comparing. Oh, I forgot that you are as perfect as the movies so you'll never make such a mistaque.
I can't tolerate your sadness cause it's me you are drowning
reply share
Don't you remember? We are the Tolkien nazis. I'm tired of being polite.
I'm wondering how far will you go before admitting that you were wrong in anything. Now I know. You're cornered by your own words and the only option that's left for you is playing the offended, since you will never say that you are wrong. That's good for you.
Now come and tell me again that you did not said what you said.
You're concluding, that if someone is unable to cause even the most minor of damage, that someone looks like a fool - it makes him look weak.
It's funny how you fail to mention the outcome of dwarves' attempt to kill the dragon.
Ultimately the dwarves were "unable to cause even the most minor of damage" on Smaug ... which means, that Smaug made the dwarves look weak and totally harmless.
But this fact doesn't support your argument, and that's why you aren't mentioning it.
What are you talking about? Exactly where did you see me make a comparison?
Well, for someone who doesn't understand words and sentences it possibly is ...
As for your ex-signature you only admited defeat before PJ himself. No matter what any other user says to you, you will keep on denying until PJ says the opposite. That is not admitting, that is worshiping.
I can't tolerate your sadness cause it's me you are drowning
reply share
As for your ex-signature you only admited defeat before PJ himself.
That's irrelevant. You said, that I NEVER could admit, I was wrong. But fact is that I did. I was even being ironic about it ("ironic" means that you can laugh at yourself).
No matter what any other user says to you, you will keep on denying until PJ says the opposite. That is not admitting, that is worshiping.
Nonsense. Worshipping is when you are like "everything PJ says, is right" and "PJ only makes good films". And in my opinion none of those things are true.
Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards. reply share
That's irrelevant. You said, that I NEVER could admit, I was wrong. But fact is that I did. I was even being ironic about it ("ironic" means that you can laugh at yourself).
Nope. That's not irrelevant.
Nonsense. Worshipping is when you are like "everything PJ says, is right" and "PJ only makes good films". And in my opinion none of those things are true.
Says the one that started a thread named: Peter Jackson kept his word.
As if you anytime said that PJ was wrong. You cannot. It's part of your faith.
I can't tolerate your sadness cause it's me you are drowning
reply share
As if you anytime said that PJ was wrong. You cannot. It's part of your faith.
If you knew what you were talking about, you would know that on two or three occasions i have said, that Peter Jackson is wrong about 48 fps and 3D. I have also said, that Tintin isn't the right project for him, cause the first Tintin film wasn't good - just boring and soulless.
So I'm sorry, BluthStickwell, but you're wrong again.
Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards. reply share
Maybe you don't find Tintin to be a Canonical text?
No. You're just talking about lesser issues. Remember the discussion about the fifth army? You kept on saying the "one orc army" even when the script said something different through Legolas. Until you found what the DVD was saying that there were two orc armies. Which lead us to another important point. If there are two orc armies and an eagle army, then it's the battle of the six armies. 😂
I can't tolerate your sadness cause it's me you are drowning
You're just talking about lesser issues. Remember the discussion about the fifth army?
So you actually think, that the identity of the fifth army a BIG issue? To me it's just an technical detail, which would only represent a problem, if there were less than five groups to choose between.
another important point. If there are two orc armies and an eagle army, then it's the battle of the six armies.
Since you've always refused to call the eagles an army, there can't be six armies, can there?
And what is it, that you're doing right here and now? You're living in the past; you're talking to me as if I was defending the assumption that the eagles were the fifth army.
Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards. reply share
So you actually think, that the identity of the fifth army a BIG issue? To me it's just an technical detail, which would only represent a problem, if there were less than five groups to choose between.
😂😂😂
Since you've always refused to call the eagles an army, there can't be six armies, can there?
Don't change the subject, I was talking about you. FOr me there might be 4 to eight armies.
you're talking to me as if I was defending the assumption that the eagles were the fifth army.
😂😂😂
I cannot stop laughing.
I can't tolerate your sadness cause it's me you are drowning
reply share
In other words, your strategy is to redefine words to mean whatever suits you at the moment.
The fact that you can employ "self-irony" might indicate that you are capable of laughing at yourself, but that is NOT what the word "irony" means, regardless of context. I am not arguing the point of whether or not you are capable of laughing at yourself; quite frankly, I don't much care at the moment. I am explaining that you misrepresented the meaning of the word when what you were probably attempting to do was explain your motive behind what you said. Your use of language here is extremely imprecise.
_____ Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
-the hobbit are pretty much perfect films. Radagast, Alfred, Tauriel, Legalos. All necessary and perfect characters.
-The dragon knocked down 2 walls and resisted hot molten. Therefore he is scary and menacing. Had he only knocked down 1 i would of said it was a fluke and he is all talk. but when that second wall came down i literally peed myself in the theatre and instantly thought "most menacing and scariest monster ive ever seen on screen"
-anything you have to say is an opinion, nothing can ever be right or wrong, proven or disproven, its my "opinion". If I saw Howard the Duck was better than LOTR I am right its all subjective.
-Statistics are an opinion as well.
-if you dislike these films the only explanation is you are a tolkein purist who hated everything and wanted it 100% like the book, if you criticize anything that was in the book that PJ did poorly, then I will use the purists argument to support it. I will then give you false dichotomies and word salad argument's so ridiculous that most of the options i present you with are literally insane. The least insane but still very stupid option just happens to align with my opinion and is therefore correct. if you say it isn't then i fall back to the "its you opinion and all subjective" line.
-the hobbit are pretty much perfect films. Radagast, Alfred, Tauriel, Legalos. All necessary and perfect characters.
No, I know. It's just that... that... well, it's hard to admit.
-The dragon knocked down 2 walls and resisted hot molten. Therefore he is scary and menacing. Had he only knocked down 1 i would of said it was a fluke and he is all talk. but when that second wall came down i literally peed myself in the theatre and instantly thought "most menacing and scariest monster ive ever seen on screen"
Not only scary, he was really smart, in fact he was the smartest villain ever.
-anything you have to say is an opinion, nothing can ever be right or wrong, proven or disproven, its my "opinion". If I saw Howard the Duck was better than LOTR I am right its all subjective.
Here I'm gonna answer seriously. Of course it's my opinion. I only have some clues that tell me that some things of this movies were terrible done, some things. My main complaint is that they were boring and childish. Quoting or friend thevillageidiot:
"In fact sometimes they are childish and not at all that great."
-Statistics are an opinion as well.
Only those that say what you don't want to hear.
-if you dislike these films the only explanation is you are a tolkein purist who hated everything and wanted it 100% like the book,
In fact, I'm a tolkien purist, but I can feel comfortable with changes (I did in LOTR trilogy), but not with stupid changes and overthetop action scenes. What I mean is, you want to include a new character? Alright, let's see how does it works. You want Legolas climbing on air and dancing on his enemies? Sorry, that's not Tolkien and I cannot admit.
I can't tolerate your sadness cause it's me you are drowning
reply share
You know that billy was using sarcasm, right? He is perfectly aware of the points you are trying to make.
I thought my clear opinion on these boards made it obvious enough ha! I was using BN's logical thought processes and arguments.. Hoping maybe even he would see the ridiculousness of the arguments he makes..
Rememeber!! The dragon knocked down 2 walls, not one, breathed fire, and scared a dude who was walking on his nose, if that doesn't scream badass and scary, I don't know what does. What did all you Jackson haters wanted him to do with Smaug? Actually make him seem sinister, intelligent ruthless and capable? And actually have the dwarves feel extremely threatened and just barely escape with their lives? The dragon knocked down 2 walls! I repeat 2! that is all the menacing and scariness I could take. Ive seen plenty of movie dragons knock down 1 wall. but 2... there is some revolutionary story telling and character revealing for you all.. truly shocking material
reply share
'Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards.'
That's the worst thing you could ever *beep* do, pretend to know what Tolkien would do and use it for your argument. You didn't know, you don't know what he would do or what he would approve of and it's very disrespectful to assume so and use a dead man's name to support your ridiculous arguments. Shut the *beep* up.
No, when they needed they cooperated. But there were some major problems between elves and dwarves. This apart, elves and men always cooperated and kept a long friendship.
Yes it does, it severly does. Imagine a lion in a cage with 13 mice, not only does the lion not manage to touch ANY of the mice, but the mice even manage to annoy and slighty hurt the lion. Then tell me that isnt the lamest, weakest and most pathetic lion in the whole World.
Fair enough, lets make it a cat, and its complety true that mice can go into the wall, so the cat cant get near them... Thats why it works in the book.. The dwarfs doesnt get in confrontation with smaug they are hiding in a place where smaug cant get near them due to his size. In the movie they litterally run around him, thorin stands on his nose for crying out loud. 12 mice running through a cats legs, jumping on its head would NEVER make sense unless it takes place in a cartoon or its the most unfit, fat, retarded cat ever to walk the face of the planet. sure a cat is agile and quick, but i still take fire breathing over that any day, especially when my foes run around in a contained space. Plus you know... Smaug is supposed to be smart n stuff.
My cat would also get confused, if she was surrounded by 10 (not 12) mice!
(There were 9 dwarves and 1 hobbit = 10.)
12 mice running through a cats legs, jumping on its head would NEVER make sense unless it takes place in a cartoon
Well, it actually IS possibly for a mouse to run through a cat's legs, if the cat is concentrating on other things or other mice.
thorin stands on his nose for crying out loud.
Is it easy for an archer to hit a person, if that person stands behind him or hangs on his back? No. Can you bite a cream cake, if it's located on your nose? No. It's not always an advantage that a person or an object is very close.
or its the most unfit, fat, retarded cat ever to walk the face of the planet.
Perhaps not "unfit" and "fat", but definitely something similar, like slow and big (TOO big).
Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards. reply share
yeah i can imagine you can find a youtube video of a cat that gets outsmarted by a couple of mice in a barn or something, and i can imagine that the comments are filled with people saying stuff like "that cat have forgotten how to cat" and "haha what a stupid cat"... Just like we equally found Smaug hilariously unfrightening to the point of ruining his character as the force of nature he is supposed to be. Even IF there are cats out there getting run around by a bunch of mice, it still highlights just how lame it made smaug look. Cute little house cats is one thing but Smaug is supposed to be a beast.
About your archer argument... But Thorin didnt stand behind Smaug, he was in his eyesight. Thorin stood on Smaugs nose/mouth, its where he shoots fire from and bites stuff you know. It would actually be more if like someone faced and stood an inch infront of a point blank arrow instead of behind the archer.
Just like we equally found Smaug hilariously unfrightening
Did "we"? No, WE did not. YOU did. I didn't.
Smaug smashed down two walls. He set Thorin's clothes on fire. He chased the dwarves. They threw things at him; they tried to burn him - but none of it worked. They couldn't kill him; in fact they didn't even hurt or damage him the slightest bit.
And YOU, BluthStickwell, claim that someone who can tear down big walls of stone and breathe fire at you; someone that can't be killed, is "unfrightening"??!!! ... Well, I suppose you meet such creatures in your neighbourhood every day.
About your archer argument... Thorin stood on Smaugs nose/mouth ... It would actually be more if like someone faced and stood an inch infront of a point blank arrow instead of behind the archer.
As long as the dragon's mouth was closed, Thorin was safe. Smaug could only bite Thorin, if he had the dwarf BETWEEN his teeth, and Thorin is standing on the dragon's upper mouth.
But Thorin didnt stand behind Smaug, he was in his eyesight. Thorin stood on Smaugs nose/mouth, its where he shoots fire from and bites stuff you know.
... which probably is why Smaug tries to bite Thorin and subsequently shoots fire after him. Thorin only survives thanks to Dwalin; not because Smaug is "stupid" or "lame".
Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards. reply share
Again, this seems to be an issue on you again having no critical sense whatsoever. Does a charavter or being only have to destroy walls to make them menacing? Certainly not for me...
The chase scene in the end of dos was purely made because of entertainment, there wasnt any thought to it, Jackson even admitted this himself, he admitted it was a bunch of nonsense. You trying to put logic to it is quite tragic really.
There was no reason for the whole action craziness, it was there to make an artificial climax. Smaug flew around like an idiot getting floored by a bunch of merchant dwarfs and a hobbit. He is supposedly one of the most powerful beings in the universe, but yes... Yes... The dwarfs didnt exactly kill him so i supposed that in itself proof the claim of his awessomeness.... At least accordingly to you... Lol.
Again, this seems to be an issue on you again having no critical sense whatsoever.
BluthStickwell, please say after me: 'You just have another opinion'. And one more time: 'You just have another opinion.'
Goooood! That wasn't so hard, was it?
Does a charavter or being only have to destroy walls to make them menacing?
And what about the fire he breathes? Oh, I guess, that whenever flames are coming your way, you just remain calm and smile, while telling yourself: 'I've seen many fires that didn't hurt any people, so there absolutely nothing frightening about fire!'
I also recall Smaug attacking both the men of Dale and the dwarves of Erebor in 'An Unexpected Journey', but you'll probably say: 'That has got nothing to with the events of BOTFA'. ... And you'll say so DESPITE the fact that it's the very same story - 'The Hobbit'.
The chase scene in the end of dos was purely made because of entertainment
No, it wasn't. On the commentary track Philippa Boyens explains, that they needed to remind us of how dangerous the dragon was and to remind us of what the dragon was capable of doing. And that was going to be the climax of the second film.
there wasnt any thought to it, Jackson even admitted this himself, he admitted it was a bunch of nonsense.
Ehm ... NO, he never said that. That's something you're making up.
Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards. reply share
Urgh.... are you still on opinions? How simple minded are you? We the rest have been on a deeper critical level here.. Maybe the fact is simply that youre stupid.. Will this be the conclusion of months of debate? That bn is simply slow in the head? Is that what you have convinced this board on with your illogical rants? That youre simply a stupid person..? If thats what you have wasted months to prove, isnt it time to stop saying you are a film fan and just admit that youre a casual pleb? And deleting your imdb profil? Anyway, its either time for you to join us in a critical debate or its time for us ALL to ignore you.... Trust me, i will make that happend if you keep on proving how ignorant you are.
2. Oh yess... The Big menacing dragon, the force of Nature... He could breath fire and break down a wall.. I gues Peter really did a great job at showing what kind of treat he was. This also just proves how little understanding of characteristics you have.
3. Yes it was made purely because of entertainment and youre a god damn idiot if you cant see it.
Welp... I have had enough of your stupidity, i will go back to ignore you for a few weeks.. Maybe if you keep it up i will make a thread asking people to equally ignore you as you again for the hundred times have brought NOTHING of value to the table. I actually think you make me hate the trilogy even more, make me hate people in general and make us all more stupid for have read your thoughts... They truely are a baffling idiotic. BN you are the most delusional, ignorant person i have ever had the displeasure of debating movies with, and im a very social person so you should be proud of being that guy, thousands contended.
We the rest have been on a deeper critical level here..
Wait a moment ... Who is "we"? Ah, yes, so what you're saying, is that billy_talent1-1, zinabaggins and you are on deep level???
I will never sink so deep.
Anyway, its either time for you to join us in a critical debate or its time for us ALL to ignore you.... Trust me, i will make that happend if you keep on proving how ignorant you are.
So now you're threatening me?
Who are you? The leader of the pack?
Will this be the conclusion of months of debate? That bn is simply slow in the head? ..... That youre simply a stupid person..?
..... I have had enough if your stupidity
..... BN you are the most delusional, ignorant person i have ever had the displeasure of debating movies with
More name-calling will certainly convince me ..... or maybe not.
isnt it time to stop saying you are a film fan and just admit that youre a casual pleb? And deleting your imdb profil?
Have you ever tried to stand on your head in an aquarium filled with piranha fish?
This also just proves how little understanding of characteristics you have.
Who knows most about moviemaking? You or Peter Jackson? Who is a experienced director and has been making movies for 38 years? You or Peter Jackson? So who knows most about characteristics? You or Peter Jackson?
Maybe if you keep it up i will make a thread asking people to equally ignore you as you again for the hundred times have brought NOTHING of value to the table.
So you want something "of value"? Well, since you are our big role model, you must be referring to name-calling and an arrogant, condescending tone.
Yeah, that's really valuable ... it sure is.
I actually think you make me hate the trilogy even more, make me hate people in general and make us all more stupid for have read your thoughts... They truely are a baffling idiotic.
"Hate"??
Ehh ... you do realize, that we're just talking about films, don't you?
im a very social person
Ehm ... yes, that very obvious indeed!
"social" in this way:
Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards. reply share
So why is it that Smaug had no problems killing scores of dwarves when he first took the mountain and scores of men when he attacked Laketown? Weren't the dwarves and men small and agile compared to Smaug during those scenes? Why didn't all those men and dwarves just duck and bob and weave and walk on Smaug's nose? Why was Smaug such an efficient killing machine in those scenes but couldn't even raise a blister on anyone in Thorin's crew?
_____ Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
The book doesn't have the dwarves racing around Smaug's feet and dancing on his nose. The dwarves had time to take refuge in the passageway when Smaug made his attempt on them. It's plausible that they could survive that attack. As you said, not every situation is the same.
_____ Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
My cat would also get confused, if she was surrounded by 10 (not 12) mice!
Your cat also isn't the undisputed apex predator of its world, equipped with a superior intellect and a flame thrower in its throat. And mice traditionally don't face cats to challenge and taunt them.
That kind of thing mostly happens in Tom & Jerry cartoons, from which the Smaug chase sequence seemed to have taken a lot of inspiration.
reply share
I missed this argument. Boy is it terrible. My cats, which are incredibly stupid, would not be confused by being surrounded by 10-12 mice. They would not catch all of the mice, but you can bet at least one of those mice will be dead and there's a good chance a few more mice would be maimed.
The fact that Smaug was "the undisputed apex predator of its world, equipped with a superior intellect and a flame thrower in its throat", was also the reason why the dwarves failed so bad.
They were too naive. They couldn't harm the dragon in any way. They could only watch in horror, while Smaug destroyed Lake-town and killed a lot of people. And had it not been for Bard, the dragon would have come back and taken "care" of Bilbo and the Dwarves afterwards.
Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards.
Not likely. From what we saw, the dwarves could not hurt him, but he couldn't hurt them either. From what I could see, they didn't care anything about Lake Town either, so Smaug again failed to hurt them.
For some reason, you don't get it. If a dozen 8-year-olds armed with paper swords fail to hurt an knight in full armor and armed with a sword, you don't get astonished that the paper swords failed to hurt the armored knight. You do get astonished when that knight tries his best to kill and harm the children and fails to do any damage. That's the stuff comedies like Home Alone are made of. Hence why we wondered why PJ turned Smaug into a comical, weak, bumbling fool when we're supposed to be afraid of him.
Yes, he could. He just decided to kill the people of Laketown first. In the book he also fails, when he tries to kill the dwarves and Bilbo. And he also goes to Laketown afterwards. And yes, the details are different, but that doesn't change the fact, that overall the same things happen.
From what I could see, they didn't care anything about Lake Town either, so Smaug again failed to hurt them.
Didn't they care about Laketown??? During Smaug's attack on Laketown the dwarves (especially Ori, Bombur and Bofur) watch in horror and Balin says "Poor souls!" And after Smaug's death Kili worries about the people of Laketown and their loss. He says: "The people of Laketown have nothing. They came to us in need, they have lost everything." ... Thorin might not want to help them, but the rest of the dwarves think, he should.
For some reason, you don't get it.
For some reason YOU don't get, that the dragon was frightening to ME. That's a fact, and it's a fact that I can not change. And I'm not going to pretend, that the dragon wasn't frightening just to please YOU. And why should I? Do you think, it would be honest of me, considering that the last scenes of DOS really convinced me, that the dragon was (A) practically invincible and couldn't be killed, and (B) able to destroy anything on its path?
If a dozen 8-year-olds armed with paper swords fail to hurt an knight in full armor and armed with a sword, you don't get astonished that the paper swords failed to hurt the armored knight. You do get astonished when that knight tries his best to kill and harm the children and fails to do any damage.
An 8-year-old would have two advantages:
1. That's he small and probably fast 2. A knight in full armor doesn't move very fast. Armor is heavy. It might protect you, but it definitely doesn't make you fast!!!
Fact is that the dwarves only survived because they were always on the run; they kept running and hiding. They knew, that if they did run or hide or both, they would be killed instantly. The dwarves had two advantages:
1. They were small, so they could run through narrow hallways and passages.
2. Smaug was huge and SLOW, so he couldn't go anywhere he wanted just like that.
And even in the book we see a person (Bilbo) outrunning the dragon’s angry flames without being hurt. So why is it a problem, that other characters do the same thing in the film?
And the question is: DOES Smaug strategically try "his best" in the book? And in the film? When you read the book, you might also ask yourself: 'Why did Smaug give up so easily? Only ONE attempt to kill the dwarves, and only ONE attempt to kill Bilbo ... and bye-bye - off he goes! Why didn't he stay inside the mountain, now that the dwarves were there?'
Tolkien would never approve of the way some of his so-called fans behave on these boards. reply share
In the book he also fails, when he tries to kill the dwarves and Bilbo.
And this... were does this happen?
Smaug had left his lair in silent stealth, quietly soared into the air, and then floated heavy and slow in the dark like a monstrous crow, down the wind towards the west of the Mountain, in the hopes of catching unawares something or somebody there, and of spying the outlet to the passage which the thief had used. This was the outburst of his wrath when he could find nobody and see nothing, even where he guessed the outlet must actually be.
After he had let off his rage in this way he felt better and he thought in his heart that he would not be troubled again from that direction. In the meanwhile he had further vengeance to take. “Barrel-rider!” he snorted. “Your feet came from the waterside and up the water you came without a doubt. I don’t know your smell, but if you are not one of those men of the Lake, you had their help. They shall see me and remember who is the real King under the Mountain!
An 8-year-old would have two advantages:
1. That's he small and probably fast 2. A knight in full armor doesn't move very fast. Armor is heavy. It might protect you, but it definitely doesn't make you fast!!!
You forget about the 1,5 meters long sword that he must be wielding.
1. They were small, so they could run through narrow hallways and passages.
2. Smaug was huge and SLOW, so he couldn't go anywhere he wanted just like that.
3. And the fact that he was jumping from one group on which the dwarves divided to the other. But the worst is that Smaug doesn't seem to be as slow as you think. I can't tolerate your sadness cause it's me you are drowning
And the question is: DOES Smaug strategically try "his best" in the book? And in the film? When you read the book, you might also ask yourself: 'Why did Smaug give up so easily? Only ONE attempt to kill the dwarves, and only ONE attempt to kill Bilbo ... and bye-bye - off he goes! Why didn't he stay inside the mountain, now that the dwarves were there?'
There is nowhere for them to run. He can wait patiently since they're trapped like rats. Not difficult to understand.
reply share
What Smaug does in the book is to smash the mountainside, eventually destroying the Secret Door and sealing the tunnel.
Peter Jackson and his crew make Smaug so huge that even most swords would not be much of a threat. Even a great spear might be useless unless one could actually hit the dragon's weak spot.
Smaug knew that he could pick off Bilbo and the Dwarves eventually. He could hurt them another way in the mean time by destroying Lake-town. He didn't feel a need to rush.
"There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world." - Gandalf
I agree. The problem is that we saw him (in the movie) unable to make any harm to the dwarves. And of course he didn't need to rush, but it looks like he is in a rush all the time when pursuing them.
Peter Jackson must be laughing about how blindly his fans behave on these boards.
Has BN ever admitted he is wrong about anything ever in life?? probably the most intolerable person to be around in reality... That guy who always knows better and one ups everything with the most unlikely ridiculous explanation that nobody with attachments to reality would buy, but since his crazed mind can come up with it he gives it the weight of validity
I'm gonna reply with an example. All are quotes from bn.
from the tread: Which army was the 5th?
The eagles are the fifth army; that's very obvious when you watch the film. The arrival of the eagles means, that the good guys win the battle.
[...]
The poster for the theatrical release shows us five races = five armies:
dwarves, orcs, elves, men and eagles.
[...]
You want me to ignore the fact, that the only other major group besides dwarfs, elves, men and orcs are the eagles?
[...]
No, we were not.
1) Dwarves (Thorin and his men + Dain and his men)
2) Elves
3) Men
4) Orcs (There is one orc army divided into two, and the bats and the trolls and the wargs are all a part of this army)
5) Eagles
[...]
Given the fact, that I haven't seen Peter Jackson talk about this subject, I don't know what his original intent was.
But I have seen the film, and in the film they focus on five armies (one army for each race): dwarves, men, elves, orcs (who had help from trolls and wargs) and eagles. I didn't see any other armies in the films.
[...]
How do you explain, that Warner Bros. counts the Orcs and the Eagles as two armies? Did they forget to consult Peter Jackson and his crew?
Anyhow: Regardless of what the original intention was, the film itself lets me believe, that the five armies are dwarves, men, elves, orcs and eagles: five races = five armies.
[...]
And when I watch the film, I see the dwarves become an army due to Dain's arrival. That army no. 1. I see Thranduil arrive with his elves. That's army no. 2. I see the men of Laketown form an army under Bard's leadership. That's army number 3. I see the orcs arrive with a small number of goblins, wargs and trolls within their ranks. That's army no. 4. And later I see the eagles arrive and turn the tide of the battle. That's army no. 5.
[...]
When I watch the film, I see the dwarves become an army due to Dain's arrival. That's army no. 1. I see Thranduil arrive with his elves. That's army no. 2. I see the men of Laketown form an army under Bard's leadership. That's army no. 3. I see the orcs with a small number of goblins, wargs and trolls within their ranks. That's army no. 4. And later I see the eagles arrive and turn the tide of the battle. That's army no. 5.
[...]
You and I have both seen dwarves, elves, men and orcs gather before the gates of Erebor. We have both seen eagles arrive later. And we have both seen goblins, wargs and trolls within the ranks of the orcs.
[...]
One army per race.
When Dain arrives in the film, Gandalf says to him: "There's no need for war between dwarves, men and elves." ... So those three armies are already present: 1. Dwarves, 2. Men and 3. Elves. Then the first legion of Orcs arrive (and within their ranks we see goblins, trolls, wargs and bats). Later the second legion of orcs arrive, but it's still the same army; the same race. 4. Orcs ... And at last the Eagles arrive. 5. Eagles
And so on. Now, after the dvd proved that there were two orc armies, his last answer about this matter was:
you're talking to me as if I was defending the assumption that the eagles were the fifth army.
So, how can I take him seriously? I can't.
Peter Jackson must be laughing about how blindly his fans behave on these boards.
reply share
In the book, Bilbo wasn't climbing into the middle of the treasure room. He stayed right next to the secret passage out. When he took his leave, he darted into the passage and began running away before Smaug breathed any fire at him. Bilbo also kept his ring on throughout the entire time he was in Smaug's lair, so Smaug could only guess where the hobbit was.
_____ Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
I wouldn't say they did. They challenged a dragon, without any chance of defeating him, as you said yourself, and they did not lose a single man. Nobody even got injured. That's about as huge a success as they could ever hope for, given the circumstances.
If you threw a bunch of young kids in a compound with a starved tiger and they all made it out completely unharmed that definitely wouldn't be seen as a failure.
Edit: Didn't read arutha's reply. So yeah, it's like that. 😉
reply share
Way didnt you say so then? Why do you make yourself look stupid? Is it on purpose? Because you look utterly stupid as a adult person trying to put Logic into that scene.
"Thorin and the gang quickly killed like... 200... No... No... Like 500 orcs without losing momentum for even a second. The gang was in trouble though for reasons you dont need to know, so Gandalf quickly made some legit light magic.. KRATZZHH... Was the Sound of this magic" "So like after Gandalf did this i guess they were able to run further into this mountain, maybe??" "The gang stood in panic, they needed to get down to the buttom of the cliff to escape the orcs, so what they did was kinda using this wood, and like surfing about a mile down the mountain, but dont worry for this wasnt a problem afterall as Gandalf asked Aule to remove gravity and so Aule did. I promise you... It would have looked so tight in a 200 million dollar movie" "Bilbo thanked Legolas and the other gods for looking over them"