The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

[Passdagas the Brown]

I agree with you, SV, though two of your logical fallacies seem easily answered:

Q: Why does Azog hate Thorin?

A: Thorin cut his arm off.

Q: Why does Thorin think Azog is dead?

A: Thorin cut his arm off.

[Elentári]

I agree with you, SV, though two of your logical fallacies seem easily answered:

Q: Why does Azog hate Thorin?

A: Thorin cut his arm off.

Q: Why does Thorin think Azog is dead?

A: Thorin cut his arm off.

Actually the question which needs answering is why exactly had Azog sworn to wipe out the Line of Durin in the first place?

[Passdagas the Brown]

Yes, that is certainly a plot hole. Though I don't find it too difficult to imagine that since orcs seem to like living in cavernous places, they will naturally be in conflict with other beings that like to live in cavernous places, such as dwarves. Maybe the line of Durin carved out the prime mountain real estate, and Azog wants it?

[Smaug's voice]

Actually that is what I meant in my question. Why the need to seek out and kill every last member of Durin's house? If they simply want to
live in underground places of dwarves, just drive them out and be done with it.
As to why Thorin thinks Azog is dead? Surely a severed arm is no proof of death? Thorin seems convinced he is dead. For apparently no reason.

[axordil]

I attributed Azog's vendetta to the War of the Dwarves and Orcs--arguably the two races with the longest memories for such--and didn't dwell on it.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Yeah. It seems like an odd thing to be concerned about to me. But to each his or her own.

[Passdagas the Brown]

Actually that is what I meant in my question. Why the need to seek out and kill every last member of Durin's house? If they simply want to
live in underground places of dwarves, just drive them out and be done with it.
As to why Thorin thinks Azog is dead? Surely a severed arm is no proof of death? Thorin seems convinced he is dead. For apparently no reason.

A severed arm in a place like Middle Earth probably means death 99% of the time, so I'm failing to grasp the "thinks he's dead for no reason" assessment. Orc-occupied Moria, as far as I am aware, was not home to a state of the art hospital...

And then having not heard from (or about) Azog again, he assumed he was dead.

However, I grant you that Azog's initial reasons for wanting to wipe out the line of Durin is hazy. My guess is that PJ's thinking was "they're orcs, and they like to do OTT evil stuff like that."

[Smaug's voice]

A severed arm in a place like Middle Earth probably means death 99% of the time ...

If untreated, yes. Why would Thorin think that the orcs would carry him away, their leader and apparently an ancient orc, and not treat him?

... so I'm failing to grasp the "thinks he's dead for no reason" assessment. Orc-occupied Moria, as far as I am aware, was not home to a state of the art hospital...

But they sure seem to have an artificial limb-replacement centre in there. Must be the NZALS...

However, I grant you that Azog's initial reasons for wanting to wipe out the line of Durin is hazy. My guess is that PJ's thinking was "they're orcs, and they like to do OTT evil stuff like that."

Yes.

[Passdagas the Brown]

C'mon, PJ. It's June. We want news!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Here you go:

A tweet from TORN:

New trailer is all action. VFX had to be rushed for new edit. The Dwarves are going to war!!

ETA: any day now

https://twitter.com/theoneringnet/statu ... 8376697856

I don't have a problem with a trailer being all action, or even having rushed VFX. It is, after all, a trailer, not the film. I'll be curious to see whatever is there.

[Passdagas the Brown]

PJ has never named one of his films after a battle. And in those films, there was a lot of action. This time, he's actually named the film after a battle. So I think it's safe to say that it will be a wall-to-wall action flick with a few obvious emotional beats.

In any case, I'm excited to see some dwarf armies!

[Elentári]

Soon?
https://twitter.com/theoneringnet/statu ... 0999074819

@theoneringnet "The time is upon us where all must choose what side we're on."
- Gandalf

Hobbit BOFA trailer is close! http://instagram.com/p/pCfV0AMGxk/

Plus, TORn to present a Bot5A preview at Denver Comic Con X

TheOneRing.net is coming to Denver Comic Con next weekend, June 13-15 with a packed schedule of Middle-earth fun for fans including a preview of BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES with Sylvester McCoy (Radagast)!

https://www.facebook.com/events/292411394267453/

[Dave_LF]

"The time is upon us where all must choose what side we're on."
- Gandalf

Seriously? Again? C'mon people; get your pronoun usage right!

[Passdagas the Brown]

Not to mention that it's a line that seems to distort a fundamental element of the story: that these "sides" are petty divisions in the face of more existential threats.

He may be speaking to the White Council - but if so - what exactly does it imply? That some members of the White Council could possibly choose to side with Sauron?

Is there going to be heavy foreshadowing of Saruman's downfall?

This is all wild speculation, but I'm not at all a fan of these clunky lines that litter Jackson's world. Particularly as they reinforce the belief, among some, that LotR is simple "good and evil" balderdash.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

For heaven's sake, at least wait until there is something to actually judge before you start judging it.

[Inanna]

For heaven's sake, at least wait until there is something to actually judge before you start judging it.

True. Dat.

[Beutlin]

Particularly as they reinforce the belief, among some, that LotR is simple "good and evil" balderdash.

Who gives a rat's ass what "some" people think about Middle-earth? Peter Jackson did not invent the common cliche that Tolkien's worlds is "simple good-and-evil balderdash". It's as old as "The Lord of the Rings" itself. And people who label Middle-earth "black-and-white" do not necessarily criticize certain character lines, but they take issue with Tolkien's view that good and evil exist in this world, and that there are characters who represent these ideals. They ridicule Aragorn not for his lines, but for his actions. They ask: "Why doesn't anybody turn all of these characters into three-dimensional personalities, full of weaknesses, vices, and mistakes?" And as I recall, Peter Jackson and Co. were criticized by some fans for doing just that in the "Lord of the Rings" films, turning Aragorn into a reluctant hero and Faramir into a man of doubt.

[Passdagas the Brown]

For heaven's sake, at least wait until there is something to actually judge before you start judging it.

I already explained that I'm impatient for news. Then we get one written line from a forthcoming trailer, and I freak out. Is there any reason to be surprised?

Plus, you of all people should know that this is an essential process in my strategy: build the foundation of seriously low expectations, build a structure of seriously low expectations, furnish that structure with all sorts of low expectations furniture, and then hopefully be pleasantly surprised when the film comes out.

It worked with DOS, after all.

[Passdagas the Brown]

Particularly as they reinforce the belief, among some, that LotR is simple "good and evil" balderdash.

Who gives a rat's ass what "some" people think about Middle-earth? Peter Jackson did not invent the common cliche that Tolkien's worlds is "simple good-and-evil balderdash". It's as old as "The Lord of the Rings" itself. And people who label Middle-earth "black-and-white" do not necessarily criticize certain character lines, but they take issue with Tolkien's view that good and evil exist in this world, and that there are characters who represent these ideals. They ridicule Aragorn not for his lines, but for his actions. They ask: "Why doesn't anybody turn all of these characters into three-dimensional personalities, full of weaknesses, vices, and mistakes?" And as I recall, Peter Jackson and Co. were criticized by some fans for doing just that in the "Lord of the Rings" films, turning Aragorn into a reluctant hero and Faramir into a man of doubt.

I care. I really want people to judge Tolkien on his own merits, rather than on his perceived merits based on something they saw in a film, or an article they read, or whatever. And it simply annoys me that Jackson's universe is increasingly being equated with Tolkien's. No big deal, though. I care a little bit, sometimes. But usually, "I don't give a "dusty f%$k" to quote Jaime Lannister.

P.S. I'm usually more annoyed at the inability (or unwillingness) of people to grasp the elements of death, deathlessness and the "fading of faery" that is so essential to the melancholy story of LotR. Yes, there is "good and evil" in LOTR, but there's so much more than that (and, I would argue, that's not the heart of the tale). For me, it's more about the human yearning for lost worlds - or as Tolkien described it - the desire to "survey the depths of time and space." And the bittersweet process of moving out of the age of myth and faery, and into the modern world. Yes, we have become more humble, caring and practical people than our Dark Age forbears. But we've swapped poetry for prose, and song for professional jargon. But most don't care to look that deep.

I don't have much sympathy for the view that the more "high mimetic" mode characters like Aragorn should be mopey, insecure hipsters.

[Beutlin]

Again: Why give a rat's ass what those people think, those who judge Tolkien without reading Tolkien? Instead of criticizing Jackson, I would criticize those who equate Jackson with Tolkien.

Personally, I try to take an entirely solipsistic approach when it comes to movies or culture in general. In theory, the film only exists for me. Thus, I do not have to give a hoot what other people think. Sure, it's nice if other people appreciate Tolkien too but ultimately the only thing that matters is what the artwork means to me and my life.