The Official "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" movie thread *SPOILERS*

[DiFabio]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Nope. He states right before they attack the FS after Pippin makes a bunch of noise "ORCS" Watch again.

(he states Goblins as they enter the mines though)

So what? He states both. The entrance of the mines, Balin's tomb, they're BOTH located in the mines.

Why would the dead dwarves be killed by "Goblins" in the entrance but the rest by orcs in the inside? That's stupid.


Regardless, for me, some Goblins are the same as Orcs. Not like Mordor Orcs or Uruk-Hai mind you, but the ones in the Misty Mountains SHOULD have looked like the Moria Orcs in Fellowship of the Ring. Regardless if they're "Orcs" or "Goblins".


Not even saying, "The Hobbit sucks because teh Goblins don't look the same", that's dumb. I'm just saying, I don't like em, the Goblins. CGI, lame design, naked mole rat looking things, especially that little scribe or whatever. For consistencies sake the Goblins should have been a similar race and culture as the Moria orcs. In the Fellowship Peter Jackson and Co. described them as like colonies of insects that don't go out in light (the a deleted scene had them out tracking the Fellowship in Lothlorien), have eyes specifically for the darkness, live deep in the Misty Mountains and are smaller and more wretched than typical orcs. Sounds like a "Goblin" to me.

Even promotional items and merchandise advertise them, half use Moria Orcs (Toy Biz, Supplemental Material, statues, etc.), half Moria Goblins (busts, miniatures, games, etc.)






Even if you look online or google it, it's one of the most debated things when it comes to Middle Earth stuff. What's the difference, is a goblin an orc, etc. etc.

 

[OSCORP]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

So what? He states both. The entrance of the mines, Balin's tomb, they're BOTH located in the mines.

Why would the dead dwarves be killed by "Goblins" in the entrance but the rest by orcs in the inside? That's stupid.

I dunno ask PJ. Inconsistencies i guess. Point is the ones we see in the mine are supposed to be Orcs. (if you believe what legolas says)

But i am with you, i don't care for the new design either.


According to this same thing.

Peter: "The Orcs, or the Goblins, I don't know whether they're Goblins, we call them either Goblins or Moria Orcs."

Fran: "They're the same thing."

Peter: "The same thing essentially. We wanted to create a sort of race of feral creatures that live underground. They're a little different to the Orcs that you see elsewhere in the movie. They're much more, um..."

Fran: "Subterranean."

Peter: "Yeah, they're subterranean, large round eyes which would have developed so they can see in the dark."

Fran: "Very sickly skin."

Peter: "Yeah, pale skin, yeah. So we did put a lot of thought into it, and their armor is quite sort of cockroachy, and on some of their gloves they have little hooks which is what allows them to crawl up and down the walls."

 

[The Josh]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Goblin/Orc really is the same thing. It's just which word you choose to use. They're just going to look a little different based on location. You're going to have variances in the species I think and I could have sworn Tolkien said as much someplace. Mordor Orcs look different than Moria Orcs who look different than the Goblins in the Misty Mountains.

Not all the goblins in The Hobbit were CGI. You can read in one of the pictures I posted someone from Weta says as much.

In the end I really like the design and can't wait to get a couple of Goblin statues.

 

[DiFabio]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Goblin/Orc really is the same thing. It's just which word you choose to use. They're just going to look a little different based on location. You're going to have variances in the species I think and I could have sworn Tolkien said as much someplace. Mordor Orcs look different than Moria Orcs who look different than the Goblins in the Misty Mountains.

Yeah, and if they're the same thing (and I believe they are, nice commentary there Oscorp), then the Goblins in the Hobbit shouldn't look so dramatically different. Is Moria not in the Misty Mountains? It is, the creatures should reflect that.

We've seen Orcs/Goblins from the LOTR prologue (the start of the 2nd age), Mordor Orcs, Moria Orcs, pack orcs, black mordor Uruks, Uruk-Hai etc etc. and they've all had similar appearances. The difference between them all though were the cultures and living environments. That distinguished them and their distinctions were some of my favorite parts.


The Goblins, and hell, even the actual orcs (save for a couple, like Yazneg) in the Hobbit are completely different. If it's a generational thing, then how come the ones from the Prologue in Fellowship pretty much looked the same as the ones during Frodo's quest to destroy the ring?

I mean, Azog is an orc? He looks nothing like what a typical orc is and he's even bigger than an Uruk-Hai which are supposed to be the largest, superior breed of the orcs. I think it's the CGI that has changed this. That's the fault I have with it. Not enough practical orcs/goblins, enemies.

Not all the goblins in The Hobbit were CGI. You can read in one of the pictures I posted someone from Weta says as much.

They might as well have been.


I know some performers got in there with suits and costumes, but for the most part, they're all CGI. The faces especially. No prosthetics were used like they were before.



For me, these Hobbit movies need more of these,

That's what I'm talking about. It's just too bad that they're few and far between. I understand having CGI armies, but I think there's something wrong when you have close up shots of computer generated enemies other than Gollum, Trolls, Wargs, Balrogs etc. Orcs/Goblins should be "real".


I hope that makes sense.

 

[OSCORP]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

The Orcs that were hunting the Dwarves looked like that^

I think they just wanted the Goblin-Town gobbys to have a distinct look from the others is all.


(btw, does that map in the art book actually glow blue like the moon runes?)

 

[DiFabio]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

The Orcs that were hunting the Dwarves looked like that^

I think they just wanted the Goblin-Town gobbys to have a distinct look from the others is all.

Yeah, and like I posted, they were few. They get a few close up shots, like when Yazneg dies but for the most part they're pretty much in the background.

Azog is their leader and an Orc, the same race/breed but he looks completely different? Same with the Goblins. I know they wanted distinct looks, but the ones in LOTR had distinct looks? I could pick out what a Moria orc was, or a prologue Goblin, etc. so they had that variety.

 

[ZaCHw117]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

LOTR Design > Hobbit Design (so far)

The entire designs in LOTR (make-up, sets, armor, clothing etc.) was much better.

 

[The Josh]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Yeah, and if they're the same thing (and I believe they are, nice commentary there Oscorp), then the Goblins in the Hobbit shouldn't look so dramatically different. Is Moria not in the Misty Mountains? It is, the creatures should reflect that.

I said the term usage is the same thing not that they're same thing. The species themselves are more like cousins from what I've read someplace. It is but they're a long ways a part. Moria is in the southern part of the Misty Mountains and where they were at was in the northern part of the Misty Mountains.

We've seen Orcs/Goblins from the LOTR prologue (the start of the 2nd age), Mordor Orcs, Moria Orcs, pack orcs, black mordor Uruks, Uruk-Hai etc etc. and they've all had similar appearances. The difference between them all though were the cultures and living environments. That distinguished them and their distinctions were some of my favorite parts.

Mordor Orcs look different than the orcs in Moria. Shagrat and some of the other orcs you see in the scene of Frodo/Sam crossing the plains of Gorgoth look different than the Moria Orcs. Even Yanzeg and the other Orcs we see in The Hobbit look different. You're going to have variances in the species basically.

The Goblins, and hell, even the actual orcs (save for a couple, like Yazneg) in the Hobbit are completely different. If it's a generational thing, then how come the ones from the Prologue in Fellowship pretty much looked the same as the ones during Frodo's quest to destroy the ring?

See above.

I mean, Azog is an orc? He looks nothing like what a typical orc is and he's even bigger than an Uruk-Hai which are supposed to be the largest, superior breed of the orcs. I think it's the CGI that has changed this. That's the fault I have with it. Not enough practical orcs/goblins, enemies.

Actually, Azog even in the books is described a large Orc bigger than normal Orcs. So they didn't decide to make him bigger because of the CGI. Being from Mt. Gundabad could have something to do with this because Bolg is also described as a large Orc.

They might as well have been.

I know some performers got in there with suits and costumes, but for the most part, they're all CGI. The faces especially. No prosthetics were used like they were before.

Its not might they had lots of people in suits. Trust me I watched a ton if the videos, read a lot of the articles. If there is one thing I trust my knowledge on its stuff dealing with Tolkien's Middle-earth and Jackson's Middle-earth (plus you have someone from Weta saying as much).

As far as upclose I believe Grinnah was but there is more guy in suits there than you'd think.

For me, these Hobbit movies need more of these,

That's what I'm talking about. It's just too bad that they're few and far between. I understand having CGI armies, but I think there's something wrong when you have close up shots of computer generated enemies other than Gollum, Trolls, Wargs, Balrogs etc. Orcs/Goblins should be "real".


I hope that makes sense.

It does make sense. I do think you're a bit off in how much of it was CGI as far as the creatures up close. As far as getting more I do think you'll get some of that starting with the next movie, and then in the Battle of the Five Armies.

 

[DiFabio]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

I know exactly what you know, I've been following the same stuff.


Jackson said it himself, he went with more CGI with the orcs and goblins because the prosthetics had human elements in the eyes and mouth. Sounds to me like he felt that prosthetic and practical creature effects are outdated and not as convincing, which I think is ridiculous.


And yeah, I said that the orcs and goblins had variations in LOTR. Mordor is different from Moria and vice versa. I understand that. I even stated it's because of the environment they inhabit and their culture. But the Goblins, Azog and the other CGI villains are a littlemore than a variation, aren't they. The change is way too drastic in my opinion. They are nothing like what came before (er, after since this is a prequel).

Azog is supposed to be larger than the other orcs, that's how it is in the books. But bigger than an Uruk-Hai? He's frigging huge. But like you said, hopefully with the battle of five armies fixes my problem with film one because so far, other than Gollum and William, Bert and Tom I haven't been impressed with any of the creatures. The orcs and goblins have really disappointed me, especially when you consider the Orcs, Goblins and Uruks from LOTR.

 

[Njits]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

The orcs that hunted the dwarves were Gundabad orcs, they are suppose to look different. The battle you saw with Azog and the dwarves at Moira were also Gundabad orcs inhabiting Moria at that time, under leadership of Azog. Who is a freak of nature, an orc that doesn't fit anywhere like Gothmog for instance. I think the main thing that makes them look so different from a technical perspective though, is that in The Hobbit they used actors with CG makeup at the face, and some had full motion capture (completely digital). Which is something that is preferred these days much more then say, practical effects. Which is really lame actually.

 

[The Josh]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

I know exactly what you know, I've been following the same stuff.

Ok. Then you probably know this is kind of my thing and that I'm probably on top of my info.

Jackson said it himself, he went with more CGI with the orcs and goblins because the prosthetics had human elements in the eyes and mouth. Sounds to me like he felt that prosthetic and practical creature effects are outdated and not as convincing, which I think is ridiculous.

He did and it says as much in the art book. It also says they made a switch back to men in suits for more of the Goblins. I don't think that's the case or not how I took what was said. I believe in the book it was said so they could make them appear less humaniod looking.

And yeah, I said that the orcs and goblins had variations in LOTR. Mordor is different from Moria and vice versa. I understand that. I even stated it's because of the environment they inhabit and their culture. But the Goblins, Azog and the other CGI villains are a littlemore than a variation, aren't they. The change is way too drastic in my opinion. They are nothing like what came before (er, after since this is a prequel).

Azog I had always imagined him looking different than the other Orcs we saw. Not exactly like what we got but the way he's described I didn't expect him to look the same. The Goblins I don't mind looking different even within the same Orc/Goblin family. Shagrat look nothing like the Moria Orcs and I expect differences in the species depending on location.

Azog is supposed to be larger than the other orcs, that's how it is in the books. But bigger than an Uruk-Hai? He's frigging huge. But like you said, hopefully with the battle of five armies fixes my problem with film one because so far, other than Gollum and William, Bert and Tom I haven't been impressed with any of the creatures. The orcs and goblins have really disappointed me, especially when you consider the Orcs, Goblins and Uruks from LOTR.

We don't know if he's bigger than an Uruk-hai though. There won't be any of those in this movie and we've not seen him standing next to a human. So judging all of that is up in the air to be honest. I hope you enjoy things more. I was 100% happy with the Goblin design and the Orc (men in suits) with this movie as much as I was happy with The Lord of the Rings.

 

[DiFabio]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Shagrat was an Uruk and looked similar to Saruman's Uruk Hai. So did the other Uruks at Cirith Ungol.


And we don't know if he's bigger than Uruk-Hai? Of course he is!

Look at that, he's huge! Not just around his fellow orcs, but look at his fist in comparison to Thror's head. It's larger than his head!


Azog is clearly bigger than Uruk-Hai. The Uruk-Hai in the film are slightly taller than men and elves, not all of them though. The Beserker Uruk-Hai and Lurtz being the biggest.

Remember Gimli at Amon Hen and Helms Deep and his size/scale relationship to them? I can tell you right now that their fists weren't larger than his head.



https://www.elfenomeno.com/imag/gimli/spoil4531.jpg






Azog is HUGE. And remember, Azog is the king of the Orcs of Moria. The orcs of Moria and he had armor. His appearance in the film is nothing like that, not even in flashback. He looks like some kind of God of War game boss, not an orc.

 

[OSCORP]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Looks like we should get this guy somewhere in the next two then?

 

[DiFabio]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Bolg?


Hopefully.

 

[The Josh]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Shagrat was an Uruk and looked similar to Saruman's Uruk Hai. So did the other Uruks at Cirith Ungol.

Gorbag then. Whichever one comes down and talks about Frodo being as limp as a bone fish.

And we don't know if he's bigger than Uruk-Hai? Of course he is!

Look at that, he's huge! Not just around his fellow orcs, but look at his fist in comparison to Thror's head. It's larger than his head!

Yes, he is huge. He's standing next to a Dwarves and holding a Dwarf head. Look at how huge Gandalf looks when he is standing next to Thorin. Use that scene at Rivendell at the Moon Rune table. If we see him standing next to a human and he's as big as say the Goblin King at 10 ft tall I'll admit I was incorrect . Until then its fair game but I feel good in stating he's probably the size of a Berserkers.

Remember Gimli at Amon Hen and Helms Deep and his size/scale relationship to them? I can tell you right now that their fists weren't larger than his head.

Yeah, he came up to about their waste beause the Uruks are the size of Men. At most that's what Azog is about the size of a man. He's not bigger than a that because he would be in-between Troll and Man size.

Azog is HUGE. And remember, Azog is the king of the Orcs of Moria. The orcs of Moria and he had armor. His appearance in the film is nothing like that, not even in flashback. He looks like some kind of God of War game boss, not an orc.

He is huge. As huge as a Uruk-hai. He is the King of not only Moria but all of the Misty Mountains. Did he have armor? I don't recall reading that anyplace that he wore armor. So that is up to interpretation as someone I know on the TORn board said in the same discussion.

 

[The Josh]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Some images and text from the movie visual guide and movie guidebook.

 

[The Ween]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Shagrat was an Uruk and looked similar to Saruman's Uruk Hai. So did the other Uruks at Cirith Ungol.


And we don't know if he's bigger than Uruk-Hai? Of course he is!

Look at that, he's huge! Not just around his fellow orcs, but look at his fist in comparison to Thror's head. It's larger than his head!


Azog is clearly bigger than Uruk-Hai. The Uruk-Hai in the film are slightly taller than men and elves, not all of them though. The Beserker Uruk-Hai and Lurtz being the biggest.

Remember Gimli at Amon Hen and Helms Deep and his size/scale relationship to them? I can tell you right now that their fists weren't larger than his head.



https://www.elfenomeno.com/imag/gimli/spoil4531.jpg






Azog is HUGE. And remember, Azog is the king of the Orcs of Moria. The orcs of Moria and he had armor. His appearance in the film is nothing like that, not even in flashback. He looks like some kind of God of War game boss, not an orc.

When I look at the fist holding the head, it doesn't look bigger than the head, not that it matters really anyway.

 

[ZaCHw117]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

The two times I've seen it, the Pale Orc seemed massive. Couple feet bigger than an Uruk-hai.

Josh, the Berserkers are about as big as a regular Uruk-hai, tall wise, mass wise, they are bigger.

Like Difab said, his fist is the size of a Dwarves head. (not counting the beard of course.)

 

[The Josh]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

He does seem massive. I agree but no more so than the Uruks. I did see someplace they speculated him to be 7ft tall. I think that's probably a bit too tall but I'd say he's 6ft tall which would look massive compared to a Dwarf. He's smaller than the Goblin King who is 10ft tall according to one of the books.

 

[DiFabio]

Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread *SPOILERS*

The Uruk Hai were as tall as men, Lurtz and the Beserkers were slightly taller pushing 6'5. They were the tallest of the Uruk-Hai

No way was Lurtz the size of Azog. Lurtz wasn't hulking over Aragorn or Boromir. Beserkers at Helms Deep fighting Gimli weren't massively taller than him.

I'd like to see some scale comparisons. I doubt Azog is as big as the Goblin King. I'm thinking 8 or 9 feet tall though. Definitely bigger than Uruks.




If these figures are in scale, and I believe they are (Bridge Direct did a good job of scaling the Goblin King), then Bolg, Azog's son, is huge. Just imagine his dad.

And that's my point. It's established that Uruks are the biggest orcs and the most superior. They're not hunched or bow legged, they're essentially perfect orcs. So it begs to question, why would Azog, king of the orcs be larger than them, but also look strikingly different.

The Goblins too, even if they are the cousins of the Moria orcs. They're just on the opposite end of the spectrum, opposite of Azog.

I know the obvious answer is "CGI" and stylistic choice, they say as much, but I don't really like that change. Let's not forget, Azog was added in later on and changed from actor to actor. I'm sure he wasn't always as he appeared (which sheds light on why there isn't concept art of him). He's radically different.