MOCpages : Share your LEGO® creations
LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop The Fellowship of the BrickLord of the Rings
Welcome to the world's greatest LEGO fan community!
Explore cool creations, share your own, and have lots of fun together.  ~  It's all free!
Conversation »
Tolkien Debate Forum
Join to comment
 Group admin 
Quoting Aidan Moon
This is a topic for friendly debate on Tolkiens works! From the light-hearted bickering over Legolas VS Aragorn, or more deep discussion over the Books VS The Movies... here is a topic to do it!

A few rules:

1. Polite debate only! We don't want any bickering, name calling... anything. Us moderators and admins will do the calling on what is out of hand or not.

2. Only Middle-Earth related. We do not need anything that is going to be non-related. It could lead into bad directions.

3. Have fun! If you are getting frustrated or annoyed, leave the debate and come back when you are in a better mood. You won't post good things if you are in a bad mood.


Let's get started: What was the WORST part of the Hobbit? I bet there will be disagreement here, so I am interested.

The worst thing included, or the worst aspect of it all?

I think the worst thing in the movie is Azog, he looks fake, and plays too prominent a role throughout the entire thing.

The worst aspect of it is that anything was left out, I have spoken enough on this matter already and I am not going to say more on here regarding that subject.
Permalink
| December 18, 2012, 6:07 pm
<<<<
Let's get started: What was the WORST part of the Hobbit? I bet there will be disagreement here, so I am interested.

Azog, although i understand why they would put him in, but he was too fake and slowed things down
Permalink
| December 18, 2012, 7:58 pm
I think the worst thing was Azog, as well. He by all means should have been killed long ago and has no place in this story. His look was cliche and he not only slowed the movie down but he dramatically altered many scenes beyond recognition and RUINED one of my favorite scenes : Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire.
Permalink
| December 18, 2012, 8:29 pm
Quoting Boarder Ryan
I think the worst thing was Azog, as well. He by all means should have been killed long ago and has no place in this story. His look was cliche and he not only slowed the movie down but he dramatically altered many scenes beyond recognition and RUINED one of my favorite scenes : Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire.

This debate is turning into an agreeable discussion.

Shall we move on to something different?
Permalink
| December 18, 2012, 8:47 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Aidan Moon
Is this the Mark Murphy I know?! Not wanting to debate something?!

I actually enjoy debating this with you, Mark, if you would say more.

No, this is a matter I have had enough of, especially on here. Debates are much harder to have on MOCpages than in real life. Even so, I am done with this, so instead because we do seem to be having such an agreeable discussion:

Which dwarf deserved more dialogue/screen-time?

I of course think Bobmur should have had more dialogue since he did not actually speak at all.
Permalink
| December 18, 2012, 8:53 pm
Quoting Aidan Moon
Yeah, that didn't work. Here's a better one.
Favorite dwarf in the company?
I have to say I like Fili a lot, along with Thorin. But Dwalin is also really cool. So I like those three the best. So go ahead! Fight for your favorites! :D

For me it's Fili or Balin. But in the movie I also loved Bofur.
Permalink
| December 18, 2012, 9:14 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Aidan Moon
Yeah, that didn't work. Here's a better one.
Favorite dwarf in the company?
I have to say I like Fili a lot, along with Thorin. But Dwalin is also really cool. So I like those three the best. So go ahead! Fight for your favorites! :D
Tie between Bofur and Ori. :) They were both so funny!

Permalink
| December 18, 2012, 10:37 pm
I've always liked Balin and the movie version of him was well portrayed. I liked Bofur in the film, as well.

I agree that Bombur should have had at least a line or two.
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 12:38 am
I've got to agree that Azog (the pale orc, right?) was one of my least favorite additions too. I concur that he was kind of fake and cheesy. I also wasn't keen on the movie's portrayal of Erebor. It reminded me of the city in 'Thor' or 'Star Wars' or something cheesy like that. I didn't buy into all the levels/bridges and such.

As far as dwarfs are concerned, Balin is my favorite in the book. As far as the movie goes, Balin was okay, but not my absolute favorite. I thought Dwalin was a total beast! I also enjoyed Fili and Kili's performance, Fili in particular; he looks like an epic viking! I thought they did a good job of making Gloin look like Gimli (from the movies) too.

Just some of my thoughts, having watched it for the first time tonight.
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 1:07 am
Agreed that Bombur should have had a line of two, i also dont like the fact that Bifer CANT talk
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 9:38 am
Quoting Ian Spacek
I've got to agree that Azog (the pale orc, right?) was one of my least favorite additions too. I concur that he was kind of fake and cheesy. I also wasn't keen on the movie's portrayal of Erebor. It reminded me of the city in 'Thor' or 'Star Wars' or something cheesy like that. I didn't buy into all the levels/bridges and such.

As far as dwarfs are concerned, Balin is my favorite in the book. As far as the movie goes, Balin was okay, but not my absolute favorite. I thought Dwalin was a total beast! I also enjoyed Fili and Kili's performance, Fili in particular; he looks like an epic viking! I thought they did a good job of making Gloin look like Gimli (from the movies) too.

Just some of my thoughts, having watched it for the first time tonight.

I dunno i liked Erabor quite a bit, it looked a bit like Moria, but on a grander scale.
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 9:45 am
 Group moderator 
So bad I haven't watched it yet... I can't take part in this.
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 9:57 am
 Group moderator 
I thought Erebor was awesome! I agree on not all the dwarves talking and having much lines,but there are 12 of them! Azog was cool,but he looked silly and boss at the same time! I also wish they added more of Hobbiton and the Shire!
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 9:59 am
Quoting Monsterlego ,
I dunno i liked Erabor quite a bit, it looked a bit like Moria, but on a grander scale.

That's funny, I didn't think it looked much like Moria at all! I thought it lost the awesome authenticity of Moria. There were to many elaborate curves and such. I image dwarfs being all about squares and blocks. I'll have to watch it again and study it more.
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 11:21 am
 Group admin 
I think all dwarves are very well portrayed. Balin is my favorite dwarf in the book and the movie didn't change that, but Bofur was awesome too!
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 11:58 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Boarder Ryan
I think the worst thing was Azog, as well. He by all means should have been killed long ago and has no place in this story. His look was cliche and he not only slowed the movie down but he dramatically altered many scenes beyond recognition and RUINED one of my favorite scenes : Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire.

I agree. His design is not really new and his behavior is too foreseeable and typical for most archenemies in movies. Nothing really interesting.
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 12:02 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Link .
I thought Erebor was awesome! I agree on not all the dwarves talking and having much lines,but there are 12 of them! Azog was cool,but he looked silly and boss at the same time! I also wish they added more of Hobbiton and the Shire!
Me too...

Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 12:05 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Michael Kringe
I think all dwarves are very well portrayed. Balin is my favorite dwarf in the book and the movie didn't change that, but Bofur was awesome too!
I loved the part when Balin called sting a 'letter opener' Haha... HE EZ STENG!

Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 12:07 pm
Quoting Ian Spacek
That's funny, I didn't think it looked much like Moria at all! I thought it lost the awesome authenticity of Moria. There were to many elaborate curves and such. I image dwarfs being all about squares and blocks. I'll have to watch it again and study it more.

Both in terms of the vastness and the art designs, it also shares giant stairwells
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 1:34 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Ian Spacek
That's funny, I didn't think it looked much like Moria at all! I thought it lost the awesome authenticity of Moria. There were to many elaborate curves and such. I image dwarfs being all about squares and blocks. I'll have to watch it again and study it more.

The second time I really caught all the details and stuff!(I've seen it 2 times already!)The first time I was really paying attention to the story.
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 7:52 pm
Quoting Link .
The second time I really caught all the details and stuff!(I've seen it 2 times already!)The first time I was really paying attention to the story.

I'll be seeing it again soon, mebbe I'll see thing differently
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 7:58 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Monsterlego ,
I'll be seeing it again soon, mebbe I'll see thing differently

I think you will! I did indeed!
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 7:59 pm
I liked Erebor though I never envisioned it being so deep; it did resemble the mines of Moria though many of you are confusing them with the city Dwarrowdelf. West to East is the Mithril mines, Dwarrodelf, the bridge of Khazad-Dum, the East gate and the road to Hollin (though all are technically "Moria"). I always thought of Erebor being the great hall with many rooms and mansions off to the sides and below and whatnot but P.J.'s version was stunning.

Debate Point #3...#4?
Radagast the Brown, though endearing in character and entertaining, played too big a role in the film.
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 9:34 pm
Quoting Boarder Ryan
I liked Erebor though I never envisioned it being so deep; it did resemble the mines of Moria though many of you are confusing them with the city Dwarrowdelf. West to East is the Mithril mines, Dwarrodelf, the bridge of Khazad-Dum, the East gate and the road to Hollin (though all are technically "Moria"). I always thought of Erebor being the great hall with many rooms and mansions off to the sides and below and whatnot but P.J.'s version was stunning.

Debate Point #3...#4?
Radagast the Brown, though endearing in character and entertaining, played too big a role in the film.

I thought he played a sort-of minor role, i think he was in just long enough.
Permalink
| December 19, 2012, 10:04 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Aidan Moon
I disagree, I liked him a lot, and I feel he played a very small role! We only saw him a few times, and he wasn't too important.

I liked him! I think he had a very good, but short enough spot in the film. :D

Permalink
| December 20, 2012, 12:25 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Aidan Moon
I disagree, I liked him a lot, and I feel he played a very small role! We only saw him a few times, and he wasn't too important.

I agree. He was one of the most interesting characters! His role was excellent and small enough for someone who doesn't belong to the book.
Permalink
| December 21, 2012, 4:12 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting Michael Kringe
I agree. He was one of the most interesting characters! His role was excellent and small enough for someone who doesn't belong to the book.

I thought he was going to be dumb and very very Jar-Jar like,but he turned out fine! He was one of my favorite characters!
Permalink
| December 21, 2012, 9:34 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
I agree. He was one of the most interesting characters! His role was excellent and small enough for someone who doesn't belong to the book.

He had a really lot of bird poop in his hair... XD
Permalink
| May 11, 2013, 11:40 am
Quoting A Sargent
He had a really lot of bird poop in his hair... XD

Yes he did. I liked him though. But if they had gone closer to the story of the book he would have had no part at all. I'm not saying that because he wasn't in the book but because the Necromancer had already been discovered and if you look at Thror's map, it says 'To the East lies Mirwood' then underneath it 'there are Spiders'

So really him discovering the Necromancer, while he may have been the one, was a discovery that happened far too late.
Permalink
| May 11, 2013, 12:01 pm
Quoting Evan 'Beardless Dwarf' Botkin
Yes he did. I liked him though. But if they had gone closer to the story of the book he would have had no part at all. I'm not saying that because he wasn't in the book but because the Necromancer had already been discovered and if you look at Thror's map, it says 'To the East lies Mirwood' then underneath it 'there are Spiders'

So really him discovering the Necromancer, while he may have been the one, was a discovery that happened far too late.

Yup!
Permalink
| May 11, 2013, 12:05 pm
I feel like this 'Debate' has become more of 'Ever body is agreeing on things that they dislike/like about the movies' rather than everybody disagreeing.
Permalink
| May 11, 2013, 12:12 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Evan 'Beardless Dwarf' Botkin
Yes he did. I liked him though. But if they had gone closer to the story of the book he would have had no part at all. I'm not saying that because he wasn't in the book but because the Necromancer had already been discovered and if you look at Thror's map, it says 'To the East lies Mirwood' then underneath it 'there are Spiders'

So really him discovering the Necromancer, while he may have been the one, was a discovery that happened far too late.

I know. Sauron's raise happened much earlier. I think they just wanted to show how fast darkness and danger came to Middle-Earth and that even the most powerful and wisest people noticed it too late.
Permalink
| May 12, 2013, 5:05 am
Quoting Ian Spacek
I've got to agree that Azog (the pale orc, right?) was one of my least favorite additions too. I concur that he was kind of fake and cheesy. I also wasn't keen on the movie's portrayal of Erebor. It reminded me of the city in 'Thor' or 'Star Wars' or something cheesy like that. I didn't buy into all the levels/bridges and such.

As far as dwarfs are concerned, Balin is my favorite in the book. As far as the movie goes, Balin was okay, but not my absolute favorite. I thought Dwalin was a total beast! I also enjoyed Fili and Kili's performance, Fili in particular; he looks like an epic viking! I thought they did a good job of making Gloin look like Gimli (from the movies) too.

Just some of my thoughts, having watched it for the first time tonight.

Yeah, Erebor had too many skinny bridges, and a lot of it seemed over-done (such as the gold streams, and the green tint to it). And I felt that the Arkenstone looked too much like something out of a sci-fi movie. I didn't like the fact that Azog survived up until the showdown between him and Thorin...that made up for it in my opinion.
Permalink
| May 12, 2013, 9:54 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
I know. Sauron's raise happened much earlier. I think they just wanted to show how fast darkness and danger came to Middle-Earth and that even the most powerful and wisest people noticed it too late.


Another thing that I disliked was Saruman. They had a chance to make Saruman seem like a good guy but instead they made him the Wizard that no one likes and the same bad guy like in Fellowship of the Ring. I remember him saying something like 'What Enemy?'. This line really didn't make sense considering the Istari were sent to battle Sauron! The fact that Saruman was so against any notions of Sauron being alive was just silly.
Permalink
| May 12, 2013, 3:05 pm
Quoting Boarder Ryan
I think the worst thing was Azog, as well. He by all means should have been killed long ago and has no place in this story. His look was cliche and he not only slowed the movie down but he dramatically altered many scenes beyond recognition and RUINED one of my favorite scenes : Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire.


I personally don't agree with this at all. They did an excellent job of animating Azog, and he provided a main antagonist for the first film, because it wouldn't have seemed as real or provided as much character or story depth for the only antagonist to be a dragon in a distant mountain. It was quite creative for Peter Jackson to incorporate the Pale Orc into the film. It allowed him to add in a lot of Thorin's backstory and the backstory of his people, such as the battle of Nandhurion. I think that the worst part of the movie was that we didn't get to see Smaug in full.

Permalink
| May 12, 2013, 3:30 pm
Quoting Will De Man

I personally don't agree with this at all. They did an excellent job of animating Azog, and he provided a main antagonist for the first film, because it wouldn't have seemed as real or provided as much character or story depth for the only antagonist to be a dragon in a distant mountain. It was quite creative for Peter Jackson to incorporate the Pale Orc into the film. It allowed him to add in a lot of Thorin's backstory and the backstory of his people, such as the battle of Nandhurion. I think that the worst part of the movie was that we didn't get to see Smaug in full.


I think that it was a good idea to include a main antagonist, but I wish it had been Bolg, Azog's son rather than Azog himself.
Permalink
| May 12, 2013, 3:56 pm
Quoting Evan 'Beardless Dwarf' Botkin

I think that it was a good idea to include a main antagonist, but I wish it had been Bolg, Azog's son rather than Azog himself.
I agree, It would've worked the same way.

Permalink
| May 12, 2013, 7:56 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Nick Doyle
Quoting Evan 'Beardless Dwarf' Botkin

I think that it was a good idea to include a main antagonist, but I wish it had been Bolg, Azog's son rather than Azog himself.
I agree, It would've worked the same way.

Yeah, he would have almost the same inducements. Thorin should have killed Azog in front of Moria and now his son (Bolg) wants revenge.
Permalink
| May 13, 2013, 8:02 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
Yeah, he would have almost the same inducements. Thorin should have killed Azog in front of Moria and now his son (Bolg) wants revenge.


It did seem kind of wimpy (to me) that Azog lost an arm and then wanted to kill every Dwarf in Middle-Earth. He should have been killed.
Permalink
| May 13, 2013, 9:06 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting Michael Kringe
Yeah, he would have almost the same inducements. Thorin should have killed Azog in front of Moria and now his son (Bolg) wants revenge.

Agreed!
Permalink
| May 13, 2013, 9:13 am
Quoting Evan 'Beardless Dwarf' Botkin

It did seem kind of wimpy (to me) that Azog lost an arm and then wanted to kill every Dwarf in Middle-Earth. He should have been killed.


From what I've been able to discover, Bolg will be in the Desolation of Smaug, and quite possibly There and Back again. Tolkien cited Bolg as a torturer in Dol Guldur, which would be why Peter Jackson used Azog as an antagonist in stead of Bolg.
Permalink
| May 14, 2013, 7:39 am
Quoting Will De Man

From what I've been able to discover, Bolg will be in the Desolation of Smaug, and quite possibly There and Back again. Tolkien cited Bolg as a torturer in Dol Guldur, which would be why Peter Jackson used Azog as an antagonist in stead of Bolg.


I didn't know that. Still, I don't think Azog should have been the main bad guy. Have you seen the pictures of Bolg? He looks cheezy. Like something out of a lame medieval movie rather than a LotR character.
Permalink
| May 14, 2013, 8:25 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Will De Man

From what I've been able to discover, Bolg will be in the Desolation of Smaug, and quite possibly There and Back again. Tolkien cited Bolg as a torturer in Dol Guldur, which would be why Peter Jackson used Azog as an antagonist in stead of Bolg.

You can also see him in the background of the battle in AUJ where he is fighting Dwalin.
Permalink
| May 14, 2013, 8:32 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Evan 'Beardless Dwarf' Botkin

It did seem kind of wimpy (to me) that Azog lost an arm and then wanted to kill every Dwarf in Middle-Earth. He should have been killed.

yeah. That makes the movie too predictable and a bit boring. Azog's just like the typical archenemy in movies nowadays.
Permalink
| May 14, 2013, 8:37 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
yeah. That makes the movie too predictable and a bit boring. Azog's just like the typical archenemy in movies nowadays.


Well, yeah, if we're going of the Darth Vader platform.
Permalink
| May 14, 2013, 10:09 am
Quoting Evan 'Beardless Dwarf' Botkin

It did seem kind of wimpy (to me) that Azog lost an arm and then wanted to kill every Dwarf in Middle-Earth. He should have been killed.

Yes, and it is funny seing how Lurtz got an arm cut of and hardly draws a grimace, while Azog screamt like a little girl.

Permalink
| May 15, 2013, 9:44 am
Quoting Frederick B.
Yes, and it is funny seing how Lurtz got an arm cut of and hardly draws a grimace, while Azog screamt like a little girl.


Lurtz even got stabbed through the stomach and actually pulled the sword deeper into his gut! That was funny. When my dad watched that the first time he was like 'Why didn't he just kill the guy while he was standing there screaming?'
Permalink
| May 15, 2013, 9:48 am
Quoting Frederick B.
Yes, and it is funny seing how Lurtz got an arm cut of and hardly draws a grimace, while Azog screamt like a little girl.


Well, Lurtz was an Uruk-Hai, and the best one ever, so it would make sense that he'd have more pain tolerance then Azog. Plus, Saruman did say "You do not know pain, you do not know fear." Azog is basically just an enhanced goblin.
Permalink
| May 15, 2013, 4:13 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Evan 'Beardless Dwarf' Botkin

Lurtz even got stabbed through the stomach and actually pulled the sword deeper into his gut! That was funny. When my dad watched that the first time he was like 'Why didn't he just kill the guy while he was standing there screaming?'

That was my thought too. Why didn't he kill Azog??? He was defeated and no other enemies were close enough to stop Thorin.
Permalink
| May 16, 2013, 12:23 pm
Quoting Will De Man

Well, Lurtz was an Uruk-Hai, and the best one ever, so it would make sense that he'd have more pain tolerance then Azog. Plus, Saruman did say "You do not know pain, you do not know fear." Azog is basically just an enhanced goblin.

True, ttrue.
Quoting Michael Kringe
That was my thought too. Why didn't he kill Azog??? He was defeated and no other enemies were close enough to stop Thorin.

Yes he had perfect acess to his head, why did he not just chop it off, so he couldn't come back years later and make all the Tolkien experts angry????
Permalink
| May 16, 2013, 2:09 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Michael Kringe
That was my thought too. Why didn't he kill Azog??? He was defeated and no other enemies were close enough to stop Thorin.

I thought the exact same thing! Every time I see that scene I'm thinking in my head "Come on! He's standing there screaming, just run up, and stab him in the gut! Come on, he's right there!". Ah well, Lurtz is a WAY better villan than Azog. I am quite excited for an Azog minifigure though!
Permalink
| May 16, 2013, 4:05 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Frederick B.
Yes he had perfect acess to his head, why did he not just chop it off, so he couldn't come back years later and make all the Tolkien experts angry????

Hah, true true... He shouldn't have even been in the movie at all. Period. He died decades before, he shouldn't have existed. End of conversation.
Permalink
| May 16, 2013, 4:09 pm
Quoting Frederick B.
True, ttrue.
Quoting Michael Kringe
That was my thought too. Why didn't he kill Azog??? He was defeated and no other enemies were close enough to stop Thorin.

Yes he had perfect acess to his head, why did he not just chop it off, so he couldn't come back years later and make all the Tolkien experts angry????


Er,,, I am definitely a Tolkien expert, and I'm not angry.

Permalink
| May 17, 2013, 7:28 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Will De Man
Yes he had perfect acess to his head, why did he not just chop it off, so he couldn't come back years later and make all the Tolkien experts angry????


Er,,, I am definitely a Tolkien expert, and I'm not angry.

Same here. I'm not angry only disappointed. Now I can live with it and it's interesting to see what they will have for him in the next movie, but hopefully they won't ruin it.
Permalink
| May 17, 2013, 10:14 am
Quoting Michael Kringe

Er,,, I am definitely a Tolkien expert, and I'm not angry.

Same here. I'm not angry only disappointed. Now I can live with it and it's interesting to see what they will have for him in the next movie, but hopefully they won't ruin it.


I don't think it'd be possible for it to be "ruined" but, then again, it is all a matter of opinion. What'd all you guys think of that fact that they switched Shelob's lair and the Tower of Cirith Ungol scenes to the 3rd movie, when it was originally in the 2nd book?

Permalink
| May 17, 2013, 7:51 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Will De Man
Same here. I'm not angry only disappointed. Now I can live with it and it's interesting to see what they will have for him in the next movie, but hopefully they won't ruin it.


I don't think it'd be possible for it to be "ruined" but, then again, it is all a matter of opinion. What'd all you guys think of that fact that they switched Shelob's lair and the Tower of Cirith Ungol scenes to the 3rd movie, when it was originally in the 2nd book?

It was in the movie, so I didn't really matter about the fact that it was in the wrong one. Same with Boromir who died in TT book not in FOTR.
Permalink
| May 18, 2013, 3:52 am
Quoting Michael Kringe

What'd all you guys think of that fact that they switched Shelob's lair and the Tower of Cirith Ungol scenes to the 3rd movie, when it was originally in the 2nd book?

I dont think that is a problem, if they had'nt done that there would pobably be much less of Frodo and Sam's journey which is supossed to be the most important one.
Permalink
| May 18, 2013, 5:00 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Frederick B.
I dont think that is a problem, if they had'nt done that there would pobably be much less of Frodo and Sam's journey which is supossed to be the most important one.

I agree. I think they adapted their journey very well for the movie.
Permalink
| May 19, 2013, 5:15 am
(continued from the Gondor vs Rohan page)I think Ori was ok looking, but I expected him to be smarter, considering he was the scribe/record keeper of the group.
Permalink
| May 30, 2013, 8:57 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Nick Doyle
(continued from the Gondor vs Rohan page)I think Ori was ok looking, but I expected him to be smarter, considering he was the scribe/record keeper of the group.

Hmm... I think they even changed the fact that he is older than Kili and Fili. That would describe his childish behaviour a bit.
Permalink
| May 31, 2013, 3:42 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting ~ Caleb ~
I thought the exact same thing! Every time I see that scene I'm thinking in my head "Come on! He's standing there screaming, just run up, and stab him in the gut! Come on, he's right there!". Ah well, Lurtz is a WAY better villan than Azog. I am quite excited for an Azog minifigure though!

Same with Elrond a little---

Elond"I saw the world of man fall that day....*flashback* Cast it into the fire!

Why didn't he push him in?
Permalink
| May 31, 2013, 9:24 am
Quoting Chris .
Same with Elrond a little---

Elond"I saw the world of man fall that day....*flashback* Cast it into the fire!

Why didn't he push him in?

That is pretty different, Isildur was the king of Gondor and would just be a little cruel. Azog was an Orc who had just killed the king of the dwarwes.
Permalink
| May 31, 2013, 9:56 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting Frederick B.
That is pretty different, Isildur was the king of Gondor and would just be a little cruel. Azog was an Orc who had just killed the king of the dwarwes.

Yes but he says that he saw the world of man fall,well if he did something he would have saved everyone a lot of time.
Permalink
| May 31, 2013, 11:49 am
Quoting Michael Kringe

Hi, Michael, I invited you to join the Middle-Earth MocAthalon group. We changed the other one to the judge group. Can you please join it for me?
Permalink
| May 31, 2013, 4:13 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Chris .
Yes but he says that he saw the world of man fall,well if he did something he would have saved everyone a lot of time.

True. Or why didn't they just fly with the eagles to Mt. Doom and thre the ring in?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yqVD0swvWU
Permalink
| June 1, 2013, 3:24 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
Hmm... I think they even changed the fact that he is older than Kili and Fili. That would describe his childish behaviour a bit.

Yeah, that too.
Permalink
| June 3, 2013, 5:10 pm
Quoting Michael Kringe
Yeah, he would have almost the same inducements. Thorin should have killed Azog in front of Moria and now his son (Bolg) wants revenge.

I think they just wanted Thorin to kill his archenemy. If it was Bolg, it wouldn't have been possible because bolg kills Thorin

Permalink
| June 8, 2013, 12:13 am
Quoting Chris .
Same with Elrond a little---

Elond"I saw the world of man fall that day....*flashback* Cast it into the fire!

Why didn't he push him in?


You forgot Elrond was in front and Isildur was at the back, so isildur could've escaped. And I also think(though im not sure)isildur is a better warrior then Elrond. Elrond wasn't Gil-Galads lieutenant in the books, Cirdan was!
Permalink
| June 8, 2013, 12:16 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
That was my thought too. Why didn't he kill Azog??? He was defeated and no other enemies were close enough to stop Thorin.

Yes I agree!! It was ridiculous!
Permalink
| June 8, 2013, 12:17 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
True. Or why didn't they just fly with the eagles to Mt. Doom and thre the ring in?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yqVD0swvWU

Or why didn't they fly the dwarves all the way to Erebor instead of leaving them on that bear shaped rock?
Permalink
| June 8, 2013, 2:06 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting Frederick B.
Or why didn't they fly the dwarves all the way to Erebor instead of leaving them on that bear shaped rock?

Because then the movie would be 13 minutes long and nobody would want to watch it.
Permalink
| June 8, 2013, 10:40 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Tureaglin Naugellon
I think they just wanted Thorin to kill his archenemy. If it was Bolg, it wouldn't have been possible because bolg kills Thorin

I totally agree! They showed us again and again that they're not afraid to ignore important facts, so maybe it would be better though if he just killed Bolg instead. That would still be much better than everything they do now.
Permalink
| June 9, 2013, 2:56 am
Thorin could kill Bolg with his last breath blablabla, just peter Jackson, DONT let azog "come back from the dead" because 1. he looks ridiculous 2. You take away Dain ironfoot II's greatest achievement!! and he's my favorite dwarf... 3. THE MOST IMPORTANT its totally different from the book. oh and Azo is just the villain you have in about every movie. not creative at all...
Permalink
| June 9, 2013, 4:24 am
Peter Jackson did great with lotr, but Azog is just one big fail..
Permalink
| June 9, 2013, 4:26 am
Quoting Will De Man
Yes he had perfect acess to his head, why did he not just chop it off, so he couldn't come back years later and make all the Tolkien experts angry????


Er,,, I am definitely a Tolkien expert, and I'm not angry.
I am too, and I AM angry


Permalink
| June 9, 2013, 4:38 am
Quoting Tureaglin Naugellon
Peter Jackson did great with lotr, but Azog is just one big fail..


Agreed, Azog was by far the worst part of the movie. I do think Jackson did a good job with the Unexpected Party and Riddles in the Dark scenes, though. Those two scenes were probably my favorite scenes in the movie.
Permalink
| June 9, 2013, 12:56 pm
Quoting Lindel Baskin

Agreed, Azog was by far the worst part of the movie. I do think Jackson did a good job with the Unexpected Party and Riddles in the Dark scenes, though. Those two scenes were probably my favorite scenes in the movie.
part of me loves Azog's inclusion, but the other half is still asking "Why...?" The goblins were a bit odd looking too...and their king? He was more like a deformed troll.

Permalink
| June 9, 2013, 9:14 pm
Quoting Lindel Baskin

Agreed, Azog was by far the worst part of the movie. I do think Jackson did a good job with the Unexpected Party and Riddles in the Dark scenes, though. Those two scenes were probably my favorite scenes in the movie.


I think bring Azog into the movie wasn't Peter Jacksons' best idea,but it didn't make the movie any better or worst.
Permalink
| June 9, 2013, 9:32 pm
Quoting Nick Doyle
Quoting Lindel Baskin

Agreed, Azog was by far the worst part of the movie. I do think Jackson did a good job with the Unexpected Party and Riddles in the Dark scenes, though. Those two scenes were probably my favorite scenes in the movie.
part of me loves Azog's inclusion, but the other half is still asking "Why...?" The goblins were a bit odd looking too...and their king? He was more like a deformed troll.


I actually liked the goblin king..
Permalink
| June 10, 2013, 2:15 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting Nick Doyle
Quoting Lindel Baskin

Agreed, Azog was by far the worst part of the movie. I do think Jackson did a good job with the Unexpected Party and Riddles in the Dark scenes, though. Those two scenes were probably my favorite scenes in the movie.
part of me loves Azog's inclusion, but the other half is still asking "Why...?" The goblins were a bit odd looking too...and their king? He was more like a deformed troll.

Speaking of the Goblin King, for those who watched it in 3-D, at the part where he turns around and talks to the audience for the first time, when he first opens his mouth, a little blob of SPIT, flies out and looks like it hits me in the eye, EVERY SINGLE TIME! So I'm just siting there going "Arghh! Agh, spit in my eye! Awghh, that's gross!" And trying to rub it out of my eye. :P
Permalink
| June 10, 2013, 5:50 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Tureaglin Naugellon
Thorin could kill Bolg with his last breath blablabla, just peter Jackson, DONT let azog "come back from the dead" because 1. he looks ridiculous 2. You take away Dain ironfoot II's greatest achievement!! and he's my favorite dwarf... 3. THE MOST IMPORTANT its totally different from the book. oh and Azo is just the villain you have in about every movie. not creative at all...

Yeah. His behaviour is too boring and predictable. Just like in thousands of other movies. And everything he says the whole time is "Kill them all!" or something like that.
Permalink
| June 10, 2013, 7:15 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Ethan Shuler

I think bring Azog into the movie wasn't Peter Jacksons' best idea,but it didn't make the movie any better or worst.

Yeah. It was a last-minute idea. They decided to enlarge Azog's role after they decided to split off the 2 movies in 3 and its only purpose is to make the 1st movie longer and more exciting since there is no other main enemy except from Smaug.
Permalink
| June 10, 2013, 7:20 am
Quoting ~ Caleb ~
Speaking of the Goblin King, for those who watched it in 3-D, at the part where he turns around and talks to the audience for the first time, when he first opens his mouth, a little blob of SPIT, flies out and looks like it hits me in the eye, EVERY SINGLE TIME! So I'm just siting there going "Arghh! Agh, spit in my eye! Awghh, that's gross!" And trying to rub it out of my eye. :P

LOL! I had some friends who watched it in 3D and at the part where Thorin is standing there watching Thror, they thought it was a real person and almost said 'Sir, could you sit down please? We're trying to see the movie.'
Permalink
| June 10, 2013, 7:45 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting Michael Kringe
Yeah. His behaviour is too boring and predictable. Just like in thousands of other movies. And everything he says the whole time is "Kill them all!" or something like that.

Yes,I saw a movie called 'Warm Bodies'(a zombie twist movie) and Azog's orc talk sounds like the guy in it turning into more of a human when he talks to other things. Plus it reminded me a lot of Azog cause they were both really pale! XD
Permalink
| June 10, 2013, 10:01 am
Quoting Ethan Shuler

I think bring Azog into the movie wasn't Peter Jacksons' best idea,but it didn't make the movie any better or worst.


In my opinion, it did change the movie for the worse. Not only was he completely unnecessary, but, as others have mentioned, Azog ruined some scenes completely beyond recognition.
Permalink
| June 10, 2013, 2:39 pm
Quoting Lindel Baskin

In my opinion, it did change the movie for the worse. Not only was he completely unnecessary, but, as others have mentioned, Azog ruined some scenes completely beyond recognition.
I think Azog was more of Del Toro's idea, but he didn't feel like he had a real presence until the end, in that scene where Thorin charged him (so badass, one of my favorite moments even if it was "made up" XD )...I think it's because he was all cgi.

Permalink
| June 10, 2013, 8:48 pm
I think the movie should have been exactly like the book; I've actually only seen it once because I was so disappointed with the inclusion of Azog and Radagast. The story is amazing as it is and didn't need alteration in any way to make a perfect blockbuster film/s. That said, the Unexpected Party and Riddles in the Dark were well done. But, on the flip side of that token, the Goblin Town and Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire were ruined beyond recognition - two of my favorite scenes I was most looking forward to.
Permalink
| June 10, 2013, 10:13 pm
Quoting Ronin Dragonslayer
I think the movie should have been exactly like the book; I've actually only seen it once because I was so disappointed with the inclusion of Azog and Radagast. The story is amazing as it is and didn't need alteration in any way to make a perfect blockbuster film/s. That said, the Unexpected Party and Riddles in the Dark were well done. But, on the flip side of that token, the Goblin Town and Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire were ruined beyond recognition - two of my favorite scenes I was most looking forward to.


Exactly! Jackson's best scenes were those that were most like the book. I suppose what Jackson meant to be doing with the changes was make the movie have a more 'epic' feel like LotR, but scenes like Goblin-town just felt ridiculous.

Permalink
| June 11, 2013, 11:42 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Ronin Dragonslayer
I think the movie should have been exactly like the book; I've actually only seen it once because I was so disappointed with the inclusion of Azog and Radagast. The story is amazing as it is and didn't need alteration in any way to make a perfect blockbuster film/s. That said, the Unexpected Party and Riddles in the Dark were well done. But, on the flip side of that token, the Goblin Town and Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire were ruined beyond recognition - two of my favorite scenes I was most looking forward to.

Thank you! I did like that they had Radagast, but I agree completely about Goblin Town and the Fire scenes.
Permalink
| June 11, 2013, 12:40 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Mark Murphy
Thank you! I did like that they had Radagast, but I agree completely about Goblin Town and the Fire scenes.

The "Out of the Frying-pan-into-the-Fire" scene was OKAY, I mean I was happy with it, but it definitely could have been better. Radagast was a great inclusion, one of my favourites actually. As for Goblin Town and the Great Goblin, he was just ridiculous. I expected him to be an actual strong fearsome seasoned warrior, kinda like Azog, not some lumpy blob of flesh that can't even fight. The rest of the movie was excellent though, expecially the "Unexpected Party", and the scenes regarding the Necromancer and Dol Goldur. I'm REALLY looking forward to the next one, now that the trailer's out! Anyhow, those are my thoughts on the movie. Tally-ho!
Permalink
| June 11, 2013, 2:24 pm
I was about to say something about someones comments in the Desolation of Smaug trailer. But I think this needs to be brought to the Debate conversation. Smaug looked a little odd in the new trailer. Just putting that out there.
Permalink
| June 11, 2013, 9:20 pm
Quoting Ronin Dragonslayer
I think the movie should have been exactly like the book; I've actually only seen it once because I was so disappointed with the inclusion of Azog and Radagast. The story is amazing as it is and didn't need alteration in any way to make a perfect blockbuster film/s. That said, the Unexpected Party and Riddles in the Dark were well done. But, on the flip side of that token, the Goblin Town and Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire were ruined beyond recognition - two of my favorite scenes I was most looking forward to.


If they did it excactly like the book it would be a kids movie, and a lot more ridiculous!
Permalink
| June 11, 2013, 10:39 pm
Quoting Tureaglin Naugellon

If they did it excactly like the book it would be a kids movie, and a lot more ridiculous!

I do agree with you here. However, the inclusion of Azog was pretty disappointing. I didn't mind Radagast but Azog made the movie seem like a different story in some parts.
Permalink
| June 11, 2013, 10:44 pm
yes, I didn't like Azog either.
Permalink
| June 11, 2013, 11:04 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Ethan Shuler
I was about to say something about someones comments in the Desolation of Smaug trailer. But I think this needs to be brought to the Debate conversation. Smaug looked a little odd in the new trailer. Just putting that out there.

The reason why many people think that he looks odd is that the very bright eyes don't fit the dark head in that scene. I think when we get to see him in more light he will look normal.
Permalink
| June 12, 2013, 9:47 am
Well I suppose I'll put my 2 cent's worth in :) well in my opinion Azog was a good addition to the film in the way that he thickened the blot because in my own personal opinion the original story to the hobbit is this [13 dwarves wanna go on a quest they can't go with only 13 because of a superstition so they find bilbo then go then kill a dragon then kill a crap load of goblins and thats it in a nutshell] now don't get me wrong I like the book but I'm starting to like the movie the more I think about because peter jackson has artfully and skillfully added the missing puzzle pieces that I always wondered about like why did the goblins come who lead them thats where azog and the witch king come in so my opinion of the movie 10/10 =) hope I didn't offend anybody.
Permalink
| June 12, 2013, 9:27 pm
Quoting Luke the Swift
Well I suppose I'll put my 2 cent's worth in :) well in my opinion Azog was a good addition to the film in the way that he thickened the blot because in my own personal opinion the original story to the hobbit is this [13 dwarves wanna go on a quest they can't go with only 13 because of a superstition so they find bilbo then go then kill a dragon then kill a crap load of goblins and thats it in a nutshell] now don't get me wrong I like the book but I'm starting to like the movie the more I think about because peter jackson has artfully and skillfully added the missing puzzle pieces that I always wondered about like why did the goblins come who lead them thats where azog and the witch king come in so my opinion of the movie 10/10 =) hope I didn't offend anybody.


of course you can have your own opinion! it would be strange if anybody was offened..
anyway, the witch king dol guldur stuff is great, I love it too! I still don't like azog though..
Permalink
| June 13, 2013, 7:35 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Luke the Swift
Well I suppose I'll put my 2 cent's worth in :) well in my opinion Azog was a good addition to the film in the way that he thickened the blot because in my own personal opinion the original story to the hobbit is this [13 dwarves wanna go on a quest they can't go with only 13 because of a superstition so they find bilbo then go then kill a dragon then kill a crap load of goblins and thats it in a nutshell] now don't get me wrong I like the book but I'm starting to like the movie the more I think about because peter jackson has artfully and skillfully added the missing puzzle pieces that I always wondered about like why did the goblins come who lead them thats where azog and the witch king come in so my opinion of the movie 10/10 =) hope I didn't offend anybody.

I think one important reason why the goblins came is that they wanted to have revenge for the Great Goblin's death. And Bolg, Azog's son (who had also a huge anger against the dwarves) led them.
Permalink
| June 13, 2013, 8:47 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
I think one important reason why the goblins came is that they wanted to have revenge for the Great Goblin's death. And Bolg, Azog's son (who had also a huge anger against the dwarves) led them.

Another reason was that they knew about the Dragon being vanquished and the gold so they came for that as well.
Permalink
| June 13, 2013, 3:22 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Evan 'Beardless Dwarf' Botkin
Another reason was that they knew about the Dragon being vanquished and the gold so they came for that as well.

Yeah. There aren't really many questions left open in the HOBBIT. Only what Gandalf does while he is away, what Beorn does at night and how the goblins heard of the fall of the dragon. An idea for the movie can be that the Master of Esgaroth or his servant Alfrid told them about it, because they hoped to get a share of the treasure.
Permalink
| June 14, 2013, 9:55 am
 Group moderator 
Quick question to all:

How do you feel about Smaug,from whats been in the trailer? He's huge!
Permalink
| June 18, 2013, 9:46 am
Quoting Chris .
Quick question to all:

How do you feel about Smaug,from whats been in the trailer? He's huge!

He looks....interesting. I can certainly say that I like the fact that he has no beak (like we saw in the picture Michael posted a few weeks ago) but he looks a bit to worm-ish. Not very dragon-ish. Similar to Volvagia from Ocarina of Time. He is huge though!
Permalink
| June 18, 2013, 5:25 pm
when Tolkien drawed smaug he was long and wormish too, so I think its cool!
Permalink
| June 18, 2013, 10:40 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Tureaglin Naugellon
when Tolkien drawed smaug he was long and wormish too, so I think its cool!

I think he looked awesome, although the bright eyes in contrast to the dark head looked a bit crazy. Maybe that's just a question of light though...
Permalink
| June 19, 2013, 11:48 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
I think he looked awesome, although the bright eyes in contrast to the dark head looked a bit crazy. Maybe that's just a question of light though...

Yeah, that scene was really dark. It makes sense though. They don't want to show too much in just a trailer. Now that I think about it, Smaug looks like the dragon-kite from the beginning of AUJ. Funny!
Permalink
| June 19, 2013, 6:28 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Evan 'Beardless Dwarf' Botkin
Yeah, that scene was really dark. It makes sense though. They don't want to show too much in just a trailer. Now that I think about it, Smaug looks like the dragon-kite from the beginning of AUJ. Funny!

Now that you say it, I see it too. Interesting idea, hehe!
Permalink
| June 20, 2013, 3:03 pm
 Group moderator 
You know some how I imagine Smaug smaller. But I can see how he could be big too. it will be interesting to see him in entirety.
Permalink
| June 20, 2013, 11:31 pm
Quoting Lee Muzzy
You know some how I imagine Smaug smaller. But I can see how he could be big too. it will be interesting to see him in entirety.

I had almost exactly the same thoughts.
Permalink
| June 21, 2013, 6:32 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting Finn tegotash
I had almost exactly the same thoughts.

Especially with Benedict Comberbatch playing him.
Permalink
| June 21, 2013, 9:43 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Lee Muzzy
You know some how I imagine Smaug smaller. But I can see how he could be big too. it will be interesting to see him in entirety.

T be honest I expected him to be so huge or maybe even bigger. Otherwise he wouldn't be able to drive so many dwarves out of the biggest kingdom in Middle-Earth and destroy one of the biggest cities at that time, Dale (and everything single-handed)
Permalink
| June 22, 2013, 6:23 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting Michael Kringe
T be honest I expected him to be so huge or maybe even bigger. Otherwise he wouldn't be able to drive so many dwarves out of the biggest kingdom in Middle-Earth and destroy one of the biggest cities at that time, Dale (and everything single-handed)


Now here is a point witch bothers me. In the book it says that only the dworves that were out side the mountain at the time of the attack survived(except for Thorin's father and grandfather). But in the movie you see many running out of the mountain.
Permalink
| June 22, 2013, 12:10 pm
Quoting Michael Kringe
T be honest I expected him to be so huge or maybe even bigger. Otherwise he wouldn't be able to drive so many dwarves out of the biggest kingdom in Middle-Earth and destroy one of the biggest cities at that time, Dale (and everything single-handed)

It certainly makes sense but I just hadn't considered it before I saw the trailer.
Permalink
| June 22, 2013, 2:08 pm
Quoting Lee Muzzy
Especially with Benedict Comberbatch playing him.

He has one of the coolest names on the planet! It's fun to say...
Permalink
| June 22, 2013, 4:53 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Lee Muzzy

Now here is a point witch bothers me. In the book it says that only the dworves that were out side the mountain at the time of the attack survived(except for Thorin's father and grandfather). But in the movie you see many running out of the mountain.

Yeah, that's another big mistake in the movie.
Permalink
| June 23, 2013, 6:41 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting Michael Kringe
Yeah, that's another big mistake in the movie.


and to top it off they really only did that to have enough dwarfs to fight Azog who(in my opinion) dose not belong in the hobbit anyway.

Permalink
| June 23, 2013, 2:28 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Lee Muzzy

and to top it off they really only did that to have enough dwarfs to fight Azog who(in my opinion) dose not belong in the hobbit anyway.

I totally agree.

And it wasn't really neccessary. There were also enough dwarves of Durin's Folk who lived in the Iron Hills and the Blue Mountains and who were able to fight the orcs in the battle of Azanulbizar.
Permalink
| June 24, 2013, 9:45 am
I think that we can all agree that if Azog was killed when he was supposed to be (whether by Thorin or Dain), and Bolg had replaced Azog's role in the films, it would've made much more sense. Actually, if Thorin had killed Azog instead of Dain, it would've made perfect sense if Bolg had tried hunting him down.
Permalink
| June 24, 2013, 10:24 am
 Group moderator 
Quoting Nick Doyle
I think that we can all agree that if Azog was killed when he was supposed to be (whether by Thorin or Dain), and Bolg had replaced Azog's role in the films, it would've made much more sense. Actually, if Thorin had killed Azog instead of Dain, it would've made perfect sense if Bolg had tried hunting him down.


EXACTLY!!
Permalink
| June 24, 2013, 12:50 pm
Quoting Nick Doyle
I think that we can all agree that if Azog was killed when he was supposed to be (whether by Thorin or Dain), and Bolg had replaced Azog's role in the films, it would've made much more sense. Actually, if Thorin had killed Azog instead of Dain, it would've made perfect sense if Bolg had tried hunting him down.

Bolg would have been a better choice.
Permalink
| June 24, 2013, 4:07 pm
Quoting Lee Muzzy

Now here is a point witch bothers me. In the book it says that only the dworves that were out side the mountain at the time of the attack survived(except for Thorin's father and grandfather). But in the movie you see many running out of the mountain.

They didn't play up the significance of the secret door enough in the movie. While it wasn't exceedingly important to the plot, Thror and Thrain's escape at least was cleared up to Thorin. They should have been more accurate to the book in that area.
Permalink
| June 24, 2013, 6:22 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Nick Doyle
I think that we can all agree that if Azog was killed when he was supposed to be (whether by Thorin or Dain), and Bolg had replaced Azog's role in the films, it would've made much more sense. Actually, if Thorin had killed Azog instead of Dain, it would've made perfect sense if Bolg had tried hunting him down.

I agree. That would have been the perfect opportunity to enlarge Bolg's role in the movie.
Permalink
| June 25, 2013, 3:50 am
Do you guys think that the Arkenstone could be a Silmaril? I know it's not directly stated, but maybe Tolkien intended to before he died...you never know! They have a lot in common, almost exactly like eachother. I think it's highly possible that it could be Maedhros' Silmaril, as he did cast it deep into the Earth. What do you guys think? Is the Arkenstone one of the lost Silmarils or not?
Permalink
| September 30, 2013, 9:13 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Nick Doyle
Do you guys think that the Arkenstone could be a Silmaril? I know it's not directly stated, but maybe Tolkien intended to before he died...you never know! They have a lot in common, almost exactly like eachother. I think it's highly possible that it could be Maedhros' Silmaril, as he did cast it deep into the Earth. What do you guys think? Is the Arkenstone one of the lost Silmarils or not?


Personally I don't think it is. but since I have not read the entire silmarilion I don't really know.
Permalink
| October 2, 2013, 10:20 am
Quoting Nick Doyle
Do you guys think that the Arkenstone could be a Silmaril? I know it's not directly stated, but maybe Tolkien intended to before he died...you never know! They have a lot in common, almost exactly like eachother. I think it's highly possible that it could be Maedhros' Silmaril, as he did cast it deep into the Earth. What do you guys think? Is the Arkenstone one of the lost Silmarils or not?

I tink te arkenstone is not a silmaril but im not sure tis article is really interesting http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=2158
Sorry about missing a ew letters my laptop is doing really strange
Permalink
| October 2, 2013, 11:46 am
But te arkenstone does ae an inner ligt so tat would mean it is a silmaril
(I really ate my laptop)
Permalink
| October 2, 2013, 11:49 am
Quoting Tureaglin Naugellon
But te arkenstone does ae an inner ligt so tat would mean it is a silmaril
(I really ate my laptop)


Exactly, and they were the only jewels said to have that power.
Permalink
| October 2, 2013, 7:35 pm
Quoting Lee Muzzy

Personally I don't think it is. but since I have not read the entire silmarilion I don't really know.


The descriptions are almost exact, besides the fact that a Silmaril will burn your hand if touched...otherwise they're quite similar.

Permalink
| October 2, 2013, 7:39 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Nick Doyle

The descriptions are almost exact, besides the fact that a Silmaril will burn your hand if touched...otherwise they're quite similar.

Or maybe it is also created by Feanor, with the only difference, that it is a slightly less precious stone. But still it would be the most important stone in Middle-Earth in the 3rd age.
Permalink
| October 3, 2013, 6:51 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
Or maybe it is also created by Feanor, with the only difference, that it is a slightly less precious stone. But still it would be the most important stone in Middle-Earth in the 3rd age.
well it did play a major role in some events of the 3rd age aswell

Permalink
| October 5, 2013, 2:10 am
Quoting Michael Kringe
Or maybe it is also created by Feanor, with the only difference, that it is a slightly less precious stone. But still it would be the most important stone in Middle-Earth in the 3rd age.

tats quite likely (im getting a new laptop soon)
Permalink
| October 6, 2013, 3:58 pm
 Group moderator 
Well its been a while since some one put a comment here but I have a topic for debate. How long do you guys thing Gandalf and Treebeard had know each other before the two towers?
Permalink
| March 24, 2014, 12:32 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Lee Muzzy
Well its been a while since some one put a comment here but I have a topic for debate. How long do you guys thing Gandalf and Treebeard had know each other before the two towers?

I don't know. Treebeard already lived in the 1st age, but Gandalf came to Middle-Earth in the 3rd age, although he already lived in Valinor during the other ages. Maybe 2000 or 1000 years?
Permalink
| March 24, 2014, 1:23 pm
Other topics
2000 Vignettes Updated today
LOTR Word Association Updated today
2300 members! Updated today
New Set Pictures Updated Thursday



LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop The Fellowship of the BrickLord of the Rings


You Your home page | LEGO creations | Favorite builders
Activity Activity | Comments | Creations
Explore Explore | Recent | Groups
MOCpages is an unofficial, fan-created website. LEGO® and the brick configuration are property of The LEGO Group, which does not sponsor, own, or endorse this site.
©2002-2014 Sean Kenney Design Inc | Privacy policy | Terms of use