Battle of the Five Armies - Extended Edition

LOTR, HP, and Star Wars were my childhood in a sense.  I was similarly torn up when HP ended, though not as much since I wasn't into the community aspect of HP fandom as much.  But I've long since mastered the art of mentally sectioning off disappointing follow-ups from beloved originals.  Although the Star Wars prequels (the archetypal example of the disappointing follow-up) are actually not entirely in this category for me because I do have a lot of nostalgia for that period, when I was young enough to have been shown Episode I first and to not be as discerning (though I still preferred the originals).

{{{I hope you guys don't mind me going on and on about this stuff, it's just been on my mind a lot lately.}}}

By all means.

I'mma have to remember that quote, Halfy. Perfectly put.

This must seem improbable to most but one day I plan to hire a few hundred extras and go out to new zealand and do the battle of five armies some justice - by not only shooting behind a green screen. And I could recast Dáin with an real person this time (sorry Billy it's not your fault), and there would be no artificial mist (that might have been the most irritating thing from botfa), and there would actually be some orc blood this time around. Perhaps I could even kill a couple extra dwarves from the company this time around.

Just sharing a fantasy of mine that will never happen

Interesting that you bring up orc blood, david.  The description of the black blood staining the rocks during the BO5A always stood out to me even as a kid, probably because it's relatively graphic.  I'm kinda curious to see if that's part of the reason for the R-rating of BOFA-EE.  {{{Probably not. :/}}}

I'm happy to see the same dwarves that survived in the book make it to the end of the film series as well, though the movie character and the book group (which operates more as a collective unit than individual characters, except for Thorin) are so different that it wouldn't bother me that much if they had changed it since it'd be a relatively minor thing. But I'll take what similarities to the book I can get.

"though the movie character and the book group (which operates more as a collective unit than individual characters, except for Thorin) are so different that it wouldn't bother me that much if they had changed it since it'd be a relatively minor thing" - Eldo

The fact that the entire set of set of dwarves were practically inseparable (except when Kili got left behind for that god awful love story ) and was in itself a character always made them feel even more superficial than they already were (especially considering PJ said he was trying to improve upon the hobbit). So I always thought killing another few of them off would help convey the fact that they were each individual characters. Or just starting the whole movies off with less dwarves to care for (though I'm sure that wouldn't hold well with book fans)

Also, I'm not sure if this is true, but weren't a few of the dwarves not in future canon? I know for a fact that Gloin, Bombur, Bifir, and Balin were mentioned in FOTR, but none else comes to head.

I think you're right that reducing the number of dwarves would have pissed off a lot of book fans, but I think it would have ultimately been a more minor change than a lot what we saw in The Hobbit. Certainly more superficial. But it's the superficial stuff that people get hung up on. And if I'm being completely honest, I wouldn't have been happy at seeing less dwarves either. But I think the large group of interchangeable dwarves is something that, while it works fine in a children's book/fairy tale sort of story, doesn't translate into epic fantasy well at all. I would have preferred that they had preserved more of the tone of The Hobbit, but I think the process of adaptation would have highlighted the weird ways in which it doesn't entirely mesh with LOTR more than the books do.

I guess my point is that there were no easy answers, even though I don't like the solutions PJ ultimately went with.

I owe PJ a lot really. well I owe him a lot for LOTR. sometimes I think that the romantic longings of my youth are but dust and ashes, and every time I watch Aragorn and Arwen its like they are fresh sparkling rain falling on a parched oasis. something wakes up and blooms in the desert.

I owe him a lot for LOTR- Figg

Me too, the bastard!

Well said Mrs Figg. LOTR are some of my favorite movies (maybe my #1 favorite, though if I'm trying to be objective they're not quite that high) and it's played a big role in my life, from nostalgic childhood memories to the multitude of people I've met through the fandom and all the things that has brought me. So whatever my thoughts on certain changes or decisions, I can't be upset that the films happened. Not even The Hobbit. And while I'm not in a hurry to revisit TH again and again (though I will see the final EE), the LOTR movies are still stone cold classics.

You don't owe PJ anything.

I don't owe him anything, but thanks for some happy times.

and some sadly frustrating I-cant-believe-they-did-that Hobbit times.

bungobaggins wrote:You don't owe PJ anything.

We owe him this forum

I had more fun thinking, talking and arguing about these films online than I did watching them

Eldorion wrote:I think you're right that reducing the number of dwarves would have pissed off a lot of book fans, but I think it would have ultimately been a more minor change than a lot what we saw in The Hobbit.  

It wouldn't have bothered me in the slightest, the Dwarves in the book seem to be mainly characterized as a homogenous group of beardies, largely ineffective and grumpy, It's hilarious in the book (I always liked to think in universe, that Bilbo was so fed up with their incompetence and selfishness he didn't see the need to credit them any further when he wrote 'The Red Book') and put's Bilbo front and center, but wouldn't translate to film very well (not least because I don't think the actors in question would be very pleased to be gievn such limited material) either from a character point of view, or from a design perspective, there's hardly any character growth for the Dwarves to get worked up about in the book, so I never really cared all that much whether Jackson was going to kill off a few more or reduce the numbers a little, when you think about the amount of screentime and development Jackson and co actually bothered to give them in the final films, it wouldn't make much difference anyway, five or six more or less background extras in Thorin's company with silly hair wouldn't be any different to the eight we got in the film (At least Thorin, Kili/Fili, Balin and Bofur had some character development).

You are right though, the other changes they went with have much more impact on the story...

And if you ask me, the death of a few minor dwarves could give some of the more important dwarves motivation to go full ballistic on the orcs. Motivation is what is key with this movie. Part of the reason why it's gotten complaints for being exactly like a video game is because Thorin is the only character with motivation to want to fight the orcs (i.e. Azog). It's similar, to a lesser degree, to when Aragorn was motivated after Boromir's death to step up as Isildur heir and become King of Gondor.

If you've got no motivation, you've lost reason to get invested in the characters, even if they're already semi interesting

davidjoneshoward wrote:And if you ask me, the death of a few minor dwarves could give some of the more important dwarves motivation to go full ballistic on the orcs. Motivation is what is key with this movie. Part of the reason why it's gotten complaints for being exactly like a video game is because Thorin is the only character with motivation to want to fight the orcs (i.e. Azog). It's similar, to a lesser degree, to when Aragorn was motivated after Boromir's death to step up as Isildur heir and become King of Gondor.

If you've got no motivation, you've lost reason to get invested in the characters, even if there already semi interesting

Good point, Jackson did give the Dwarves more of a motive than a simple treasure hunt in the movies, but all the same I never really got the sense of why I was supposed to care about these guys, most of them weren't developed beyond being extras with slighty odd hairstyles. I think if a few more were killed off I don't think it would have detracted from the three canonical deaths, rather it would have raised the stakes and perhaps make Azog an co seem less cartoonish.

I can barely remember any of BOTFA, but aren't most of the background Dwarves largely absent from the battle? It's very hard to care about any of them if they aren't seen in mortal peril...

malickfan wrote:Good point, Jackson did give the Dwarves more of a motive than a simple treasure hunt in the movies, but all the same I never really got the sense of why I was supposed to care about these guys, most of them weren't developed beyond being extras with slighty odd hairstyles. I think if a few more were killed off I don't think it would have detracted from the three canonical deaths, rather it would have raised the stakes and perhaps make Azog an co seem less cartoonish.

I can barely remember any of BOTFA, but aren't most of the background Dwarves largely absent from the battle? It's very hard to care about any of them if they aren't seen in mortal peril...

The time that the dwarven army stands out the most was when they showed up. You never see any of the individual soldiers fighting, because it's cgi, which is something they'll definitely have to fix if they want to make it believable.

I think cinema has shown that 7 is just about the perfect number for an ensemble group such as this [Seven Samurai, Magnificent Seven, etc.]. Unfortunately for PJ, "Seven Dwarves" had already been used....

Unfortunately for PJ, "Seven Dwarves" had already been used....
- David H

Thorin, Balin, Kili (up until the romance), Bofur, and Dwalin (though he should have been more developed), were all the dwarves I had good feelings for.  Maybe even Fili could join the troop because I'd be interested in his brotherhood with Kili, if done right.

Bifir, Oin, and Gloin (edit: we can cut Oin out) I liked the character designs (they looked dwarvish), so if there were any background dwarves, they would be the ones. But let's face it, we don't need background dwarves. Perhaps because there are less dwarves in total they could even be developed to. The rest are just interchangeable.

Those would be the dwarves I would keep in The Hobbit. So in total it would be 7 dwarves and Thorin. What would your picks be of which dwarves to keep?

The only dwarves that stand out in my memory from the book are:

- Thorin, cause he's an actual developed character
- Fili and Kili, mainly cause they die and are related to Thorin
- Bombur, cause he's fat and the main source of comic relief
- Gloin, cause he's Gimli's father
- Balin, cause his tomb appears in LOTR

I mean beyond that, most of the characteristics the dwarves have were probably invented by the screenwriters, so they could've picked another 3-5 to keep at random if they felt like it and it wouldn't have made much of a difference. Or maybe just go with relatives of the memorable dwarves (so Bifur, Bofur, Dwalin, and maybe Oin), so you still have sets of siblings that could provide a basis for their interpersonal relationships.

they just needed to look like Dwarves and I would have been happy. All I wanted was Dwarvley Dwarves with coloured hoods. Half of them being in the background would have been perfectly reasonable and nobody would have noticed. The look of them annoyed me from the minute I saw them. Balin looked like a Dwarf and was the only one I really warmed to. I hated the fact they were shown as oafs who couldn't sit down to table without being obnoxious. or disrespecting their host. it was appalling.

If I ever did a fan edit all that would be left would be enough for a trailer. it would have all the Balin bits, butterflies, and sparks coming up a chimbley. fin.

Eldorion wrote:The only dwarves that stand out in my memory from the book are:

- Thorin, cause he's an actual developed character
- Fili and Kili, mainly cause they die and are related to Thorin
- Bombur, cause he's fat and the main source of comic relief
- Gloin, cause he's Gimli's father
- Balin, cause his tomb appears in LOTR

I mean beyond that, most of the characteristics the dwarves have were probably invented by the screenwriters, so they could've picked another 3-5 to keep at random if they felt like it and it wouldn't have made much of a difference.  Or maybe just go with relatives of the memorable dwarves (so Bifur, Bofur, Dwalin, and maybe Oin), so you still have sets of siblings that could provide a basis for their interpersonal relationships.

I always remember Dori because Bilbo is dangling from his legs during the eagle rescue. Too bad I just wanted to punch movie Dori in the face the whole time.