The Hobbit (Teaser Trailer released)

[AsburySkinsFan]

Just got back from seeing the Hobbit in 3D......awesome....that is all.

[DeaconTheVillain]

Let's settle this once and for all.

What is the difference between orc and goblin?

I was under the impression that goblins where the ones living in caves and who you see climbing up walls in Moria and also in the hobbit obviously in the goblin cave. These are different than orcs right? Or as I think I heard someone say before, orc is just the elvish word for goblin

[AsburySkinsFan]

Let's settle this once and for all.

What is the difference between orc and goblin?

I was under the impression that goblins where the ones living in caves and who you see climbing up walls in Moria and also in the hobbit obviously in the goblin cave. These are different than orcs right? Or as I think I heard someone say before, orc is just the elvish word for goblin

In Tolkein's world they are different. Moria was over-run by orcs.

A orc is to a goblin as an urukai is to an orc.

They are each a created species, the next one better than the last. Goblins are the smallest, orcs human sized, urukai larger than men.

[Major Harris]

It's Uruk-Hai. :geek:

[endzone_dave]

Question for the smart LoR folks:

Why is Gandalf so weak? I think the most powerful thing he did was light some pine cones on fire. Maybe I'm just used to seeing powerful wizards in video games.

[AsburySkinsFan]

It's Uruk-Hai. :geek:

LoL! Mi culpa

It isn't in my spell check.

---------- Post added December-29th-2012 at 02:18 PM ----------

Question for the smart LoR folks:

Why is Gandalf so weak? I think the most powerful thing he did was light some pine cones on fire. Maybe I'm just used to seeing powerful wizards in video games.

I think Gandalf likes to sandbag...and I never got the feeling from any of the books that the wizards are some sort of all powerful trump card.

[stupidmorals]

In Tolkein's world they are different. Moria was over-run by orcs.

A orc is to a goblin as an urukai is to an orc.

They are each a created species, the next one better than the last. Goblins are the smallest, orcs human sized, urukai larger than men.

I don't think that's right. I thought that, for Tolkein, Orc and Goblin were all but interchangeable. I probably have some of this wrong, but I thought Orc was the elvish word for that species that was created in mockery and defilement of Elves. Men used that word often because Men and Elves were friendly for a long time, Elves teaching Men as they rose to prominence. Goblin was the Hobbit word for Orcs. Maybe some others used that word, too (Dwarves and Men and maybe even some Elves that live in the regions where that word became common).

Now, I think I remember Tolkein distinguishing between Moria Orcs and Mordor Orcs and Morgul Orcs, etc. But, I thought those differences were more cultural/geographic/racial. The same way there were Men of Gondor and Rohan and Harad and the Easterlings, etc. Or Wood Elves as compared to High Elves or whatever the hell. They're all of the same respective species, but within any of those species are divisions of culture, homeland, lifestyle, historical allegiance, etc.

But all of the Orcs and Goblins are of the same species, created a long time ago as kind of a direct opposition to Elves. But Tolkein's universe is old, lots of stuff has happened over thousands of years and so there is a lack of uniformity between, and amongst, languages and cultures and histories and even species.

I think that because PJ is working with a primarily visual medium, he emphasized more drastic differences in appearance and terminology between all of the disparate "breeds" of Orcs. It helps the audience to keep straight which ugly bad guys are which if they all look pretty different and are often called different things. I guess you could kind of make a half-assed evolutionary argument about the Orcs that live in deep caves for generations getting all misshapen and short and pale, while the Orcs that live on the surface more closely resemble a "human" stature.

Also, the Uruk-Hai are a crossbreed, a hybrid of Orc and Man. That's why they're still butt-ugly, bloodthirsty, and evil, but also large, upright, strong, disciplined, and resistant to the sun. Saruman created a whole new species by using science and magic to splice Man with Orc.

[DCSaints_fan]

Question for the smart LoR folks:

Why is Gandalf so weak? I think the most powerful thing he did was light some pine cones on fire. Maybe I'm just used to seeing powerful wizards in video games.

The Istari (wizards) were indeed powerful but were prevented by Valar (who sent them) from intervening so directly in the fate of Middle Earth. They could act as guides and protectors, but they weren't supposed to fight the battles of men/dwarves/elves/hobbits were supposed to fight. You mostly only see them unleash their otherworldly powers when confronted by another being of similiar power (like the Balrog or Nazgul) and when the odds were stacked against them, but even then Gandalf was inclined to protect and evade not to destroy every enemy in their path.

There is a similiar issue with the Eagles ... why do they need to travel through dangerous country on horseback or foot, when Gandalf can seemingly dial 1-800-GOEAGLES anytime he wants? Although you can't find a reason why not, unlike the Istari theres no hint that the Eagles were prevented from doing this ... its clear in the literature that the entire role of the Eagles is they are a deus ex machina device to get the good guy(s) out of a jam when theres no other way out (the company outside of Goblin town, Gandalf on top of Isengard, the army at the Black Gate, Frodo and Sam atop Mt. Doom).

[AsburySkinsFan]

On top of the things in Middle Earth that drive me nuts it's the eagles.

But then I do undersand their use but sometimes it just feels like cheating. However, using narrative to get our bands of merry travellers out of their situations would require a lot more space within the books.

I don't mind Gandalf's escape, it was pretty silly putting him up there to begin with, and I don't mind them coming into the fight at the Black Gate. But, the tree (Hobbit) and rescuing Frodo and Sam just felt like cheating.

[endzone_dave]

The Istari (wizards) were indeed powerful but were prevented by Valar (who sent them) from intervening so directly in the fate of Middle Earth. They could act as guides and protectors, but they weren't supposed to fight the battles of men/dwarves/elves/hobbits were supposed to fight. You mostly only see them unleash their otherworldly powers when confronted by another being of similiar power (like the Balrog or Nazgul) and when the odds were stacked against them, but even then Gandalf was inclined to protect and evade not to destroy every enemy in their path.

There is a similiar issue with the Eagles ... why do they need to travel through dangerous country on horseback or foot, when Gandalf can seemingly dial 1-800-GOEAGLES anytime he wants? Although you can't find a reason why not, unlike the Istari theres no hint that the Eagles were prevented from doing this ... its clear in the literature that the entire role of the Eagles is they are a deus ex machina device to get the good guy(s) out of a jam when theres no other way out (the company outside of Goblin town, Gandalf on top of Isengard, the army at the Black Gate, Frodo and Sam atop Mt. Doom).

It's a good thing he and the dwarves can fall about 500 feet on a bunch of wooden scaffolding, otherwise he would have had to use some of his powers.

[AsburySkinsFan]

It's a good thing he and the dwarves can fall about 500 feet on a bunch of wooden scaffolding, otherwise he would have had to use some of his powers.

hey that was some well made bridge-work!

[Southtown]

Here is how the LOTR Wiki explains the eagle thing...which makes some sense:

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Gwaihir

◾It has been pointed out by several observers that the entire War of the Ring could have been over almost as quickly as it began if only Gandalf had requested that Gwaihir simply take the ring himself and delivered it to Mount Doom to have it destroyed. Whether or not this is a reasonable possibility is debatable, however, using logic, you can conclude that Sauron would have seen the ring and sent armies and the Nazgûl after him, thus eventually overpowering Gwaihir and ultimately giving Sauron the ring. This also is debatable because it is unknown how the wearing of the Ring on a claw or other appendage would affect an animal and Sauron's ability to see it with his Eye. It should also be understood that the mission to bring the One Ring to Mordor was appointed to Frodo by the White Council. Only Frodo alone should risk holding the Ring, thus it was not Gwaihir's mission, nor was it his burden, to carry either the Ring or the Ring Bearer. ... Also, since a single poison arrow had nearly brought him down in the past, it would be reasonable to assume Gwaihir and the other eagles would be reluctant to fly over orc archers.

As far as orc vs. goblin...they have this:

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Orcs

As mentioned previously, the word goblin as used by Tolkien is merely another word for Orc, although in popular culture goblin is often used by readers of Tolkien's works to refer to the smaller breeds of Orc.

The original edition of The Hobbit and early drafts of The Lord of the Rings used 'goblin' throughout and used 'Hobgoblin' to refer to larger and/or more evil goblins. In the introduction to later editions of The Hobbit, Tolkien explained that Orc is generally to be translated as goblin.

In The Lord of the Rings, "Orc" is used predominantly, with "goblin" used mostly in the Hobbits' conversation. Uruk-hai is a type of larger and stronger Orc.

[Koolblue13]

This is the first ever 3D movie on my island. I might go to our theater and see it. Haven't seen a movie in over a year.

[fwo40]

The Istari (wizards) were indeed powerful but were prevented by Valar (who sent them) from intervening so directly in the fate of Middle Earth. They could act as guides and protectors, but they weren't supposed to fight the battles of men/dwarves/elves/hobbits were supposed to fight. You mostly only see them unleash their otherworldly powers when confronted by another being of similiar power (like the Balrog or Nazgul) and when the odds were stacked against them, but even then Gandalf was inclined to protect and evade not to destroy every enemy in their path.

There is a similiar issue with the Eagles ... why do they need to travel through dangerous country on horseback or foot, when Gandalf can seemingly dial 1-800-GOEAGLES anytime he wants? Although you can't find a reason why not, unlike the Istari theres no hint that the Eagles were prevented from doing this ... its clear in the literature that the entire role of the Eagles is they are a deus ex machina device to get the good guy(s) out of a jam when theres no other way out (the company outside of Goblin town, Gandalf on top of Isengard, the army at the Black Gate, Frodo and Sam atop Mt. Doom).

Actually on the Eagles, they are sort of prevented in the same fashion as the Istari - I believe. The Eagles were the servants of Manwe - who was head of thr Valar....and so in theme at least the Eagles were similar to the Istari in that the Valar and the inhabitants of the Valinor were not generally permitted to involve themselves fully in the War of the Ring.

And then there's the technical issues of using the Eagles: if the Eagles had tried to take the fellowship all the way to Mordor it was likely they'd have been spotted...apart from the Nazgul (who they would've had to woory about) the eagles were about the only thing in the air - the "eye" would've spotted them miles away. Remember the eventual success of the quest is complete secrecy - if Sauron had sensed the Eagles coming toward Mordor - even if the Nazgul could not outduel them in the air...he could've rather easily surrounded Mt Doom.

The thought of destroying the ring never came to him - using the Eagles may very well have given that away.

Issues like this and the orc/goblin are sometimes best resolved by reading Tolkien's Letters which were published I think in the early 80's,. If you haven't read them, and you have detailed questions like this I recommend picking it up- Tolkien answers letters from fans and colleagues in depth on sticky issues.

[AsburySkinsFan]

So I'm reading the Hobbit when lo and behold I should find something that ould suggest strongly that orcs and goblins aren't synonymous in Tolkien's world.

[China]

So I'm reading the Hobbit when lo and behold I should find something that ould suggest strongly that orcs and goblins aren't synonymous in Tolkien's world.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8493/8379472530_3ceb4d7991_b.jpg

This belongs in The Hobbit Book thread where there was already a discussion about it.

[AsburySkinsFan]

This belongs in The Hobbit Book thread where there was already a discussion about it.

My bad, I knew we had talked about it here, and I'm actually reading the book for the first time in a very long time so I didn't want to risk spoilers. I'll pop it in there though.

[China]

Trailer for the next installment, The Desolation of Smaug:

 

[Elessar78]

FWIW, my sister's husband is in New Zealand working on The Hobbit (he's an animator). It's just kinda cool for me to be able to say that. 

[shakinaiken]

pretty excited for DOS.  I remember being a little lukewarm on the first Hobbit movie when i saw it in theater last year, but just picked up the extended edition today, and I'm warming up to it quite nicely. The key for me is to look past some of the more cartoony aspects jackson included- namely the portions Radagast is on screen and the accompanying bunny-sled chase. I remember watching that scene in theaters and thinking the "Benny Hill" theme might be a more suitable choice for background music. 

 

But still, the movie seems to improve with increased viewings. Cant wait for December 13 

[China]

An interactive map of Middle Earth:

 

http://middle-earth.thehobbit.com/

[Corcaigh]

Off topic, but always still makes me laugh:

 

[AsburySkinsFan]

Yes, if you liked the LOTR *and* liked the book (The Hobbit, that is), you should like Jackson's film. There seems to be three groups

1) People that didn't like LOTR movies or books (or never read them). They won't like The Hobbit

2) People that liked the LOTR books, but not the movies (the "hardcore" crowd). They probably won't like The Hobbit

3) People that liked the movies, but never read the books. They should like The Hobbit, though its feel is a bit different than LOTR ...

Make that 4: People that have read and loved all of the books, and were disappointed with some of Jackson's plot moves in LOTR: e.g. Frodo and Sam getting into a fight and splitting up on their way into Mordor, and are also a bit annoyed with some of Jackson's inclusions in the Hobbit series: e.g. Legolas....seriously?! But we still like all of the movies, because after all it's more movies from Tolkien's mind, presented by Peter Jackson and seriously when have we ever seen Tolkien's world presented so beautifully?

[TheGoodBits]

Make that 4: People that have read and loved all of the books, and were disappointed with some of Jackson's plot moves in LOTR: e.g. Frodo and Sam getting into a fight and splitting up on their way into Mordor, and are also a bit annoyed with some of Jackson's inclusions in the Hobbit series: e.g. Legolas....seriously?! But we still like all of the movies, because after all it's more movies from Tolkien's mind, presented by Peter Jackson and seriously when have we ever seen Tolkien's world presented so beautifully?

I kind of fell into this category, especially with some of the Hobbit plot inclusions. But I re-read The Hobbit and realized Tolkien left so much on the table by making that a children's book instead of a proper precursor to LOTR, so I'm willing to give Jackson more leeway to add his own twists to it.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I kind of fell into this category, especially with some of the Hobbit plot inclusions. But I re-read The Hobbit and realized Tolkien left so much on the table by making that a children's book instead of a proper precursor to LOTR, so I'm willing to give Jackson more leeway to add his own twists to it.

Totally agree on what Tolkien left with the Hobbit, I re-read it prior to watching the first Hobbit installment and recognized how much of the character development and drama he left out. I also agree with Jackson differentiating between goblins and orcs, I know this is a huge debate between geeks, but the fact that Tolkien himself lists them side by side in the same sentence in The Hobbit is enough for me. While part of the same family sure, Tolkien sees fit to determine a distinction between them.