Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I take it we are pronouncing it the same Smawg and Smog are more or less the same, or I'd take it as the same. I'd write the film pronounciation as "Smoug"

its pronounced "sm-ow-guh"...

but yes, every one says it smog because phonics is a lost art

http://entertainment.time.com/2013/12/09/the-hobbit-schools-tolkien-fans-on-how-to-pronounce-smaug/

has the videos and such explaining how its said,

but even without the movie phonetically it is sm-ow-guh




Observant watchers of The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug — or just its trailers, as seen here, since the movie’s not actually out till Dec. 13 — will have noticed that either they themselves are saying the word wrong, or the movie is. In case you couldn’t guess (given that a movie into which hundreds of millions of dollars are being poured probably included in that budget someone to check the pronunciation of such words): you’re the one who’s wrong.

Read more: The Hobbit: How to Pronounce "Smaug" | TIME.com http://entertainment.time.com/2013/12/09/the-hobbit-schools-tolkien-fans-on-how-to-pronounce-smaug/#ixzz2pMsWs4po

As Tolkien himself made clear in Appendix E of the Lord of the Rings trilogy:

All these diphthongs [in the books] were falling diphthongs, that is stressed on the first element, and composed of the simple vowels run together. Thus ai, ei, oi, ui are intended to be pronounced respectively as the vowels in English rye (not ray), grey, boy, ruin: and au (aw) as in loud, how and not as in laud, haw. [Emphasis added]


Read more: The Hobbit: How to Pronounce "Smaug" | TIME.com http://entertainment.time.com/2013/12/09/the-hobbit-schools-tolkien-fans-on-how-to-pronounce-smaug/#ixzz2pMsTIJ00

 Medium of Death wrote:
I just felt that "Smog" was the best fit and is how I hear it in my head. It's really just a personal thing. I'm not sure if their is a Tolkien established pronunciation.

There is and it is Sm[ow]g.

I'm sure he was mistaken in some way...

Just saw it .

Short review: it didn't suck, but obviously had TONS of added material. She-Elf was gratuitous, but good eye candy.

LOTR is still superior by a long shot.

For the most part good. Tauriel was grating, but until the dwarves fight against Smaug the movie was pretty entertaining. The final fight was kinda ruined by cringe-worthy physics which I really shouldn't have to suspend disbelief for.

Incidentally, is anyone else disappointed that they made the Black Arrow a Ballista?

A little, but then again the greatest Dragon since Ancalagong the Black dying to just a normal arrow is a little silly when you think about it. even a special Black Arrow.

I always had pronounced it smog--rhymes with fog. But I like the way its pronounced in the movie.

GG

I always thought it was Smaug, as in "yo dawg!".

I thought the movie was good. I think 48fps sucks for special effects, but otherwise everything else was fine. I also love drinking the tears of book purists who whine about changes.

Indeed, change is alright.

The Hobbit seems out of place compared to all the other books Tolkien wrote because of its cheery undertones and humor.

None of the changes in the movie are out of place or strange except for whatever the heck is going on between Tauriel and Fili and Smaug's apparent relationship with Sauron.


While the band may not have been directly hounded by orcs the entire journey, it is a plausible occurrence and would make more sense with how quickly the Orc army arrives at the mountain after Smaug's death which was a little too quick in the book. Heck, the Elves and Men had barely just got there and yet somehow a massive orc horde arrived right on their heels from over 150 miles away.

It's a little better this way, with the orcs having already been chasing them and Sauron having a direct hand in the entire affair.


Only thing I don't like is Smaug somehow being in league with Sauron. While Dragon's are certainly evil, they are primarily self-serving and Smaug wouldn't be in league with Sauron unless there was something in it for him. And what can you really offer to a dragon sitting on the largest pile of treasure in Middle Earth? Sauron certainly doesn't have much to offer at this time.

Smaug was really a bit of a loose cannon. Not in league with Sauron(yet) but not against him either. More of a potential servant of Sauron than a current one.



And Smaug is definitely Sma-ow-gh and not Smog. But most people are lazy and cut out a syllable.

I would have gone with a normal arrow, myself. Albeit one that was poisoned with something suitably impressive sounding.

 Compel wrote:
I would have gone with a normal arrow, myself. Albeit one that was poisoned with something suitably impressive sounding.

Morgul arrow?

Actually that'd work and probably tie into the other stuff mentioned in the film. Ringwraiths were fought centuries ago and some morgul arrows were retrieved and handed down as a relic in Bards family.

Or something of a sort.

Well the Black Arrow was quite clearly a dwarven artifact.

So a special Dragon Slaying enchanted arrow.

Black Arrow, Crossbow Bolt, Heavy, 3d6x4dmg, piercing +10dmg to dragons/dragon kin. Can only be fired from a Dwarven Windlance.

Am I the only one who gets into the mentality of a dwarf when eating Hobbit themed food at Denny's?

Denny's has Hobbit themed food?

Only thing I don't like is Smaug somehow being in league with Sauron. While Dragon's are certainly evil, they are primarily self-serving and Smaug wouldn't be in league with Sauron unless there was something in it for him. And what can you really offer to a dragon sitting on the largest pile of treasure in Middle Earth? Sauron certainly doesn't have much to offer at this time.

Allow me;



Personally I'd totally get behind another LotR movie after the Hobbit about the War in the North. I want to see the battle around Erebor. We never got enough Dwarves in LotR

Firstly LordofHats, A+ on your knowledge of middle-earth

LordofHats wrote:Personally I'd totally get behind another LotR movie after the Hobbit about the War in the North. I want to see the battle around Erebor. We never got enough Dwarves in LotR

I'd love to see another LotR film about the war in the north because we never got enough Rangers

I just want to see Dain and Brand (?) pulling a Battle of Thermopylae at Erebor. That would be epic on screen.

 LordofHats wrote:
I just want to see Dain and Brand (?) pulling a Battle of Thermopylae at Erebor. That would be epic on screen.

a) yes it would

b) we'll be seeing Dain in the next film, played by the glorious Billy Connolly

And it will be glorious (I hope)

LotR is about the only universe where I actually like Dwarves (DA:O is there too I guess). I'm normally more of an Elf fellow, but Dwarves in Tolkien's universe are just plain bad ass. The actual LotR trilogy just doesn't feature them much, but Middle-Earth is a big enough universe with a large enough mythology provided by the author himself that you could launch numerous films, tv series, video games, whatever you want. I'm willing to sit back and see what others can do with his world.

LordofHats wrote:And it will be glorious (I hope)

LotR is about the only universe where I actually like Dwarves (DA:O is there too I guess). I'm normally more of an Elf fellow, but Dwarves in Tolkien's universe are just plain bad ass. The actual LotR trilogy just doesn't feature them much, but Middle-Earth is a big enough universe with a large enough mythology provided by the author himself that you could launch numerous films, tv series, video games, whatever you want. I'm willing to sit back and see what others can do with his world.

to be honest, I'm hesitant to want more films as it risks cheapening the whole thing, but if they're made as good as the originals, god damn it, I want TV shows, video games, films, youtube series, flipbooks, plays, CDs, the whole lot

but yeah, Tolkein made one of the few universes in which dwarves are properly badass

I think we can trust Peter Jackson to hold to standards when it comes to Middle Earth. And Tolkien's dwarves are just plain awesome.

Much like the Star Wars EU, I suspect any forays into an expanded Middle Earth will have its high points (the Thrawn Trilogy) and it's low points (anything written by Karen Travis that doesn't involve Mandelorians /I got my shot in ).

Then we'll have the "Legolas shot first" debate

I enjoyed this second Hobbit movie a lot more than the first one. I'm not sure this is because it's actually much better, I suspect its more because the first film lowered my expectations considerably. If you go to McDonalds expecting a good hamburger you're just going to be disappointed, but if you expect nothing more than McDonalds you might even enjoy it for what it is.

My problem basically, is that there are lots and lots of good bits, Bilbo's character development, the creation of Rivertown, the spider lair, Smaug, and above all else the reveal of the Necromancer to Gandalf, the and the variation of the image of the flaming eye was just marvellous.

But then among all the good bits there's some really jarring bits. In the Hobbit films this seems to be mostly in the action scenes, which are weighted far too heavily towards spectacle. Nothing in this film was as bad as the great goblin roller coaster trap in the first movie, but the barrel ride down the river came close, and the scene with the spiders was pretty good up until they started chopping apart spiders left and right like a video game.

Ultimately, I've walked out of both movies so far pretty happy, but with a heavy dose of what could have been, if only there was a little more restraint shown.

 Grey Templar wrote:
A little, but then again the greatest Dragon since Ancalagong the Black dying to just a normal arrow is a little silly when you think about it. even a special Black Arrow.

That's one of the things I really liked about the book - that just it was just an ordinary bow, shot by an ordinary (albeit very heroic) human that slayed a dragon. One of the things that's always annoyed me about so much heroic fiction is that only big heroes and big villains and special monsters can touch each other, the vast armies of regular troops are basically just there to get slaughtered.

All those thousands of troops turning up should have some feeling of relevance to the events, I think. When hundreds of archers loose arrows at the dragon and we're sitting there knowing they won't do anything because there's a special ballista that the hero has to get to, then there's a problem with the drama.

I really enjoyed this movie, even more than the first.

I didn't mind the female elf so much, though the love triangle thing was a bit....silly to me.

While not a purist, I think there was a little bit too much left out with the Bilbo/Smaug interacting, and then a little bit too over the top with the dwarves going after Smaug. Though I will admit that the massive gold statue was entirely on par with something dwarves would create! Loved seeing that.

Also, when I first heard Smaug talk, for awhile I thought that it was Tim Curry!

* * * *
I would absolutely LOVE to see Jackson tackle some of the stories from Silmarillion....especially the war vs. Morgoth.

Could TOTALLY include more dragons, balrogs, and heroes

The fall of Gondolin would also make a great movie!

Ya know, honestly, as much as I dislike Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and am over Peter Jackson's The Hobbit - I think out of all of Tolkien's stuff the War of the Jewels is the most suited to being Peter Jacksoned. It's just a bunch of over the top awesome-nonsense without much real plot to get in the way; IE perfect for a good Peter Jacksoning.

sebster wrote:My problem basically, is that there are lots and lots of good bits, Bilbo's character development, the creation of Rivertown, the spider lair, Smaug, and above all else the reveal of the Necromancer to Gandalf, the and the variation of the image of the flaming eye was just marvellous.

But then among all the good bits there's some really jarring bits. In the Hobbit films this seems to be mostly in the action scenes, which are weighted far too heavily towards spectacle. Nothing in this film was as bad as the great goblin roller coaster trap in the first movie, but the barrel ride down the river came close, and the scene with the spiders was pretty good up until they started chopping apart spiders left and right like a video game.

Ultimately, I've walked out of both movies so far pretty happy, but with a heavy dose of what could have been, if only there was a little more restraint shown.

pretty much nailed down most of the C&C I've agreed with thus far