7

Azog was killed years before during the War of the Dwarves and Orcs. Why is he such a heavy presence in the first Hobbit movie?

Edlothiad
  • 77,282
  • 32
  • 393
  • 381
Robert
  • 3,785
  • 3
  • 33
  • 54
  • 11
    Because Peter Jackson – BBlake Dec 17 '14 at 12:54
  • 2
    VTC'ers - before pulling the trigger, consider whether or not the answer to this may be on a DVD commentary or in one of the DVD extras. –  Dec 17 '14 at 13:44
  • 4
    Um, how is this primarily opinion based. A)Azgog is 100% in the Hobbit movie and is the antagonist. B)Azgog most certainly DID die during the War of the Dwarves and Orcs. So, anyone want to explain to me where the opinion is? – Robert Dec 17 '14 at 13:57
  • @BBlake if you want to post your comment as an answer, I'll accept it because it actually answers my question. – Robert Dec 17 '14 at 13:58
  • 1
    See also: Is Legolas in The Hobbit Book? and Who is Tauriel and why are they adding her to the Hobbit movies? – phantom42 Dec 17 '14 at 14:01
  • 2
    Think of it from a movie perspective. Peter Jackson is a director(and a fine director at that), not a writer. He knows what needs to be done to capture an audience for a film, and one of these things is to have a heroic figure to root for. Is that Bilbo? Sure, but Bilbo isn't about to slay orcs and fight dragons. What he does is commendable, but the audience needs something more. Thorin is this character, but Thorin isn't about to go fighting Smaug toe to toe realistically either. Azog being put into the movie gives Thorin a main enemy to fight, and allows the audience to get behind Thorin. – Demarini Dec 17 '14 at 16:28
  • It's hilarious that people think that this is an opinion based question. It's fact that Azog is in the movie and has died before the events of the book. I'll ask again, how's it opinion based? My guess is, like always, this same group of people don't have an answer so they VTC'd – Robert Dec 17 '14 at 17:34
  • @Demarini, but if Jackson follows the story at all, Azog won't even fight Thorin during the battle, Bolg will. And Thorin won't even defeat him. There was literally no point in adding Azog as the antagonist of the movie because he just took the role of Bolg, who in turn took over for Azog during the second movie. – Robert Dec 17 '14 at 17:37
  • 1
    Similar in question to why Legolas showed up in the Hobbit movies. He was not in the Hobbit at all but wood elves were so it was an obvious method to add a subplot. The orcs chased the party up a tree and were saved by eagles, and it didn't say who led the orcs, so adjusting it to have a continuous thematic villain is not bad for movies at all. – Jeff Clayton Dec 17 '14 at 17:39
  • @JeffClayton again, he's not continuous as he's simply replaced 15 minutes into the second movie – Robert Dec 17 '14 at 17:40
  • 1
    By continuous I mean he shows up more than once as the enemy. Not just in one scene. Though @Robert you do bring up good points. I think Peter Jackson just wanted to have a few more moments of familiarity rather than changing characters as often as in the books. – Jeff Clayton Dec 17 '14 at 17:41
  • Ah, ok, gotcha. – Robert Dec 17 '14 at 17:44
  • @phantom42 the reasons for Legolas being in the Hobbit trilogy is strictly because Orlando Bloom made him such a likable character and Jackson wants the tweeny girls to go see his movies. Those are literally the only two reasons why he's in the movies. Why Azog exists in the movie is a completely different reason. – Robert Dec 17 '14 at 18:01
  • I would have excused Azog's presence in movies more if ˙ɹnouoɥ ʇɐɥʇ uıɹoɥ⊥ ƃuıʌıƃ uɐɥʇ ɹǝɥʇɐɹ '(∀ xıpuǝdd∀ ᴚ⊥O⅂) ʞooq ǝɥʇ uı suǝddɐɥ sɐ ɯıɥ ʎɐʃs uı֥ɐ◖ ʇǝʃ puǝ ǝɥʇ uı pɐɥ ǝɥ – leftaroundabout Dec 23 '14 at 00:31
  • @leftaroundabout, um, I'd change your comment to not include that spoiler, it may be difficult to read but it's not impossible – Robert Dec 23 '14 at 03:26

0 Answers0