A new view of Smaug?

[Herald_of_Mandos]

Interesting development reported here: movieweb.com/news/hSireBbiGlat0t

Fans of "The Hobbit" who expect the Smaug the dragon to be an evil, fire-breathing cliché may be in for a few surprises.

In J.R.R. Tolkien's classic two-volume prequel to "The Lord of the Rings", the dragon is presented as a vicious monster who serves the Necromancer Saruman. The movie Smaug, Sir Peter Jackson revealed today, has a lot more depth– and not just because of the dazzling, state-of-the art 3D CGI technology used to portray him.

"We've moved on from the traditional negative view of dragons," says Jackson. "It's such a stereotype. Our Smaug is a much more complex character."

In this re-imagining, dragons are peaceful, gentle beings who live in harmony with nature, and Smaug turns to violence only after his family is brutally slaughtered by marauding dwarves and humans. "There's an important message there," Sir Peter explains, "about tolerance and caring for the environment, but it's very subtle."

As in the book, the dragon will still be beheaded by the sword of the "heroic" Brad the Bowman– but there's a twist.

"We want this to be a tragic moment," Jackson says. "Smaug is just misunderstood. It's the people who are the real monsters."

What do you think? Is this version of Smaug really an improvement?

[Mithalwen]

I presume it is the Carolingian Minuschool Academy Press edition that has Bard decapitating Smaug?

[Herald_of_Mandos]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I presume it is the Carolingian Minuschool Academy Press edition that has Bard decapitating Smaug?

Then you must be familiar with artist Arial Black's exquisite illustration of the scene! I hear they're using it for the concept art.

[Galadriel55]

In J.R.R. Tolkien's classic two-volume prequel to "The Lord of the Rings", the dragon is presented as a vicious monster who serves the Necromancer Saruman.

Which novel is that?I don't recall any classic, two volume prequel where Saruman is a dragon-tamer.

This movie shouldn't be called "The Hobbit", more like "PJ's Misunderstood Dragon". It's a crime calling something like that by a name JRRT gave his book, when the only thing left from the book is names.

[Herald_of_Mandos]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Which novel is that?I don't recall any classic, two volume prequel where Saruman is a dragon-tamer.

Well, I've only read the Caslon translation. You mean it's not like that in English? Really?

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Pitch

The saddest thing is that we're now so used to expecting the worst from PJ's adaptation that an April joke like this is all too believable. Reality defeats satire.

Too true.

Originally Posted by Herald_of_Mandos

Well, I've only read the Caslon translation. You mean it's not like that in English? Really?

Well, TH is one book, where Saruman doesn't appear at all. And Sauron is the Necromancer, not Saruman. Me is confused very very.

Please tell me this is all in April Fools spirit!

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Herald_of_Mandos

Then you must be familiar with artist Arial Black's exquisite illustration of the scene! I hear they're using it for the concept art.

Indeed. Black is one of the finest Tolkien illustrators and sadly underrated. Of course the Black dynasty is highly influential in Seriffean culture. Aeonis and Absara have also made their marks in their own way. Only perhaps Raleigh Roman is in the same league....

You should try the Goudy version, Herald, I think the opening conversation between Bilbo and Gandalf is particularly effective. However the illustrations by Arnold Boecklin are somewhat crude in comparison to the elegance of the others.

[Anguirel]

and how about Brad the Bowman...assume Brad II's mother was Queen Angelina, then...

EDIT: I thought, "hang on, must be a joke", then clicked link...

[Morthoron]

Well, it is April 1st. And if it isn't a joke, it's a sad commentary on PJ's need to warp the story.

[Herald_of_Mandos]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

Indeed. Black is one of the finest Tolkien illustrators and sadly underrated. Of course the Black dynasty is highly influential in Seriffean culture. Aeonis and Absara have also made their marks in their own way. Only perhaps Raleigh Roman is in the same league....

You should try the Goudy version, Herald, I think the opening conversation between Bilbo and Gandalf is particularly effective. However the illustrations by Arnold Boecklin are somewhat crude in comparison to the elegance of the others.

I know, that's what's always put me off. Too heavy, dark, and well, symbolic. I really am curious now to read "The Hobbit" in the original, though. I did know some things were different– for example, "Blackoak" is "Mirkwood", "Elrod"* is "Elrond", "Lithos" is really "Legolas" and Italica the Elf-maiden is "Itaril" in English. Of course I'll always think of them by their Serriffean names...

You know, I heard Jackson and Walsh were so impressed with Arial Black's work they had the Carolingian Minuschool edition translated back into English and used that as the basis for their screenplay! You can imagine how proud that makes me, as a San Serriffean!


*A poor choice of name. I know many readers here were just confused by the similarity to Port Elrod in the Upper Caisse!

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Herald_of_Mandos

*A poor choice of name. I know many readers here were just confused by the similarity to Port Elrod in the Upper Caisse!

I believe the same translator did Lord of the Rings and rendering Boromir as Bordoni of course caused the same sort of problems due to confusion with the capital city. You would have thought he would have learned his lesson.

I should warn you that the original has eagles not the giant Kwotes... and substituting swarfega for waybread or lembas was not fortuitous either.