Best hobbit book edit?

[M4_]

@ArtistDead in fact I'd like to add on that I agree with you in some sense. Not that it really matters, but personally I'm not a fan of edits using Tolkien's name in their title. Some edits use Tolkien's name but stray quite a bit from the book at times, which wouldn't be an issue, but the title then causes confusion about what it's based on.

I think associating with the source material is fine but I wouldn't go as far as claiming the author to your project. That said, my opinion on this is only a minor critique and I'm not trying to start drama or critique the quality of anyone's work, just purely the title choice.

 

[Gieferg]

I'm not sure any edit that cuts several hours worth out can get away with no holes, including mine.

Yeah. The black arrow, Bard doesn't seem to have it until the last moment of his fight with Smaug when suddenly pull it out of his...
That's a minor nitpick though

 

[M4_]

Yeah. The black arrow, Bard doesn't seem to have it until the last moment of his fight with Smaug when suddenly pull it out of his...
That's a minor nitpick though

He kept it hidden

 

[ArtisDead]

And there is that huge white orc that killed Thorin...

 

[Gieferg]

Some random commander of the orc army, maybe we can assume it is Bolg? No problem with that.

 

[ArtisDead]

Some random commander of the orc army, maybe we can assume it is Bolg? No problem with that.

But we know it's not.

 

[Gieferg]

So what? It is not a plothole.

Many fanedits make changes for some scenes to work different way or to pretend that we already dont know some things (see this new Terminator edit on the site that tries to keep the viewer in doubt about Reese's intentions) even if we know.

In Hobbit's book edits (which are the only ones I'm interested in) reducing Azog's role and pretending that is not even him (he wasn't in the book at all) is mandatory thing.

 

[The Scribbling Man]

^^ not to stray off-topic, but that Terminator edit is great.

It's difficult when changes like that are made and you're familiar with the source. I guess you've got to look at it through the lense of "if I were watching this for the first time, is there anything to indicate to me that this is anything more than a minor character?". However, I do think edits sometimes attempt to do this and the error is not with the viewer, but with there being too much footage retained of the character. (that's not a knock on M4's edit though - I haven't seen it).

 

[ArtisDead]

^^ not to stray off-topic, but that Terminator edit is great.

It's difficult when changes like that are made and you're familiar with the source. I guess you've got to look at it through the lense of "if I were watching this for the first time, is there anything to indicate to me that this is anything more than a minor character?". However, I do think edits sometimes attempt to do this and the error is not with the viewer, but with there being too much footage retained of the character. (that's not a knock on M4's edit though - I haven't seen it).

I wasn't even going to respond because I felt that it required no explanation. Yours however, is precise. That Terminator edit is great. I believe that Childs Play edit attempted to try to remain ambiguous for a time, as well?

 

[Darth Kermit]

But we know it's not.

I’m inclined to agree that it doesn’t matter. An edit doesn’t have to acknowledge that you as the viewer may have seen the original and know all the details, characters, etc. When I watch M4’s edit, Azog is just a nameless orc commander. Doesn’t matter who he is, so he is credited as Bolg to be more in line with the book. Works for me as a book lover and works for audience members who haven’t seen the original films.

 

[DigModiFicaTion]

If you are a true Hobbit fan, I recommend not limiting yourself to Book Cuts.

Just watch the Rankin and Bass film. Way better than the Jackson trilogy.

Dustin's edit...well...I'm told that it's the most popular edit in the history of this forum...

Nope

 

[ArtisDead]

Just watch the Rankin and Bass film. Way better than the Jackson trilogy.


Nope

I was told that and unfortunately believed it and repeated it. It makes perfect sense that it would be Adywan. I even asked myself that.

 

[The Scribbling Man]

I believe that Childs Play edit attempted to try to remain ambiguous for a time, as well?

I haven't seen it.

It makes perfect sense that I would be Adywan.

 

[ArtisDead]

I haven't seen it.

I didn't even catch that. Stupid autocorrect on my mobile device.

 

[M4_]

It's difficult when changes like that are made and you're familiar with the source. I guess you've got to look at it through the lense of "if I were watching this for the first time, is there anything to indicate to me that this is anything more than a minor character?". However, I do think edits sometimes attempt to do this and the error is not with the viewer, but with there being too much footage retained of the character. (that's not a knock on M4's edit though - I haven't seen it).

Yep this is the issue you run into it with removing Azog entirely except for the battle, it's always a question of how much to cut and how much to keep.


For the sake of discussion I'll go more in depth (but I know that you weren't trying to critique my edit, it's just a really good point of discussion for book edits here!), I found there to be 2 specific issues, for anyone curious about this topic:

1) Since he duels Thorin, this originally used to be a huge pay off to their trilogy-long feud, is there a way to play it off like Thorin is just fighting a random Orc commander (like Gothmog or Lurtz, sorta)?
2) How can Azog be naturally introduced, given that his entire backstory is cut?

For #1, this is completely subjective, but I felt that given how much we see of Thorin and his arc, him dueling Azog is just another step of the way in paying off his character, going from greedy and prideful to selfless and willing to sacrifice himself to help the good guys win, the duel is mostly about Thorin being the hero after going to his lowest points. As a bonus, I tried to keep a decent amount of "Azog being a good commander" moments where the movie shows us "this guy is making the Orcs win" so that way we have a motive after removing their history - it's not just kill him for the sake of it, but kill him because the Orcs will be leaderless and unorganized.

The Maple edit fixes #2 by having him introduced by the Goblin King and then showing up right after briefly, but I didn't want to do that with my goals in mind, I wanted to keep Azog just to the final battle.

So to fix #2 (this was a revision after lots of feedback and thought), I decided to re-include the Gandalf scene where he warns us about Orcs coming, which just feels right with his character (and also doubles as a way of explaining why Gandalf was gone) and then a following quick scene showing the Orcs marching to the mountain with new subtitles (about wanting to claim the Mountain), so we can expect to see Azog's face in the future plus we have a motive for the army, it doesn't seem completely out of the blue.

Clocking in at just under 20 minutes of battling, I think a decent balance of his character was hit in order to feel natural to the audience. What are your guys' thoughts that have seen my edit or other book edits? Curious to see what the consensus with Azog is. Was also surprised to see BOTFE entirely remove him given that his edit isn't about being book accurate, I like it.

 

[bradwestness]

Clocking in at just under 20 minutes of battling, I think a decent balance of his character was hit in order to feel natural to the audience. What are your guys' thoughts that have seen my edit or other book edits? Curious to see what the consensus with Azog is. Was also surprised to see BOTFE entirely remove him given that his edit isn't about being book accurate, I like it.

Yeah, in the book you don't even really get a good explanation of what happened to Thorin, he's just a casualty of the battle, right? Bilbo sees him charging Bolg and gets knocked unconscious, and then wakes up to find Thorin mortally wounded. But I think it wouldn't really work to do that in the movie. I think your edit does a great job of acknowledging that in the medium of film, you need to see some of that sort of stuff and not just have major characters die offscreen and hear about it afterward. But Azog is basically featured the same amount as Gothmog in RoTK, which feels about right IMHO.

I think you did a great job of balancing the need to show enough of the combat and various stages of the battle so that it doesn't feel confusing or overly jumpy with characters teleporting around and stuff, but while still cutting out a lot of the superfluous stuff where Peter Jackson was indulging his goofiest slasher-y instincts to pad out the runtime. A lot of that stuff is kind of detrimental to the overall flow of the series IMHO - because the battle in the Hobbit should not be even more fantastical and violent than the battle of Pelennor fields in Return of the King, which is meant to be the ultimate battle of the whole Third Age.

 

[Stromboli Bones]

DonKamillo went with a purist book approach for Azog and removed 100% of his scenes from The Anti-Cringe Cut. (His edit as a whole is not a book cut, I'm only talking about how he handled this ending piece) He has Bilbo experience a flashback to the ending of the first original film, and then wake up to find Thorin, Kili, and Fili dead with no real explanation as to how that happened other than the obvious: they died in battle. The flashback serves as a way to contrast a pleasant memory Bilbo had of Thorin with the grim reality he finds upon waking up. It also removes any continuity errors that could occur depending on how people chose to handle showing how Thorin managed to get Orcrist back, as you don't see him with it again in DK's version. Personally I was pretty dissatisfied with learning all of a sudden that 3 of the main characters had been killed off-screen, but as far as book-accuracy goes, I think his approach is the best I've seen.

Was also surprised to see BOTFE entirely remove him given that his edit isn't about being book accurate, I like it.

Ugh, I hear you dude. I spent a TON of time debating how to handle Azog throughout, especially at the end. I ended up going with the "Surprise: Gothmog 2.0!" version because of my decision to make the fate of the Arkenstone a "mystery." I argued with myself a lot about whether I should have Gandalf announce that orcs were coming to the mountain, but ultimately since I cut out Gandalf's original return to Erebor and subsequent spiel warning Bard and Thranduil about a super unique "bred for war" orc army (why PJ, why?) I decided to go with the surprise approach. Otherwise, the orcs are mentioned only one other time (I think) by Gandalf making a comment to Dain like "Hey this fighting is stupid, there's orcs coming dude," and it came off to me in a way that made me go "Wait, what did he say? Orcs?" moment that didn't have as much weight as it should have, given the severity of what he just said. Is this a problem with the Narrative of my version? Eh, I think it depends who you ask. I myself think it works out well, but not everyone will agree.

I felt that given how much we see of Thorin and his arc, him dueling Azog is just another step of the way in paying off his character, going from greedy and prideful to selfless and willing to sacrifice himself to help the good guys win, the duel is mostly about Thorin being the hero after going to his lowest points. As a bonus, I tried to keep a decent amount of "Azog being a good commander" moments where the movie shows us "this guy is making the Orcs win" so that way we have a motive after removing their history - it's not just kill him for the sake of it, but kill him because the Orcs will be leaderless and unorganized.

Ultimately this is same rationale I had in my head when I chose to deviate from how DonKamillo handled the end.