Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

The Hobbit: How the sets relate to the movies

brendanbrendan Member Posts: 15
edited December 2012 in Collecting
I am probably not seeing the thread so it may exist. But am I the only one confused by this set? I am wondering what happened in design on this one. Specifically in regards to Yazneg. He was killed long before this scene. And he is riding the Pale Orc Azog's warg. I know originally the actor who was cast to play Azog was switched to Yazneg and that may explain it. Anyone have any insight?
TheBigLegoski
«1

Comments

  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    was wondering about that myself - I can only assume the film editing changed fairly substantially from the time the set was designed and the movie's final cut. to be honest, when I saw the movie, I was like "hey, where's that Yazneg guy from the Warg set? And wouldn't it have made more sense to have the 1-armed Pale Orc instead?"
    brendanTheBigLegoski
  • brendanbrendan Member Posts: 15
    edited December 2012
    Exactly. Yazneg was killed by Azog on Weathertop after the elves intervened. And one more thing... Why the blue flames??
    TheBigLegoski
  • HELLRAZR_28HELLRAZR_28 Member Posts: 61
    Haven't seen the movie yet, but in the book Gandalf shoots out flames of different colors. I'm guessing the blue flames in the set were produced by his magic, while the orange flames were set by the orcs.
    TheBigLegoski
  • YellowcastleYellowcastle Member Posts: 4,401
    Relatedly, was the barrel set a scene that didn't make the final cut? Same goes with the Mirkwood spiders. Did the decision to turn the two parter into a three parter muck up the LEGO sets?
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 2,002
    ^This is the assumption of most. The film likely originally ended with the escape down the falls, but when New Line decided to milk it, the sets were probably already too far along into production to be changed, thus the 'special Hobbit trilogy preview set' notation.
  • BoiseStateBoiseState Member Posts: 804
    Ya, it was the one armed guy who was up on the rock when they were up the tree.
    brendan
  • Ma1234Ma1234 Member Posts: 693
    edited December 2012

    Relatedly, was the barrel set a scene that didn't make the final cut? Same goes with the Mirkwood spiders. Did the decision to turn the two parter into a three parter muck up the LEGO sets?

    Those are scenes from future Hobbit films coming out in the next two years.
  • CapnRex101CapnRex101 United KingdomAdministrator Posts: 2,282
    I assumed that Yazneg was just a Minifigure they thought we might want, and since they had nowhere else to put it, they stuck it in Battle of the Wargs much like they placed Queen Amidala in the most recent Gungan Sub in the Star Wars line.
  • YellowcastleYellowcastle Member Posts: 4,401
    Yazneg would not have put up with Jar Jar in that sub. ;o)
    RedbullgivesuwindCapnRex101brendanBJ21plasmodium
  • SapmiSatanSapmiSatan Member Posts: 106
    I think they might not have been allowed to feature [the weird version of] Azog [from the film] to avoid spoilers. At the beginning of the film he is believed to be dead... (As he should have been!)

    It was widely believed that the first film would end with the escape in barrels, so that's probably the reason we've gotten those sets already. I wonder what they'll do for the second film, as those sets were the most obvious ones to make into LEGO... We might get Esgaroth and Dol Guldur, which is very good.
  • RedbullgivesuwindRedbullgivesuwind Brickset's Secret HeadquatersMember Posts: 1,821
    I believe they have shot both films already and then decided where to split it. Oddly Del Torro who was set to do the film was going to split it where they did. I think while he is named as Yazneg there is a similar looking orc in the scene. And so took it from that.
  • brendanbrendan Member Posts: 15
    I actually went and re-watched the film just for this scene. Don't judge me. Anyhow, the flames (orange) are started by Gandalf and there is no use of blue in the film. As HellRazr points out that could be a book reference. Also, there is no Orc in that scene that resembles Yazneg or has the bone collar that he wore. And my main contention is that he is on Azogs warg. Azog was the only one with a white warg. This whole set is just odd to me. Not that I don't like it. But for example, why does the tree spin? I would have been fine with a nice sized tree that was just a tree.
  • brendanbrendan Member Posts: 15
    Oh and from what I can tell Mirkwood and Barrell escape were always intended to be preview sets. I could be wrong.
    yys4u
  • brendanbrendan Member Posts: 15
    edited December 2012
    Also @redbullgivesuwind don't forget it's three films
  • icey117icey117 DenmarkMember Posts: 506
    About book references:
    1) They are caught up with in a small forrest (not at a cliff) at the feet of the mountain.
    2) They are only captured by WOLVES (no orchs yet, they arrive later).
    3) Gandalf use magic fire of DIFFERENT colours to set fire of cones.
    4) The Eagles pass by out of curiosity... and interveen because they dislike wolves. (They are not summoned).
    5) Galdalf is about to throw himself down to a last fight, since the fire is about to burn up their last tree - then Eagles pass by and catch them.
    6) No Heroic acts of Baggins or Oakenshield (they are first in the forrest).

    Obviously the LEGO-set production started way before the filming was done, or they didn't give LEGO enough material, or the changes didn't reach the production.

    Also... one of the Wags stand on the cliff-edge (on the LEGO BOX front), which obviously is the cliff-edge the last tree is standing on in the movie. So.... they must have been working in blind with only a few references/scetches.
    Redbullgivesuwind
  • RedbullgivesuwindRedbullgivesuwind Brickset's Secret HeadquatersMember Posts: 1,821
    edited December 2012
    @Brendan ah that clears it up. So it is obviously just an added figure.

    Yes I know its being three. But originally when Del Torro was going to be directing it was going to be two. It still is going to be two films covering the hobbit, but when Peter Jackson came back he added the third film. That final one isnt anything to do with the hobbit. What the third film will do is tie the hobbit and LOTR together. There are romours that it will be aragons search for Gollum/Saurmans decline/Gandalf adventures or the silmarrillion. Its the third one I believe they are currently filming.
  • brendanbrendan Member Posts: 15
    edited December 2012
    The cliff thing the warg is on is just to represent the rock Azog was standing on or so I believe
  • brendanbrendan Member Posts: 15
    I just double checked on the trilogy and it is not the sillmarrilion. I believe we will see elements of those things implemented but I wouldn't be surprised to see Jackson hold off and do another two films. The titles for the hobbit trilogy are an unexpected journey, the desolation of smog, and there and back again. Essentially the films are 7 chapters each according to Jackson's blog. But I could see him incorporating certain parts of the samarillion as side stories or such.
  • kbenjeskbenjes Member Posts: 70
    brendan said:

    The cliff thing the warg is on is just to represent the rock Azog was standing on or so I believe

    Exactly.

    And as someone said, Mirkwood and Barrel are both 'preview' sets, just like it says on the box.



  • icey117icey117 DenmarkMember Posts: 506
    edited December 2012


    That final one isnt anything to do with the hobbit. What the third film will do is tie the hobbit and LOTR together. There are romours that it will be aragons search for Gollum/Saurmans decline/Gandalf adventures or the silmarrillion. Its the third one I believe they are currently filming.

    Are you sure? So far, the Hobbit movie has covered exactly 1/3 of the Hobbit book (+plus a bit from other Tolkien books). Seeing the Lego sets, it's obvious that the two-movie idea was intented to the cut should have been after the Barrow Escape... which is around halfway through the book.

    [SPOILER ALERT] It's much more likely that the second movie will cover Beorn, Mirkwood and the passing through at Lake Town and evt. include Galdalf's second visit to Dol Guldur as an extra thing. (First visit was when he got the map and key he gave to Oakenshield, though that part was ignored in the first movie for the sake of storyline flow). Last movie, will be .... the great last 3rd of the book, that I shouldn't write about here! But it's plainly impossible to include the rest 2/3 of the book in just one other movie, at least with the pace the story pace the first Hobbit movie has set. And calling a third movie Hobbit, not being about the Hobbit... well, doesn't make sense!
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    I think the confusion here is they when the hobbit movies were first expanded from two to three one of the ideas thrown about - may have been del toro - was that the hobbit would still be two movies and the third would be a bridge movie to Lotr with back stories, etc

    In the end however this idea was abandoned in favor of doing a full hobbit trilogy, though I wouldn't discount a 10-15 minute epilogue to bridge at the end if the third movie
    brendan
  • SapmiSatanSapmiSatan Member Posts: 106
    I don't feel like including a SPOILER ALERT when the source material is 75 years old, but now I kind of did anyway... They will reach the Lonely Mountain in the second film, we've already seen a photo of Bilbo with the treasure. The White Council's business at Dol Guldur will also be finished off in the second film. I think the biggest question now is; Will Smaug be killed in the second, or third film?

    Also, are there any good small scenes left to make into LEGO? Dol Guldur and Laketown make good large sets, but there aren't any Gollums or orcs to fight in a small "Riddles for the Ring"- or "Mirkwood Spiders"-size set...

    The last film will cover the end of "The Hobbit", but it will probably cover a lot of the middle ground between "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the Rings" as well. There will be no parts of "The Silmarillion" in this, as they don't have the rights to it and there's nothing in it that would fit in.
    brendan
  • yys4uyys4u USA SoCalMember Posts: 1,092
    brendan said:

    Oh and from what I can tell Mirkwood and Barrell escape were always intended to be preview sets. I could be wrong.

    Relatedly, was the barrel set a scene that didn't make the final cut? Same goes with the Mirkwood spiders. Did the decision to turn the two parter into a three parter muck up the LEGO sets?

    What I assume happened is what Yellowcastle speculates. Mirkwood Spirders and Barrel Escapes were supposed to be scenes in the first film, but when it was later split into a triology LEGO must have not had enough time to make 2 new sets so they simply labeled them as "Special Preview Sets"


    On the topic of the Warg set, I initially thought it was a very nice set (before I saw the movie) but after seeing it I have the same issues as everyone above. Yazneg on the white warg, the size of tree (being thick not tall like in the movie) the flames, etc. I chalked it up to some parts referencing the book, and just not having enough info on the movie. Either way the set IMHO is a fail. That being said I still picked it up for $30 at Target using some gift cards :)
    icey117brendan
  • RedbullgivesuwindRedbullgivesuwind Brickset's Secret HeadquatersMember Posts: 1,821
    @icey117, @brendan

    yep very sure the second film ends with the death of Smaug. The third film will deal with the journey home and link into the events in the silmarillion. The problem if the second film stops with them at the secret door. Is that for two hours nothing has happened. There is no final action scene (as dictated by film convention). Plus it does not follow how Jackson made the LOTR films.

    http://screenrant.com/hobbit-title-desolation-of-smaug-there-back-again-release-date/

    http://screenrant.com/peter-jackson-hobbit-trilogy-benk-188086/





    The youtube clips talk about what Del Torro planned to do for the films.
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    ^ this is already outdated of course. As we know for certain, "there and back again" is now the subtitle of the third movie while the second has been dubbed "the desolation of smaug"

    As said previously the plans for the third film have evolved greatly, with it now clearly being mostly the last third of the book. Im assuming movie 2 will end with smaugs demise and book three will focus on the (anticlimactic imho) aftermath including the battle of five armies
    brendan
  • RedbullgivesuwindRedbullgivesuwind Brickset's Secret HeadquatersMember Posts: 1,821
    ^I doubt they would change their plans that much though. Plus the two youtube links are within the last two weeks. It was clearly meant to be two films. Despite what people think it is very very difficult to change your plans at the last minute. So the script could be shifted by from a cinematic point of view it makes no sense to do as has been suggested.

    The problem with having the battle of the five armies is that it is a huge battle. So if you have it at the very start. Where would you go from there? You cant make it the entire film as that will get very dull very fast. So for me the final film must be bilbos return and the linking into the fellowship film. Something Jackson has done from the start (opening five minutes.)

    However of course ultimatly we are just speculating. And we will just have to wait to see who is right. Just dont offer to eat your hat :-D.
  • Jabba_the_TaffJabba_the_Taff Member Posts: 211
    I've read in a number of places that they have yet to film the battle of the five armies and will be doing so next year.
  • CrownieCrownie WA StateMember Posts: 228
    These films are turning into more of a mess than this set, lol.

    ;-)
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 2,002

    I've read in a number of places that they have yet to film the battle of the five armies and will be doing so next year.

    When Jackson was on Colbert a few weeks ago, didn't he say everything had already been shot? This is how LotR went, so it wouldn't surprise me if the same was true here.
    brendan
  • brendanbrendan Member Posts: 15
    Yes Jackson did say that. There is some post production stuff and they may always call everyone back for extra stuff but filming is wrapped.
  • brendanbrendan Member Posts: 15
    I just completed Goblin King 79010. After building all of the LOTR and Hobbit sets the Warg battle is my least favorite by far. The others are great. And don't get me wrong, I enjoy the mini figs and wargs but it was just not a good representation of the film or book in my opinion. Now with that said, anyone know when Wave two of LOTR is expected to hit? I know they are listed on brickset. Release guess?
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 2,002
    ^I'd guess around May again, but I'm basing that on nothing but supposition.
  • SirBenSirBen In the Hall of the Mountain KingMember Posts: 563
    @icey117 Thank you for clarifying regarding the book references. I reread the book back in August, and watching the movie I kept thinking, "That was nowhere in the book;" particularly all of the altercations with the orcs this early in the story.
  • icey117icey117 DenmarkMember Posts: 506
    edited December 2012
    @Sapmisatan Ah, it's always nice to add a SPOILER ALERT, not to offend anyone! ;-)

    @Redbullgivesuswind
    Watching the Hobbit(1) it does seem that we're watching an extended version. (not that it's any problem for me) - but keeping that pace, they got enough material make the second three hour movie around:
    - Beorn (which following the book practically enough includes a resume of movie one)
    - Mirkwood
    - Dol Guldur
    - Wood-elves
    - evt. the Orc & Wolves alliance.
    - Lake Town


    And the third movie would be:
    - Lonely mountain
    - Smaug (conversations)
    - Battle of LakeTown
    - Siege and Bilbo's negrosiations
    - The Battle of five armies
    - ... and back again!

    Add alot of the middle-earth politics in movie 3 and there's plenty enough to watch.
  • icey117icey117 DenmarkMember Posts: 506
    edited December 2012

    Also, are there any good small scenes left to make into LEGO?

    But back to a LEGO related subject, I really think they should make a Hobbit set consisting of:
    ....a baseplate
    ....a polybag dragon
    ....and 2 kg of LEGO coins/jewels/goldbars.
    hissingsid99DanGPMathBuilder
  • StuBoyStuBoy New ZealandMember Posts: 623
    edited December 2012
    Having just seen the film, Attack of the Wargs doesn't resemble the movie scene much at all.

    Something has gone wrong here with this set, most likely the scene changed a lot after LEGO had already designed and probably produced this set. The inclusion of Yazneg instead of Azog is most puzzling, as he had already been killed at this point in the film.

    Does Azog actually appear in the book in this scene? Its been years since I've read The Hobbit.
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 2,002
    edited December 2012
    ^In the books, Azog is dead long before the start of The Hobbit, beheaded by Dáin at the Battle of Azanulbizar. This could be hugely problematic by the time we get to the Battle of the Five Armies, though this adaptation has already strayed FAR from resembling the book (if Gandalf summoned the eagles... why didn't they just TAKE HIM TO THE MOUNTAIN?).

    Yazneg, of course, doesn't appear in the books at all, so his inclusion here still makes absolutely no sense.
    yys4u
  • icey117icey117 DenmarkMember Posts: 506
    edited December 2012
    ^The
    y2josh said:

    if Gandalf summoned the eagles... why didn't they just TAKE HIM TO THE MOUNTAIN?:

    The eagels are more neutral in the book. They hate orcs and wolves, but are not loyal in any direction. Gandalf (in the book) does ask the eagels to take them closer, but they only fly them a bit away from the misty mountains. After one middle landing they take them to Carrock, but not further since they are afraid of arrows from woodsmen who might think they hunted their sheep.
    From the Hobbit: Eagles are not kindly birds. Some are cowardly and cruel. But the ancient race of the northern mountains were the greatest of all birds; they were proud and strong and noble-hearted.
    Also in the book he does not summon the eagles, they just pass by out of curiosity because of the war noise and fire...

    Much of the dialog with animals are left out in the movies so hard to keep up with these nuances from the book. I wonder if Smaug will be talking...
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 2,002
    ^That was my point, really. In the book, it made perfect sense as to why the eagles didn't take them there. Due to changes made in the film, it seems idiotic.

    As to Smaug, yes, he will be speaking. Benedict Cumberbatch is providing his voice.
    icey117
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,848
    I saw the movie yesterday and I have to point out one reason for the differences in the fire from the set and that in the film-- since some of the fire effects would probably have been done in post-production, it's possible that there was at one time an intention to use multicolored fire like in the book, but then for whatever reason it was decided to make all the fire a more familiar orange color.
  • binaryeyebinaryeye USMember Posts: 1,734
    y2josh said:

    ^In the books, Azog is dead long before the start of The Hobbit, beheaded by Dáin at the Battle of Azanulbizar. This could be hugely problematic by the time we get to the Battle of the Five Armies [...]

    Problematic in the sense that it will be different than the book, yes. But it seems obvious to me that they are setting up a showdown between Azog and Thorin as the centerpiece of the Battle of the Five Armies. I don't particularly like that, but I also never expected these movies to be faithful to the source material after all the changes made in the LoTR movies.
    y2josh said:

    [...] though this adaptation has already strayed FAR from resembling the book (if Gandalf summoned the eagles... why didn't they just TAKE HIM TO THE MOUNTAIN?).

    It could be rationalized that they stopped because Thorin was wounded. Of course that didn't happen in the book, either.
  • RedbullgivesuwindRedbullgivesuwind Brickset's Secret HeadquatersMember Posts: 1,821
    @icey117 I do agree there is plenty to do but thats the worlds most boring second film. For me nothing happens to keep people interested which is why imo theu have to move the battle to the second part. Which would fit with it inittially being two parts.

    For me as we have been told we will meet Aragon, Borimier amd Gimli. A third film will have:

    Bilbos return home and intercut with the casting out of Sauron from Numeour and his move to morder.
    Gandalf researching the ring and diapatching Aragon and the rangers to find Gollum.
    Gollums capture by Sauron and after Aragon.
    Gondor retaking osgilliath.
    Disptaching of the ring wraiths.
  • y2joshy2josh Member Posts: 2,002
    binaryeye said:

    Problematic in the sense that it will be different than the book, yes. But it seems obvious to me that they are setting up a showdown between Azog and Thorin as the centerpiece of the Battle of the Five Armies. I don't particularly like that, but I also never expected these movies to be faithful to the source material after all the changes made in the LoTR movies.

    POTENTIALLY LARGE SPOILERS AHEAD (especially if you haven't read the book):

    I was thinking more problematic in the sense that Bolg still exists in the movies, and that character makes zero sense to have around if Azog is just going to fill his role in The Battle of the Five Armies. Though, I suppose for the films, in a very Lurtz-ian move, it makes more sense for a named character to kill Thorin, rather than to just have him randomly mortally wounded.

    I don't know. It just seems there's no way for this to play out that doesn't completely diminish the significance of Beorn smashing Bolg immediately following Thorin's death. If Azog is still alive by that point, their leader has already been slain, and Beorn is essentially taking on a nobody.
  • SapmiSatanSapmiSatan Member Posts: 106
    I read a theory on IMDb about Azog replacing Bolg, slaying Thorin, only to be slain by Dain, like he was supposed to.
  • icey117icey117 DenmarkMember Posts: 506
    @redbullgivesuswind Correct that theres not much action for a second movie... But then again, theres not so much action on the chapters for the first movie either... Some exageration and some orcs added and it went approximately ok anyway ;-)
    Redbullgivesuwind
  • JpegJpeg Member Posts: 22
    If you've read this far and are still confused about why the sets don't match the film then there are just two things to know. 1. Lego sets are designed up to a year before release and that goes for licensed ones as well. For film based sets, the designers are relying on mostly pre-production drawings; all very preliminary. 2. As has been discussed, Jackson made a relatively late decision to make three films and, even if he hadn't, big changes are often made to help with a film's overall feel. All of this leaves the Lego sets as prone to discrepancies. This will always be the case for film licensed sets.
    StuBoy
  • StuBoyStuBoy New ZealandMember Posts: 623
    ^That would explain why generally The Lord of the Rings sets seem to be better designed and more movie accurate than the Hobbit ones (IMO, anyway), as the designers would've been able to use the LOTR movies as part of their set design.

    The exception is 79003 - An Unexpected Gathering, which is probably the best set so far, but Bag End also appeared in LOTR, so designers would have the original movies again for reference.
  • icey117icey117 DenmarkMember Posts: 506
    @stuboy The Prince of Persia theme suffered from the same thing. They had elements and caracters from the movie - but that was about it!
  • brendanbrendan Member Posts: 15
    Then IMO if they are going to do licensed themes like this all participating toy companies should be allowed on set to see details first hand and view scenes that they are planning on replicating in toy form. It serves the movie better.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon

Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.