Has anyone seen any pics of how Smaug will look? There are too many Wyverns masquerading as Dragons in films these days. Tolkein's own drawings of Smaug had him as a long winged wurm with forelegs, hindlegs and wings.
Posted 9 months ago
#
Online discussion of Peter Jackson's The Hobbit movies
The Hobbit Movie Forum » Hobbit Movie
Anatomy of Smaug
(311 posts)-
-
I know man, I just saw Harry Potter and there was another Wyvern. Jeez its like none of them have arms anymore. It could be deliberate, I guess, to make them more bestial. They usually don't speak either. Smaug should sound intelligent and have opposible thumbs.
Posted 9 months ago # -
i thought the dragon in harry potter looked great. It showed that a dragon could be done realisically and not the dragonheart crap way. Now i expect more though in smaug taking the dragon from HP and steping it up a few notches
Posted 9 months ago # -
There were no Dragons in HP just Wyverns its laziness. The Dragon in HP looks more realistic, compared to what? All the real Dragons roaming around the planet? You can't compare the real world to Middle Earth and state that evolution doesn't allow six limbed vertibrates, otherwise nothing would exist in Tolkien's Middle Earth.
Posted 9 months ago # -
I was comparing it to every other dragon put on film. you can call it a wyvern all you want but its still a form of dragon. dragons came in many shapes and sizes and just because it had the short forearms like a t rex doesnt mean its not a dragon. it wasnt like it was a serpent with NO arms or legs, lets face it from the look of the dwarfs there is still some of del Toro's influence present so I'm sure they'll be some of his influence with smaug as well and I am sure that will be one secret they keep until the release of the movie is the dragon
Posted 9 months ago # -
A Wyvern's forearms are its wings like a bat or pteradactyl. What Dragon are you comparing too? I will be watching the last HP tommorow so I am looking forward to the Dragon, although by the film clips on the net it seems to be a WYVERN.....I hope Alan Lee has more influence on the design than Del Toro.
Posted 9 months ago # -
lets see, dragonslayer, dragon heart ( i really hated the ape snout on that one), the ones from dungeons and dragons, Reign of Fire (the bull wasn't half bad) and god help us eragon. the ones from harry potter and the goblet of fire werent half bad either but then again you can lump them in that wyvern catagorie too I guess. I'm not a dragon purest I just hope they do it justice and it doesnt look phony like some of the ones I mentioned
"Although both wyverns and dragons are depicted as flying creatures with wings, wyverns are not adept flyers like dragons. Dragons have a monstrous mouth that has sharp pangs whereas WYVERNS HAVE BEAKED MOUTHS. Dragons have varying shapes, sizes and body color whereas wyverns have a common standard shape. Unlike wyverns, some depictions show dragons as wingless and generally more reptilian than wyverns which can be semi birdlike. A dragon is one of the most popular and easily recognizable among mythical creatures. Its depiction is of a snake-like fire spitting beast or some reptile but with ability to fly. Some depictions show dragons as having legs whereas others show them without legs and having one head or more.Physically wyverns are known to be smaller, lighter and generally weaker than their cousins the dragons. Dragons are depicted as able to speak and are capable of some compelling speech. They are also intellectually bright creatures. However their kin the wyverns are less open to speech, preferring to stay silent most of the time."found that info on a dragon website just to clarify the difference I think they might do ok as long as the dragon Del Toro envisioned was scrapped
Posted 9 months ago # -
I just hope the dragon doesn't look phony,like from Eragon. The HP dragon, or wyvern, or whatever it was, was pretty good, though.
Posted 9 months ago # -
No one is saying that these creatures depicted are not of great design I own almost every film or tv programme with a dragon in it. Many designers depict the dragon as mammilian in shape or like a saurapod dinosaur which does'nt look right to the eye.
WYVERNS (Pseudodraconis)
Originating from a thirteenth centuary word WYVER meaning viper or life, these creatures seem closely related to Dragons but it has been long argued as to wether they are actually from the same order.
There are fundamental differences in body structure. A Wyvern is two legged and it's wings are true, as in they are derived from the forelimbs like birds. They have beak like jaws, long tails that taper to poisoned barb tips and eagle like claws. Wyverns are also smaller than dragons, the largest on record being approximately 18foot (5.4m).
Lifespan also plays a part - whereas Draco live in excess of 400years, wyverns have a surprisingly short life of upto 30years and any living beyond this have yet to be discovered and recorded. (MYTHYK WORLD)
Smaug is very old during the time of the Hobbit.
Posted 9 months ago # -
well if Wyverns only get as big as 18 ft then the ones from HP are definitely dragons cause they are at least 40 ft no matter the wing design or amount of legs LOL..... well anyways its good to see someone as spirited and concerned about the way smaug will be portrayed as I am
Posted 9 months ago # -
There is no reason to say that Wyverns only reach 18ft. I have just seen the HP movie and it was fantastic, including the large Wyvern. Smaug is definately a dragon with forelimbs as he decribes himself.
""My armour is like tenfold shields, my teeth are swords, my claws spears, the shock of my tail a thunderbolt, my wings a hurricane, and my breath death!" - The Hobbit, Ch. 12 'Inside Information'."Posted 9 months ago # -
every source i found about wyverns said similar things much smaller than dragons in most cases 18 to 20 ft and only live about 30 to 50 years at best you yourself said the same thing a few posts back and saying he has claws doesnt mean he has fore arms just means he has claws which could be on the ends of his wings... dont get me wrong i agree smaug should have fore arms but just because they do not have them does not make them a wyvern, dragons come in a variety of shapes, sizes, and colors. As long as smaug is done well and doesnt have the face of a ape like other talking dragons have had i'll be happy
Posted 9 months ago # -
I have to step in here...I love dragons, I have a huge collection of painted miniature dragons from decades of collecting, and have read all sorts of things about them. In my universe, dragons have 6 limbs, and walk in that half-upright, half quadrupedal manner that bears do (not that they resemble bears in any way, of course)
BUT, and I have to reiterate this, THERE ARE NO DRAGONS. All you can state is "I like them to be 6 limbed" or "I think a wyvern and a dragon are the same thing" or whatever you think, but please stop quoting various "sources" of information as though they represent fact...DRAGONS AREN'T REAL!!Sheesh, it's a bad as the star Wars fanbois trying to reconcile the fact that the interior set of the Millennium falcon won't actually fit into the exterior model. Endless forum posts on how it could be squeezed in, or other bizarre concepts, when, in fact, there is no dilemma, because the SHIP ISN'T REAL!
Posted 9 months ago # -
Richard: You say you dragons have six limbs, so dragons must exist in your universe.
Todd: As you have stated before I may be a Dragon purist and in my universe a Dragon has four limbs and usually a set of wings (Glaurung had no wings) and a Wyvern's forelimbs have evolved into wings.
For the Hobbit Movie which this blog is for (where dragons do exist)I only hope that Smaug is a long serpentine low slung copper red dragon with four limbs and a set of wings, this would buck the trend of recent films, and also follow the designs of Tolkien and Del Toro.
Posted 9 months ago # -
but dragons not only are THAT shape Higno they have many shapes and wing designs according to the published encyclopedia of dragons
Posted 9 months ago # -
They are not true dragons but dragon kin.
Posted 9 months ago # -
we can agree to disagree LOL thats all I got to say... anyone else wanna weigh in on this?
Posted 9 months ago # -
I accept your graceful defeat.
Posted 9 months ago # -
never said I was defeated... you need to re- read some of your own posts LOL cause you said some of the same things I said like the size of a wyvern... 18 ft, beak-like jaws, the dragons in HP had no beak-like jaws and did have deadly claws and fangs. like I said, agree to disagree because obviously my views wont change and neither will yours. THAT'S ALL. I would like some other people weigh in though, just to see the variety of opinions. i'm sure were not the only 2 with an opinion. AND YES Richard I realize dragons are NOT REAL!!!! BUT... in the world of Tolkien they DO exist and in the worlds of those who publish books about them they DO exist. this forum is concerning the world Tolkien's and fantasy literature. NOT OURS!! and as far as colletions go I have thousands of pieces of dragon memorabilia collected over 30 years and go to Dragon-con every year in Atlanta GA. tell THOSE people dragons dont exist you might get hurt seriously. Higno and I just have 2 different opinions that's all
Posted 9 months ago # -
Todd, the point I was making is that you quote such "facts' as "wyvern... 18 ft, beak-like jaws"
Where did you read this?
Did Tolkien define a Wyvern as such?
No
So therefore, your source of information is utterly irrelevant.
All you are quoting is some random person's ideas and opinions, no more valid then yours, mine, or anyone else's.
This is about Tolkien's dragon, and he illustrated it thus:
http://www.hobbit.ca/Smaug-Tolkien2.jpg
Therefore, THAT is what the author thought Smaug should look like.
What Peter Jackson and his team decide, is up to them, so all we can do here is hope that Smaug looks believable, and works within the context of the film.Also, I doubt that terribly many people TRULY believe dragons exist, if they do, they are delusional.
As they aren't real, they can be represented in any way a particular person fancies. I have stated what I think they should look like, and undoubtedly you have YOUR opinion.
All we can say is, I like them this way, you like them that way.
Neither of us is WRONG, neither of us can quote "sources" to back our opinion, except the afore mentioned illustration, neither of us can claim a superior knowledge.
ALL we can do is agree to disagree about our opinions, because DRAGON'S DON'T EXIST.
The fact that they DO exist in fiction is precisely my point: FICTION.
You can't reference a work of fiction, to justify another work of fiction, it just doesn't work that way. This is where all that CANON nonsense came from, people more or less arbitrarily assigning credence to one source, but not another, even if those sources disagreed with each other.
An encyclopaedia of dragons is a work of fiction...bear that in mind please.Posted 9 months ago # -
look encyclopedia of dragons Richard there are other volumes of books written describing dragons and Dragon-kin. and the books in question were written by the people who defined the genre. what you fail to realize Richard is that in this world of Tolkien and fantasy dragons DO exist. Do I think they exist in the real world NO but in the world of fantasy they DO exist. And I agree neither of us is wrong but I believe just from everything I have seen in production so far with the hobbit they will ride the trends of the current movie dragons with 4 limbs 2 rear legs and forarms which are wing based with talons or hands at the end. If I'm wrong I'll be the first to eat my words
Posted 9 months ago # -
Todd, reread my post, I added this about something existing in fiction:
The fact that they DO exist in fiction is precisely my point: FICTION.
You can't reference a work of fiction, to justify another work of fiction, it just doesn't work that way. This is where all that CANON nonsense came from, people more or less arbitrarily assigning credence to one source, but not another, even if those sources disagreed with each other.
An encyclopaedia of dragons is a work of fiction...bear that in mind please.Posted 9 months ago # -
Trust me I know what fiction is, I read TONS of it. I also read Non-fiction and Poetry as well. Let me ask this... does the elvish language exist because it is in a fantasy book? .. YES it does, Tolkien wrote it himself and it is realized as a true language by several linguists. Same with all the languages in LOTR as well as Star-trek people believe in various different things from that genre of fantasy. I DO NOT believe dragons exist in the real world NEVER HAVE NEVER WILL I do believe they exist in a fantasy world and just like any other world "guidelines" have been laid out by the pioneers of the Genre. Not me. That's what makes it escapism and gives it a real life quality even though everyone should know its not real
Posted 9 months ago # -
Ah HA!
I have just got up to the death of Smaug (gee, I hope that's not a spoiler...lol), and the text clearly states "Where the foreleg was flung wide"
So Tolkien definitely envisioned Smaug with 4 limbs, and 2 wings.
ALSO, Smaug has to leave the great hall, and make his way out to the main gates, and he needs 4 legs for that, otherwise, he would have to crawl out on his wings, like a bat does, (if you have seen Dragonslayer, you'll know how crappy that looks).
So, fellow "dragons have 6 limbs" enthusiasts, there is hope!Posted 9 months ago # -
I know Smaug had 6limbs tolkien well stated that and I hope your correct Richard I really do but I think they will follow the current trend of making the wings forelegs with talons at the end to make it more with pop culture which seems to be the trend
Posted 9 months ago # -
Oh, and Todd, on the Elvish language (and the Klingon language too).
Elvish exists because Tolkien created it, he then USED it in his books, there are a few important differences.
1. Tolkien's work is considered the definitive source of information, it came first, all others followed.
2. The officially designated language drew from Tolkien's scholarly works, where he created and defined the language, NOT from idle references in any of his fiction.
3. Klingon, likewise, was created by linguists for use in the fiction, NOT vice versa.
4. None of these languages are complete, you could not conduct a normal conversation in them, as they lack many fundamental features of a living language... useful for a funeral eulogy, perhaps, but not for discussing day-to-day trivia.Posted 9 months ago # -
just finished wathing the transformers cartoon movie Smaug would be bad-ass with a Orson Wells quality to his voice (Ex The scene where Unicron changes Megatron into Galvatron) it has that resonating deep in your soul quality to it along with power wisdom to it Hopefully Cumberbatch will do it justice
Posted 9 months ago # -
Cumberbatch and several million dollars worth of audio effects equipment!
Posted 9 months ago # -
SOOOO true richard
Posted 9 months ago # -
The notion of a single form for a creature that exists in thousands of different shapes and desings from all over the world seems a little odd to me. Personally like some have mentioned I like my Dragons with two legs two arms and wings but this is largely because for 70 years they have been drawn that way (largely based on Smaug). The idea taht you can't call it a dragon because it has no forlimbs and only wings is purely subjective.
Posted 9 months ago #
Reply »
You must register or log in to post.
