Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

5
  • 1
    It was a change in the design choice and also an error. Smaug should look as closely as possible to the way that Tolkien depicted him in drawings. Commented Nov 10, 2019 at 16:52
  • As @M.A.Golding says it should follow as closely as Tolkien depicted him. But the quote that for Jackson there's never too late for a great idea - that's just absurd. His films are terrible and this is one example of such. Even if it was a good idea it introduces inconsistencies and when it's part of the same story it makes no sense at all. How can it be a good idea to remove limbs (or add limbs) to the same character in the same story where the story doesn't have any way that would add/remove limbs? That's just completely asinine. It's mental. That's not a good idea.
    – Pryftan
    Commented Feb 16, 2020 at 17:40
  • 2
    @Pryftan it is your opinion, I personally would have found the dragon ridiculous if it looked like the ones in Tolkien's drawings. Some people like the movies, some don't, that's it.
    – Ren
    Commented Feb 17, 2020 at 7:18
  • @Ren Maybe so but it's still unfaithful to canon. That's the issue. You might think it looks better but that doesn't mean it's correct. It's not correct; it's incorrect and that is factual.
    – Pryftan
    Commented Feb 19, 2020 at 14:09
  • 2
    @Pryftan When you take a book and adapt it into a film, you can change practically anything you want, if the contracts allow it. It's not incorrect to do so. It might be unfaithful to the source material; but that is their choice for how closely they want to adapt their film to the books. It's not factual to say that's incorrect. It's basically a non-sequitur. If someone said it was a perfectly identical adaptation of the books, then you could call that person incorrect and point to this. Given that I doubt the films claim this, it means they aren't incorrect; just an adaptation.
    – JMac
    Commented Mar 19, 2020 at 20:25