Film features a """dragon"""

>Film features a """dragon"""
>It's actually a wyvern
WTF Jackson?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=l3xc3b5taDg&t=9259s
twitter.com/AnonBabble

You mean HAcKson.

Are wyverns like niggers of dragonkind or something?

I'm also annoyed by this. Wyverns are kind of cool but usually smaller, and it was supposed to be a majestic dragon.

Four-legged dragons just look like scaly dogs

No. They're the jews.

The worst part is that he was a proper dragon in the theatrical release of AUJ. Why the hell did they change him?

Is there a reason why ancient people call a dragon a worm?

Wyrm you fucking idiot.

...

aren't wyverns dragons?

Fuckin' poindexter.

Oh fuck I remember thinking he had arms when I saw that scene. What fairly recent movie has an actual dragon in it?

Of all the flaws in this shitty trilogy , this bothers you?

Wyverns are more immersive.

Wyverns have 2 legs and 2 wings (they walk with their wings as front legs) while dragons have 4 legs and 2 wings (using wings only to fly).

i can't see shit

Because they thought two legs with arm wings would be more intimidating, plus its apparently easier to animate

youtube.com/watch?v=l3xc3b5taDg&t=9259s

@41:10

KEK! Total post of the day, lulz!

You sir, win the internet!

Is wyrm different from worm?

I think four legs are more intimidating, especially if the the front legs can be used as pseudo arms. GRRM argued that his dragons are wywerns because nothing in the real world except insects have four legs and wings.

It looked much better with 4 legs
jackson is a hack
shiting on tolkien for no reason

>smaug
>predatorial
>always sleeps
>fucking hackson

Why do autists act like there are rules set in stone as to what constitutes a dragon?

because there are

Jackson had years of pre-production work to prepare for the LOTR trilogy, with the Hobbit he had to pick up where Del Toro(?) left off. They had different visions and Jackson had to rush in order to get his vision done.

Thank you.

No there aren't. Dragons are fictional. If I want to put a dragon with four legs in my fictional world, I can.

>Film features a dragon
>Actually is a dragon

Plus she looks super-hot in this armor

Jackson is still a hack. Lack of pre-production doesn't explain some of the absolutely unnecessary and abominable scenes in the Hobbit trilogy. Also his hackery began to appear as early as ROTK

“According to the rules of heraldry, dragons have four legs and wyverns two, yes,” he wrote on his blog. “But have you ever seen a heraldic ‘seahorse?’ Heralds didn’t know crap about biology. Now, there are no actual dragons, to be sure. But there are bats, and there are birds, and once upon a time there were pterodactyls. Those are the models to use when designing a dragon. No beast in nature has four legs and wings.”

Then that's no a dragon, are you trans by any chance?

>Then that's no a dragon
According to who? Dragons aren't real, user.

Wyverns are actually more anatomically correct, it makes a live action fairy tale a bit more grounded

>Those are the models to use when designing a dragon
That's not how the myth of a dragon came about though. No one in early medieval Europe sat down one day and said "I'm going to design a big monster called a dragon"

>Implying you even need wings to be a dragon.

Wyverns don't breathe fire

This design is objectively more aesthetic too.

Technically actual wyverns stand on two feet, March around like birds. The "wyverns" in stuff like GoT and the Hobbit are under the label of psuedo-wyverns, due to being four limbed but not bird like in stature. As for dragons they are stated as having 6 limbs, and long necks, which basically makes the different between them and drakes.

>I'll call a wyvern "dragon" because dragons are a social construction
Really makes you hmmmmm

>As for dragons they are stated as having 6 limbs
Glaurung only had 4 limbs and NO wings at all, and Tolkien himself named him ''the father of Dragons''

Only autists nitpick this bullshit. It's a flying fire-breathing lizard? It''s a dragon.

No it's dinosaur with wings shitlord. Check your reptilian privileges

>implying D&D naming shit has anything to do with actual mythological creatures
next you'll tell me you think broadswords are specially broad

for all its flawes, Eragon nailed four legged dragons

way more convincing than GOT """"dragons"""

>dinosaur with wings
you mean a bird?

Say what you want about the books. Saphira was a good girl.

Nailed them? That one has feathered wings, for Christ's sake.

>Some faggot is autistic enough to get triggered by some pathetic DnD purist lore crap

Also, wyverns are usually smaller and less intelligent than dragons, and they have a venomous stinger on their tail.

And it looked nice.

Dinosaurs had wings ??? Saphira was and stays the best designed and animated dragon to date.

Jurassic Park did something similar. Deinonychus was a cool dinosaur, but they didn't like the name, so they gave it the name of a chicken-sized relative of the deinonychus. And ever since, everyone has thought velociraptors were 6 feet tall.

DURRRRR THIS ISN'T A DRAGON CUZ MUH MONSTER MANUAL SEZ DRAGON HAS 4 LEGS AND 2 WINGS. THIS IS WYVERN!

Dragons should have big, leathery wings with claws. Eragon dragons are just another attempt at reimagining them.

>reminder that this is what autists want to put in fantasy movies

grrm blowing out autists on the wyvern thing was nice

...

Is OP autistic?

Yes they are and you put them in your anus everyday you disgusting queer

Yes, they're dragon lookalikes that are also of bestial tier intelligence only, as opposed to dragons

Smaug was a dragonlet anyway.

Yes, they are a type of dragon, and don't let anyone tell you differently.

Some dogs have a lot of fur, others don't. Some even lack a tail.
Why can't it be the same with dragons ?

But you still label them with race and shit, same thing with dragons they are still dragons user nobody said otherwise

Reminder that dwarves got BTFO by Cold Drakes.

>using some autist categorisation of fantastical creatures
>using it in the Legendarium which is pre-eminent for its linguistic depth and complexity
>not realising there are wingless, legless, two legged, and four legged dragons without ever the distinction of wyverns being made

2 legged dragon design is always more realistic, since it make sence that creature like this could've existed and would be aerodynamic enough to fly instead of 4 legged autism with wings.

don't forget to upvote

So was Ancalagon like a living mountain? Are there any silmarilionfags here who would shed some light?

...

This looks so much better.

Weta is GOAT designers.

Film Smaug was too big anyway, pic related is Tolkien's own artwork. Film Smaug was the size of the Dragon of the War of Wrath.

Here's the pic

Cute

but that wouldnt look threatning at all.

...

You'd think The Hobbit was a book for children or something

He is kind of an indiot. Body segment counts are controlled by a group of genes that can easily be copied. Look at the varying leg count in millipedes or the fact insects have wings/2 extra sets of appendages at all. The fact a chordate never had a body segment with limbs doubled and survive is just luck.

Tolkie wasn't very good drawer so that's probably nothing like he imagined.

Is it wrong to find Smaug oddly attractive?

Never saw it, but in that screenshot he looks strangely undetailed to me

What are you talking about?
I've seen the lotr prequel trilogy, it's not for children at all.

If Weta made a red evil fox wyrm it would be

Superior dragon coming through.

The size is right, otherwise he would've just drawn him larger.

do dragons have feet

No the lotr and the hobbit are supposed to be written for different audiences by different people. Lotr was written by Frodo an adult audience, The hobbit was written by Billbo as if he was speaking to children. And there personalities show through the different narration. Frodo is somber and Bilbo sees it all with wonder and adventure.

Most do. Unless your a bitch dragon.

Gtfo you disgusting piece of shit pile of reddit trash

>Nat making a cool insectoid dragon

>everyone confuses Dragons with Drakes.

Wyverns have longs ass necks and are green and venemous, they don't spew fire either.

AUJ?

I loved the books

Dailly reminder that the only reason LoTR is "epic" is because of the movies. This is the campy cheesy shit that he was thinking of when writing.

why did smaug bother accumulating such a vast treasure? its not like he ever has to pay for anything.

An Unexpected Journey

Scrooge McDuck syndrome

Nigga, Hobbit was campy cheesy shit.

Tolkien was putting serious shit in Lotr, nigga must have had PTSD after being in the trenches during WW1

EDIT: Wow, thanks for the gold, kind anonymous!

Because melkor built them with an insatiable greed and envy worse than the dwarves to compel them to evil? Dragons are sadistic and physically corrupt the areas they live.