Video diary 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clSUILKxW3w

Orcrist has a very quick appearance in one scene

Yep! Screen shot at 6:46 for Orcrist. Looks pretty awesome. Definitely a Goblin Cleaver!

Now begins the wait until I can purchase one of my own...

Me buy orcrist immediately...precious...

You know, the more I look at Orcrist, the more I dislike Sting's design. I think the fact that it's supposed to be a 'elven knife/dagger' and every other one (Legolas', Aragorn's, Merry and Pippin's) are all single edged and curved; like the elven warrior sword and hadhafang might be what ruins it for me. Not a bad design overall, just feels out of place.

Its possible they were going for a older look since it is from centuries back. Maybe a historical approach like the older one handed sword and short double sided dagger fighting before the typical medieval time period thatrepents lotr.

I'm loving it more and more with each video. I'm actually pretty excited about what PJ is doing with the 3D, it looks like he's got some cool stuff going on. Just as long as it isn't overdone.

And it's great to see faces I remember from the LotR extras working at it again. I'm glad they got the same group together to make this film, I don't know if I can wait another year for it!

Oh, this video blog was wonderful! SO many glimpses of characters: Gandalf, Elrond, Frodo, the "new" Bilbo, and of course the Dwarves. PJ & Company's description of shooting not only in 3D, not only at 48 fps, but also at 5K resolution was pretty engrossing. I think this movie is going to look spectacular. Now, as long as the get the story right.

Anyway, videos like this make December 2012 seem very far away!

[quote=""Olorin""]Anyway, videos like this make December 2012 seem very far away![/quote]
I was thinking the opposite. This last year was like a blur, it went so fast. Seems like it was only a short time ago I had made the remark about it being two years away, and now it's just one year away. Some how I'm feeling it'll be upon us in what will seem like just six months.

The video was great. Dan Henna looks like he groomed his beard inspired by the dwarves (Bombur in particular).

It was cool to see John Howe & Alan Lee working so close together on this, I wish I had a pair of the glasses to see that artwork they showed us.

And thanks for pulling out that still of Orcrist Rosere It's beauty, definitely tops the "Gotta have it" list .

Yeah, the time is flying by.

There are lots of glimpses of the various weapons and other things scattered throughout the video, if you look carefully.

Kit, you mentioned in another thread that u were working on a few things for UC from the Hobbit, maybes you wont be able to say anything just yet, but is there a chance we'll see some replicas released alongside the movie?

Orcrist looks really cool, there are also brief glimpses of the scabbard. I hope UC replicates that

Orcrist and the scabbard will probably be the first release, along with 2-3 other replicas that we plan on having available at the time the film I is released. Several other projects are in the works too from film I, but it all depends on when Weta can get props to us. They have been in a big crunch the last few months getting a large number of weapons made for the production.

[quote=""Nasnandos""]Orcrist and the scabbard will probably be the first release, along with 2-3 other replicas that we plan on having available at the time the film I is released. Several other projects are in the works too from film I, but it all depends on when Weta can get props to us. They have been in a big crunch the last few months getting a large number of weapons made for the production.[/quote]
That'd be cool; ordering Orcrist right after seeing the film, scabbard too eh?
I'm in

Oooh, the scabbard too! I like the sound of this!

I am sure I will be buying Orcrist as soon as it is released. I wasn't an LOTR fan when FOTR came out, so I missed all the excitement when the swords were first coming out. I love when the scabbards are released, really feels like it completes the piece.

Thanks for the reply Kit. Also one more question if you don't mind, I take it we will be getting a scaled version of Orcrist so that it fits in with the rest of the collection so I was wondering if you thought it was a decent length. It seems quite short in the production diary but perhaps that may just be the angle, I was just wondering how small the replica actually wood be. I always imagined something around the size of Theoden's sword

It will be actor scale like Sting, as will the other Dwarven replicas. We never had much interest in the real world Hobbit or Dwarven scale size. It is not as long as any of the full sized Numenorian swords obviously, but the Rohan sword lengths are close.

[quote=""Nasnandos""]It will be actor scale like Sting, as will the other Dwarven replicas. We never had much interest in the real world Hobbit or Dwarven scale size. It is not as long as any of the full sized Numenorian swords obviously, but the Rohan sword lengths are close.[/quote]

thanks for the quick reply, Kit. That's pretty cool actually, I already have the small sting scabbard so I'll buy the sword and I could get another set so there would be two different scales. I'm really looking forward to this. Thanks Kit!

Thanks for all the information Kit! I can't wait to see some of these pieces and hopefully someone will be making one of these.

The one of the left is actually on it's way to me from NZ right now

This could either drag like hell till we get to see the replicas or it could fly by... oh blimey...

[quote=""Nasnandos""]It will be actor scale like Sting, as will the other Dwarven replicas. We never had much interest in the real world Hobbit or Dwarven scale size. It is not as long as any of the full sized Numenorian swords obviously, but the Rohan sword lengths are close.[/quote]

Uhhh...I thought the UC Sting (both versions) was Hobbit scale...not sure about the axes being Drwarven and not actor scale.
That is, UC Sting is about 22 inches long making it a perfect "sword " length for a Hobbit but only dagger length for a full size person. (The White Knives are about 22 inches long)

Why did UC opt for actor scale this time around?

Actually, I think you have that backwards. Actor scale means the full sized lead actor scaled props. There were smaller scale actor "doubles" for wide shots with men and elves. They used Hobbit scale props.

For example, my Hobbit scale Sting prop is around 17", vs the 22" actor scale prop.

Yeah, I confess I'm puzzled by this statement also. I was always happy that UC had opted to make their LOTR replicas true to Middle-earth scale, not actor scale. Compare the UC Sting to the Noble Collection Sting and you will see the huge disparity in size. I think the Noble Sting is way too big, but it is actor scale, thus it is exactly how it would look in Elijah Wood's hands as a prop. However, UC wisely went with Hobbit scale, making Sting look how it should in the hands of human (we collectors.)

I'm not concerned about the Dwarven weapons as they tend to be oversided anyway and Dwarves are not that far off in terms of being close to human scale. Thus, I never had any issues with the LOTR axes as I felt they were perfectly scaled for a Dwarf. I should not that Orcrist, though wielded by Thorin, should not be referred to as a Dwarven weapon. It was crafted and wielded by Elves. Its look onscreen so far makes it seem like a Sting-Glamdring hybrid in size as well as style design, so it looks like it was an Elven falchion of some kind,: somewhat small for a typical Elf, but of good length for a Dwarf. I just hope it scales well with the existing UC Sting and UC Glamdring, because having it suddenly be actor-scale is going to create an inconsistency in people's collections.

Ok, Kit replied while I typed my post above and now I'm even further confused as I was always under the impression that the UC replicas were correctly scaled for how they would actually look in Middle-earth, not in the hands of a human actor portraying a smaller race. In fact, I'm pretty sure Kit himself e xp lained the differences in scale here a few years ago, and the Noble Collection large Sting was a perfect example of an actor-scale Sting, not a Hobbit-scale one, like the one UC had made.

Screencaps bear this out as Sting looks way larger in Wood's hands than the UC replica looks in anybody else's hands. In fact, the sword we see Wood handle in the movies looks just like the Noble version in terms of scale. The UC Sting looks like the one the small body doubles used.

I'm stumped now.

Actually, I am saying it backwards. I should not post on forums while doing CAD.

You are right on Sting, sort of. I forgot that we had three different scaled props on that one. There was the small Hobbit scale, the one we were given first that we used for the UC replica, which was also called actor scale, and a larger Elijah actor scale one, which is what Noble used. At least I was told they copied an actual prop by someone at Weta. I'm not sure when the small and medium sized got used in the film, but we did not even know about the larger sized prop until we had already made Sting. From the scale of a Hobbit vs Human in the film, I think the small 17" prop was the one used most for the small scale actor doubles.

I think I get it, by orcrist being actor scale u mean the small actor who is playing the scale double of Thorin so the replicas we get will be consistent with what we already have. Is that right?


A falchion first came to mind when I saw the blade for orcrist like you said Val. I rather like it. Also Thorin seems a lot taller than the other Dwarves so I don't think Orcrist will be that small

Thanks for clarifying, Kit, it helps me know I'm not going crazy after all.

Interesting to know there was a third scale version, and that's the one UC used for its official replica. Like you, I wonder in which parts of the movie a middle-scale sword would have been used.

Sorry to get off topic a bit, but while you are popping in on this thread and we have your attention Kit (always a treat), have you heard any talk around UC about any future LOTR weapons being made permanently affixed to their displays. This subject has come up several times here on the forum in the last year or so. I believe that it started with a story about new licensing negotiations and that being a requirement. The subject may have been put to rest in another thread and I missed it (if so, sorry for being behind), but I am curious on your inside scoop on this, if any.

Excellent question about an issue which I had completely forgotten about. I guess my mind subconsciously blocked the horrific prospect of these replicas being permanently affixed to a plaque.

I don't know if anyone high up is taking note of public sentiment on this issue, but United Cutlery, and New Line by association, will definitely not be getting my money if this rumour proves true.

[quote=""Nasnandos""]Yeah, the time is flying by.

There are lots of glimpses of the various weapons and other things scattered throughout the video, if you look carefully. At about 31 second in you can see Gandalf's new staff. Dwalin's knuckle dusters at 7:25. That's a nice glimpse of Orchrist they threw in there too, but several of the other weapons are here and there. Note that Glamdring is identical to LOTR. You can also see all three Elven environments. Love it.[/quote]

Hi Kit,

Thanks for taking the time to have a chat with us. Middle-earth mania is slowly making a comeback and it's only going to get crazier in the next two years. Very exciting for us fans and you sound pretty excited too!

I have a few questions that I hope you can answer (confidentiality permitting).

1) Have you had the chance to look at the Glamdring hero prop? Does it have the weathered finish like in LOTR? And have you had the chance to see anything that suggests that PJ intends to maintain consistency in Glamdrings design between LOTR films & The Hobbit films?

2) Does Sting (in the hobbit) have the same design as the LOTR version? i.e. Does Sting have the elven inscriptions on it? [NB: I suspect you might have restrictions on answering this one, but thought i'll put it out there].
I have seen a photo of a Sting hobbit prop (from Weta workshop) that has the same curved vine pattern on the blade but other than the vine pattern there is no inscription. Any thoughts?

3) Just to clarify, you mentioned that UC intends to release its swords in actor scale (i.e. scaled to a human acting as a Hobbit). From the marketing research/feedback that you guys have received/done, is there really little demand for middle-earth scaled weapons that has consistent middle-earth scale between weapons like Glamdring, Sting and Orcrist(i.e. scaled to dwarf human actors acting as hobbits)?

I ask this because it'll be cool to be able to display the three swords (Sting, Glamdring & Orcrist) together and having a consistent scale would be cool.

3) And this is probably getting ahead of ourselves, but do you think there is a chance that we may see Museum Collection versions of Sting and Orcrist? Or has the LOTR Museum Collection problems (particularly with Glamdring) killed off that line for good?


Thanks.

[quote=""Steel Servant""]Sorry to get off topic a bit, but while you are popping in on this thread and we have your attention Kit (always a treat), have you heard any talk around UC about any future LOTR weapons being made permanently affixed to their displays. This subject has come up several times here on the forum in the last year or so. I believe that it started with a story about new licensing negotiations and that being a requirement. The subject may have been put to rest in another thread and I missed it (if so, sorry for being behind), but I am curious on your inside scoop on this, if any.[/quote]
I think I did talk about that in another thread. UC told WB they were not interested in the license if that was a requirement. Period. That was a few years ago as I recall, but when PJ got on board as director, and personnel changed at WB, thankfully that all went away. The people we are working with at WB are being really good to work with so far, and understand us and the collectors much better.

[quote=""Aragorn""]Hi Kit,
Thanks for taking the time to have a chat with us. Middle-earth mania is slowly making a comeback and it's only going to get crazier in the next two years. Very exciting for us fans and you sound pretty excited too!

I have a few questions that I hope you can answer (confidentiality permitting).

1) Have you had the chance to look at the Glamdring hero prop? Does it have the weathered finish like in LOTR? And have you had the chance to see anything that suggests that PJ intends to maintain consistency in Glamdrings design between LOTR films & The Hobbit films?

2) Does Sting (in the hobbit) have the same design as the LOTR version? i.e. Does Sting have the elven inscriptions on it? [NB: I suspect you might have restrictions on answering this one, but thought i'll put it out there].
I have seen a photo of a Sting hobbit prop (from Weta workshop) that has the same curved vine pattern on the blade but other than the vine pattern there is no inscription. Any thoughts?

3) Just to clarify, you mentioned that UC intends to release its swords in actor scale (i.e. scaled to a human acting as a Hobbit). From the marketing research/feedback that you guys have received/done, is there really little demand for middle-earth scaled weapons that has consistent middle-earth scale between weapons like Glamdring, Sting and Orcrist(i.e. scaled to dwarf human actors acting as hobbits)?

I ask this because it'll be cool to be able to display the three swords (Sting, Glamdring & Orcrist) together and having a consistent scale would be cool.

3) And this is probably getting ahead of ourselves, but do you think there is a chance that we may see Museum Collection versions of Sting and Orcrist? Or has the LOTR Museum Collection problems (particularly with Glamdring) killed off that line for good?


Thanks.[/quote]

1. I can't talk about anything unless WB/PJ officially release info or images, but you can see in the Production Diaries that it is the same. In fact everything I have seen indicates all 5 films will be seamless, and Peter has stated he wants you to feel the same group of people made them all.

2. You can see that in the diaries too. Clearly no inscription, just a vine. The inscription in LOTR referred to the spiders from The Hobbit. According to the folks at New Line (or Weta, I don't recall since this was back in 2001), it was supposedly added by the Elves much later when Bilbo was in Rivendell, in between TH and LOTR.

3. Sting, Gamdring, and Orcirst will all be consistent in scale, or at least as close as we can get based on what Weta supplied. This stuff decorates my home too, so I have the same concerns as everyone else! The Orcrist we are working with is full sized actor scale, but our replica will be Dwarven actor scale. I don't know if that will be the same for everything UC replicates, but so far that is what we are going for with Dwarven items. It depends on the item. For example, if we replicate any Dwarven helms from TH2, they will likley be human scale so they can be worn, like the LOTR Gimli helm. I don't know if there are any Dwarven helms in TH2, just using that as an example.

4. We do not know yet, but if we bring that program back, it will be after film 2. I was never a big fan of the Museum Collection series because some of the issues of accuracy (Sting guard shape, deeper hollow grinds on Glamdring, et cetera) did not get improved, IMO. I worked with Marto making those, and I only think we got 75% where they should have been. The real purpose of the MC series, in my eyes, was to do functional blades, which we were not allowed to do in the beginning. Martos blades were hardly functional spring steel. UC has much better hand-forged blade makers now. I would love to do good carbon steel bladed versions, but there is no talk of that as of yet.

Weta will likely be doing their own versions at some point, so I would rather they do the ultimate hand made replicas, and we get as close as we possibly can with ours.

Thanks for stopping by Kit, you are always most welcome here and we await any tidbits of news you can give us like hungry dogs waiting at the bowl for food.

@Kit Rae: Thanks for the informative reply. I went back to have a look at production dairy #4 and managed to find the screenshots that you were referring to.

Had to watch it a second time to spot it. There's quite a bit of stuff in it.

There is a lot of hidden stuff in those diaries. I probably spot things quicker that most because I know what to look for regarding the weapons and arms. I have been looking at all the props the past few months.

Well that's a great relief knowing the swords will be free from their plaques.

Also good news on the scale issue, and knowing that Sting will be accurately depicted without the runes, as it should be. This now raises another interesting question: is UC going to release a version of Sting from the Hobbit without the runes, or are they done with that sword? For that matter, is Glamdring being rereleased even though it will be exactly the same sword as before?

Sorry but one last question from me if that is alright kit? well its a two part question actually

In the video there is a good shot of Thorin holding Orcrist on his back and the scabbard seems to match the blade shape. Am I right in thinking that the side of the scabbard is open like on Hadhafang's scabbard and scabbard for Haldir's sword? Also the second part of the question if you're allowed to answer that is, when the scabbard is released, if UC still go ahead with it, will it come with straps that attach to the waist or will they be for it to be carried on your back?

I am actually going over the final tweaks to the 3D Hobbit Sting model right now.

I assume UC will keep Glamdring in the line, since there is a decade of new collectors since last time that did not get one the first time around. Actually, it is still in the LOTR line.

As far as the Orcrist scabbard, I can't reveal anything there since no clear image has been released from PJ or WB yet. I'll just say it is a beautiful scabbard. It is still in development, but there probably won't be any belts issued with them. That is primarily to keep costs down, but like LOTR, many of the scabbards don't simply have a couple of hang straps, but include belts and other strapping systems which would make them very costly. With our current Obama economy, UC is going to be fairly conservative to be sure this stuff is not priced to high.

[quote=""Nasnandos""] UC is going to be fairly conservative to be sure this stuff is not priced to high.[/quote]

It's good to see that UC are thinking about the fans this time round, I also like the fact that Warner Brothers are as well. Thanks for the info, Kit! Always nice to see you here on the forum

[quote=""Nasnandos""]I am actually going over the final tweaks to the 3D Hobbit Sting model right now.

I assume UC will keep Glamdring in the line, since there is a decade of new collectors since last time that did not get one the first time around. Actually, it is still in the LOTR line.

As far as the Orcrist scabbard, I can't reveal anything there since no clear image has been released from PJ or WB yet. I'll just say it is a beautiful scabbard. It is still in development, but there probably won't be any belts issued with them. That is primarily to keep costs down, but like LOTR, many of the scabbards don't simply have a couple of hang straps, but include belts and other strapping systems which would make them very costly. With our current Obama economy, UC is going to be fairly conservative to be sure this stuff is not priced to high.[/quote]

Wow, so much great info Kit, kind of scares me a little thinking this line could end up being bigger then the LOTR line.

Here is a picture of Sting from the production diaries.

[quote=""Nasnandos""]Yeah, the time is flying by.

There are lots of glimpses of the various weapons and other things scattered throughout the video, if you look carefully. At about 31 second in you can see Gandalf's new staff. Dwalin's knuckle dusters at 7:25. That's a nice glimpse of Orchrist they threw in there too, but several of the other weapons are here and there. Note that Glamdring is identical to LOTR. You can also see all three Elven environments. Love it.[/quote]

Just found a picture of the knuckle duster as well.

Check out the Dwalin pix original released by PJ for those.

[quote=""Nasnandos""]and what could that be over his right hand and forearm?....hmmmm [/quote]

Well... seeing as Thorin's last name is Oakenshield, and the tale tells that he actually used a piece of fallen oak to use as a shield during the Dwarf and Orc wars, then my guess is: the Oakenshield itself!

What do I win?

Hi Kit! I've had trouble finding a Battle Axe of Gimli that's in great shape at a good price. Will that axe make an appearance in The Hobbit (don't see it in the pic of Balin & Dwalin)? If so, do you know if it would be re-released? Also, if UC adds the LOTR license, it would be great to see the Weathertop series completed, at least with the swords of Merry and Pippin. They're the only 2 members of the fellowship that nothing was made for.

This has been discussed at length before.

There are two theories:

1) The axe that Gimli recovers from Balin's tomb is Balin's normal axe that he had during his adventures in the Hobbit.

2) The axe that Gimli recovers from Balin's tomb is in fact Durin's axe, which Balin recovered for himself during his e xp edition to Moria (after the Hobbit.)

Theory 2 makes more sense as Balin would have taken to using the priceless artifact and would have had it entombed with him. If theory 2 is correct, then we should not be seeing the battle axe in the Hobbit movies because it hadn't been discovered yet.

If theory 1 is the correct one, then we should see the axe again as it would make sense for Balin to have it.

It will be interesting to see how PJ deals with this piece of sticky continuity. What is plain to see is that he can go either way and still be correct, merely proving one theory and disproving the other without ever letting us know whether he made a mistake or not.

[quote=""Nasnandos""]That's not the knuckle dusters. Check out the Dwalin pix original released by PJ for those.

This Thorin, and you can see a different sword hilt hanging from his belt, clearly not orcrist, an axe in his left hand....and what could that be over his right hand and forearm?....hmmmm [/quote]

Ah, then these must be what you mean?

[quote=""N2darkness""]Ah, then these must be what you mean?
[/quote]

Yep. I am pretty sure we are going to see some Orc bashing with those.

[quote=""MorgulMike""]Hi Kit! I've had trouble finding a Battle Axe of Gimli that's in great shape at a good price. Will that axe make an appearance in The Hobbit (don't see it in the pic of Balin & Dwalin)? If so, do you know if it would be re-released? Also, if UC adds the LOTR license, it would be great to see the Weathertop series completed, at least with the swords of Merry and Pippin. They're the only 2 members of the fellowship that nothing was made for.[/quote]
UC still has the LOTR license, I think into TH1's release. I doubt the battle axe will come back, and it is not in the Hobbit as far as I know. I specifically asked that question. I have also seen all of Balin's weapons and it is not there. Of course, it could always appear in film 2, as I know very little about anything past TH1, but I doubt this. Back in the LOTR days, I was told by Weta that the battle axe belonged to Balin, so presumably he acquired it after the Hobbit, or possibly he will in TH2. It is also stated in the Weapons and Warfare book as being Balin's, and I think all of that non book info came from the same source we got it from - Weta and the LOTR production. It is exactly that kind of attention to detail I think we will see crammed into The Hobbit.

Not sure if you read my last post, Kit, but for it to make any kind of sense, that battle axe either appears in the first movie right away as Balin's axe, or it should not appear at all, not even in the second movie, as this would basically confirm that this is the axe that he is supposed to find in Moria, which comes well after the events of the Hobbit.

The one and single possible e xp lanation for him to find this axe in the second movie only and still have it jive with LOTR is if he finds the axe in the dwarven hoard of the Lonely Mountain. However, should PJ depict events that way, this would then confirm that the axe that Gimli later finds in Balin's tomb is just his old axe and not Durin's axe, which the books say was found by Balin during his e xp edition. I should also note that the info in Weapons and Warfare is about as non-canonical as it gets for Tolkien related lore, as much of it is invented and some of it even non-sensical. While some of the info in that book corresponds to what we see in the movie, I wouldn't use it as a source of reliable information because it is full of errors. It's a great visual guide, but little else, sorry to say.

No, none of this is canonical. Gimli did not even find an axe in the book.That's why I said non-book. According to the LOTR production (whether it be PJ or one of the other writers who decided this, or Richard or one of the designers at Weta) they decided that the battle axe was Balin's, no mention of it being Durin's original axe. I'm sure that is where the W&A writers got that info as well. I think it was just a little detail to tie in some lore to Gilmi's cousin.

I don't think they had any intention of tying Durin's axe into this, and if they did I'm sure they would have had Gimli recognize it as such in FOTR...and subsequently pissed a lot of us off because that would have been very wrong to add something so incorrect by bringing Durins axe into this.

We are on the same page then.

Yes, it would greatly simplify things if they just had Balin carry that axe right from TH1 onward. By him not having it, it sort of implies that he acquired it later, and that it could be Durin's axe, Gimli's non-acknowledgement of that fact notwithstanding. It is not written in the novel that Gimli found an axe in the tomb, but it does say elsewhere (the Appendices, I believe,) that Balin discovered Durin's axe during that e xp edition. I would say however, that you are 100% correct and PJ and co. never intended for Durin's axe to come into this.

[quote=""Nasnandos""]I am actually going over the final tweaks to the 3D Hobbit Sting model right now. [/quote]

@Kit: I'm going to be bold here and make a request to have the Hobbit licensing info stamped into a more discrete location of the sword rather than above the shoulder of the sword blade.

Perhaps, the licensing info could be stamped on the pommel or even on the underside of the cross guard that is facing the pommel?