The Lord Of The Rings General Discussion Thread

[KK 3,307]

I don't think it was so much about the CGI as it was the film-making process, which I imagine was quite chaotic. Things were always last minute, and changes were always being made left and right, so I can understand why he doesn't look back at the experience fondly. It's interesting though, because from the appendices, Mortenson always seemed like the guy who had a lot of faith in the project.

But as horrible as it may have behind the scenes, I guess I'm a bit disappointed he doesn't find as much merit with the way the films actually turned out on the big screen.

[SafeUnderHill 205]

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,364]

Silly explanation for "Why didn't the eagles just drop the ring in Mount Doom" joke

http://www.tickld.com/x/this-guy-just-changed-the-way-we-see-lord-of-the-rings-mind-blown

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Makes sense!

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

lol...

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Finally!

[crocodile 8,017]

TORn Exclusive: Interview With Sheila Chandra

Just read that, Made me think how much I miss those, very specific and unique vocal solos in Shore's writing. The Hobbit doesn't really have those. Up until this point, at least.

Karol

[SafeUnderHill 205]

[Incanus 5,715]

TORn Exclusive: Interview With Sheila Chandra

Just read that, Made me think how much I miss those, very specific and unique vocal solos in Shore's writing. The Hobbit doesn't really have those. Up until this point, at least.

Karol

There is radically less soloist work in The Hobbit films than in LotR, perhaps due to the difference in the nature of the tales. The vocal music was quite often there in LotR to inject the poems and Tolkien's writing back into the films but I think that was only the starting point and it all really grew organically through the trilogy with Shore selecting different voices for each progressive film and the film makers creating lyrics in the spirit of Tolkien to illustrate the dramatic subtext of the scenes. While chorus has been represented in the two scores quite well thusfar solo voices have been largely absent from The Hobbit. We don't have people like Elisabeth Frazer, Sheila Chandra, Elizabeth Bayrakdarian or Renée Fleming attached to these films or even if they are they do not have the same prominence they had in LotR.

[Faleel 5,350]

I think its a case of Shore wanting to add something to each progressive score.

Makes sense!

No it doesn't, when Gandalf came back, why didn't he continue the eagle plan?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Faleel 5,350]

Makes sense!

No it doesn't, when Gandalf came back, why didn't he continue the eagle plan?

Because Frodo was already far away (and Gandalf had no clue regarding where he was).

Emyn Muil is easy to spy out via Eagle.

[John Takis 206]

A reply: http://middle-earth.xenite.org/2014/08/07/did-gandalf-really-mean-to-use-the-eagles-to-destroy-the-one-ring/

And an earlier article by the same author, referenced in the above: http://middle-earth.xenite.org/2012/10/11/is-there-an-in-story-explanation-for-why-the-eagles-rarely-participate-in-great-events/

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The Tolkien fanboys are as anal as the Star Wars fans!

[Incanus 5,715]

The Tolkien fanboys are as anal as the Star Wars fans!

Oh even more so! You should know that by now after speding all that time in LotR and The Hobbit threads.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Hmmm....compared to prequel discussions...

[Incanus 5,715]

Hmmm....compared to prequel discussions...

Yes. We can strike up a heated and pointless argument on the number of feathers Gwaihîr the Windlord has in his wings and which of them should be counted as feathers and which is obviously soft down. If you add novels VS films battle in there I think we Tolkienists come on top pretty easily. There has not been such tallying minutiae of faults in many an age.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Does the Balrog have wings?

[Bilbo 3,709]

Balrogs have wings.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The movie version sure. And some of the illustrations. But in the actual book?

[Bilbo 3,709]

"...suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall..."

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Incanus 5,715]

Balrogs have wings.

Yes I agree. In my mind they do have wings, most of them. Especially the Balrog of Moria.

The movie version sure. And some of the illustrations. But in the actual book?

Ah this is an old debate of great import. People must know!

"...suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall..."

Actually that is still ambiguous as the aforementioned wings are in the previous sentences composed of shadow. And Tolkien fanatics have had their discussions and debates over this extremely important detail for eternity. Tolkien's other texts do not specifically mention that balrogs have wings either.

Tolkien most often left out enormous amount of character details like hair colour or other distinguishing features from rather important characters like Boromir for example. E.g. Balrog is described as being of greater than man-height (as is Sauron in one of his letters) but not gigantic but not much actual physical detail is made known to the reader. Same goes for most of the Fellowship in fact.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Bilbo Skywalker is a fool if he thinks he can settle the matter with a simple quote.

Where does Christopher Tolkien stand on this?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

We should ask Christopher Lee! The guy knows!

[Incanus 5,715]

Bilbo Skywalker is a fool if he thinks he can settle the matter with a simple quote.

Where does Christopher Tolkien stand on this?

I think even Christopher Tolkien can't settle this for certain as he usually follows his father's writings to the letter but the text concerining the Balrog does leave some ambiguities hanging in the air. And the earlier drafts presented in the History of Middle Earth series as hardly conclusive as they were abandoned concepts and drafts and Tolkien must have changed his mind a lot before settling for the final version of the tale.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

Silly explanation for "Why didn't the eagles just drop the ring in Mount Doom" joke

I have the impression that many people ask the question quite seriously. But as John linked, it's really simple. The eagles are basically divine intervention. They don't came when called. Actually, you don't even call them. Gandalf (and the other wizards) is divine intervention light: Him you do call, and he does an active role, but there are strict rules limiting what he is allowed to do.

I understand that that probably isn't apparent from reading (not to mention just watching) just LOTR. But honestly, very little of LOTR makes sense on its own if you dig into it - because it's only the final chapter in a much longer history. It really needs at least The Silmarillion to put all the stuff in context.

Thinking about it, I guess we could make a point that from a conceptual point of view, the eagles in The Hobbit were an inconsistency until Tolkien wrote LOTR, validating their coming to the rescue of a group of people who now no longer were just some dwarves and a wizard on their own personal quest, but in fact a necessary means for ensuring the Ring would stay safe.

[KK 3,307]

A reply: http://middle-earth.xenite.org/2014/08/07/did-gandalf-really-mean-to-use-the-eagles-to-destroy-the-one-ring/

And an earlier article by the same author, referenced in the above: http://middle-earth.xenite.org/2012/10/11/is-there-an-in-story-explanation-for-why-the-eagles-rarely-participate-in-great-events/

People took that explanation seriously? Wasn't it meant as a humorous answer to that anal question?

[mstrox 6,651]

My feeling on the argument is that if the Eagles were to drop the ring into the volcano, there wouldn't be much of a story and that wouldn't be fun. No use trying to poke little holes in things you love and enjoy!

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

My feeling on the argument is that if the Eagles were to drop the ring into the volcano, there wouldn't be much of a story and that wouldn't be fun.

That's the usual counter argument, but it's selling Tolkien short. There are several instances in the story where something is unlikely, but if it happened differently, there wouldn't be story. In this case though, there actually is a thought through logic behind it.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Is that conjecture on your part? Or is there actually confirmation of this?

[Wojo 2,453]

"...suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall..."

Maybe the Balrog had a Red Bull. That gives you wings.

[Jay 37,364]

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

Is that conjecture on your part? Or is there actually confirmation of this?

Of what? That the eagles are under direct "command" of Manwe? That's mentioned clearly in Sil, and it's consistent with their behaviour in LOTR. Also, their eucatastrophic tendency to show up unexpectedly in the last hour matches the Valar's own contribution to the War of Wrath at the end of the first age. Where apparently the eagles were involved as well.

[Wojo 2,453]

My feeling on the argument is that if the Eagles were to drop the ring into the volcano, there wouldn't be much of a story and that wouldn't be fun.  No use trying to poke little holes in things you love and enjoy!

Not only that, but you use the Eagles to deliver the Ring, then Sean Bean doesn't die. And we can't have that.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

Apparently it's just my own interpretation, although it's always seemed pretty clear and obvious to me. More here.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Kühni 485]

.

[Quintus 5,399]

A reply: http://middle-earth.xenite.org/2014/08/07/did-gandalf-really-mean-to-use-the-eagles-to-destroy-the-one-ring/

And an earlier article by the same author, referenced in the above: http://middle-earth.xenite.org/2012/10/11/is-there-an-in-story-explanation-for-why-the-eagles-rarely-participate-in-great-events/

People took that explanation seriously? Wasn't it meant as a humorous answer to that anal question?

Why shouldn't they? It's actually a perfectly plausible theory. I'm not saying it's gospel, but it's good nonetheless. It's nice to have.

[SafeUnderHill 205]

[Incanus 5,715]

Joke or not the "If something is possible and easy, why didn't they just do it?" "Or I could have solved this much better if I had been in their shoes" is usually the worst way of approaching any story. Tolkien knew well this problem inherent in the giant eagles and their transporting capabilities and their possible aquila ex machina effect. It is easier to accept that if the author didn't intend Frodo and the company to swoosh down to Mt. Doom and just drop the Ring in, then there is no point in arguing like an optimization-loving engineer over "inconsistent use and faulty logic of possessing an optimal means of accomplishing the task but never using it in the story". Lord of the Rings, a modern day myth and legend in fact, should not have to explain and defend such story telling decisions to people who think it is fun to sarcastically poke holes into the functionality of the story. If there are faults in the narrative or story telling, they certainly do not lie in the use of Eagles.

These kind of optimization games in literature are ridiculous. Engineers might like to cover all angles, come up with the best possible way of solving things with minimal risk and produce an outcome that will fall in with their minutely measured calculations on the odds of success. But obviously stories and even life most often does not follow suit. If books in any genre were written this way and good and evil would decide their battles with optimization, these people would be still building the best possible weapon or crafting the best possible plan to defeat the enemy and not actually doing any battling.

But "what ifs" are irresistable.

[SafeUnderHill 205]

[Quintus 5,399]

From now on I'm going to accept this new explanation as canon and share it with people I know and meet in life. I'll present it as a persuasive argument.

[Faleel 5,350]

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Too many possible joke routes there... pick whichever one you'd prefer I take, and imagine it yourself.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Incanus 5,715]

Did James Horner write that?

I am betting it was Emily Howell, the Angela Morley of the future!