LOTR : Slightly off-topic questions

[Xeon]

Hi all,

Just curious, but I've 2 questions after watching LOTR on VCDs.

1) In LOTR : The Two Towers, at the start of the movie, there's this part where Gandalf battled this huge fire beast with large horns. Does anyone know the name of this beast, why it exist and why it's so strong?
This beast seems to be even more powerful than Sauron with the ring.

2) In LOTR(Fellowship of the Ring and Two Towers), there's all these hooded figures whose faces are totally invisible and they rode on black eerie horses and hunt down Frodo and his pals. Who are these ghastly specters?
Are they immortal?

Thanks!
Xeon.

[j. d. worthington]

Simply, the opening you refer to is a recap of the battle with the Balrog from The Fellowship of the Ring, only this also shows more of what happens after the fall from the Bridge of Khazad-dum.

The Ringwraiths are those "nine kings of mortal men" trapped by Sauron through the use of the Rings of Power in the Second Age; they are now neither alive nor dead, thoroughly corrupted and yet, as Gandalf notes in the novel, to be pitied for their fallen state.

If you haven't watched the extended versions of these, you might give them a go. They are considerably closer to capturing the depth of Tolkien's vision than any of the theatrical release versions (though they stray quite a bit in spots), and may answer some of the questions you have. Also, if you haven't read the book, or haven't read it in quite a while, it gives you much more information on all these figures.

[Marky Lazer]

Originally Posted by Xeon

Hi all,

Just curious, but I've 2 questions after watching LOTR on VCDs.

1) In LOTR : The Two Towers, at the start of the movie, there's this part where Gandalf battled this huge fire beast with large horns. Does anyone know the name of this beast, why it exist and why it's so strong?
This beast seems to be even more powerful than Sauron with the ring.

The beast you refering to is a Balrog. Durin's bane is the one being attacked by Gandalf. As a matter of fact, the Balrog is of the same origin as Gandalf. There were actually more Balrogs in the whole world. I could tell you more if you're really interested.

Originally Posted by Xeon

2) In LOTR(Fellowship of the Ring and Two Towers), there's all these hooded figures whose faces are totally invisible and they rode on black eerie horses and hunt down Frodo and his pals. Who are these ghastly specters?
Are they immortal?
Xeon.

The used to be nine kings of men, who were corrupted by the rings they got from Sauron. They are not immortal, Eowyn killed the strongest of them at Pelennor fields...

If you want more info, I'm happy to deliver it

[Boaz]

Xeon,

Wow! It's refreshing to find someone who is coming to The Lord of the Rings with little or no foreknowledge of the story. JDW and Marky are right on and they gave good, concise answers. I'd have given you the long winded answers that would have driven you away from Tolkien.

Let me just add on to the question about the "ghastly spectres"... their lives (their presence in the physical world) were tied to their rings, but their rings were tied to the existence of the One Ring. As long as the One Ring existed, the three Elven Rings and the nine Human rings were subservient to it. When the One Ring was destroyed, the works of the Elven rings (ie, their effect upon the physical world) seemed to begin to come undone. So, it seems as long as the One Ring existed, the Ringwraiths existed.

Best wishes in your quest.

[Xeon]

LOL......what can I say? Thanks a lot for all your help!
But Marky Lazer......how can Gandalf and that Balrog be of the same origin?

Also, regarding Frodo. I remember he was really short and a hobbit in FellowShip of the Ring, but in The Two Towers and Return of the King, he seems to have become taller and looked more like a human? Or maybe I saw things wrongly?

Thanks!
Xeon.

[j. d. worthington]

Well, I'm not Marky, but I'll undertake to answer that. This is not something you'd gather from the films, though. It's from the book's appendices, and even more from The Silmarillion. Both Gandalf and the Balrog of Morgoth are of the order of the Maiar, an order somewhat lower than the Valar, or Powers of the World. Morgoth, or Melkor, as he was originally called, was of the order of the Valar, one of those who helped to bring the world into being by their Music, through the Will of Iluvatar, the One (not to be confused with the One Ring -- this is the ultimate One, God, if you will). But Melkor, like Lucifer, fell through pride into striving against the will of Iluvatar, and once the Middle-Earth was made, he did all he could to mar or unmake what his fellow Vala had achieved. He also corrupted certain Maiar of the people of Aule, the Vala smith, and through promises of great power brought them under his sway. Because of this corruption, and the fact that they were spirits of fire to begin with, they became an evil flame, one which could only be used for destruction and harm rather than growth and healing. Their form became that of a deep shadow wreathed in flame, bestial and malefic, just as Melkor's original majesty became warped through his malice into the fearful majesty of a Dark Lord. Sauron himself is of the order of the Maiar; he was the greatest servant of Melkor (renamed "Morgoth" or "The Dark Enemy of the World" by Feanor of the Elves after Melkor slew his father in quest of the Silmarils). Sauron could also take the form of a wolf, or werewolf, which he often did during the First Age. It is believed by some that he lost this power following his defeat and physical destruction at the end of the Second Age, when he lost the ring, and could only be seen in the form of a burning eye of malice, with a pupil that was an empty void, reflecting the nothingness within him.

That help? If you've not read the books, they really are very good, and full of rich textures and very deep history; Tolkien's may be the most fully realized world of historical profundity in all fantasy. Others have tried, but Tolkien may well have given his more depth than any before or since.

[Xeon]

Thanks JD!
One more question : in Fellowship of the Ring, Sauron's hand was chooped off by one warrior and he crumbled to dust soon after.
Who's that warrior who's so powerful to kill Sauron? And bear in mind, Sauron had that One Ring on his fingers that time.......wasn't it suppose to make him totally invincible?
(actually, no......I won't read Tolkien....I prefer Lewis' Narnia[don't laugh!]......Tolkien's books are too descriptive for me, although the movie is pretty good)

Thanks!
Xeon.

[hypocriticHarkonnen]

[hey! Narnia IS one nice humdinger, huh? it would've been nice to read up a little somethin'-somethin' about tolkien, but that's ok.]

uhm...i may not be the lotr authority here, but i'll try and answer that. i've always had the idea that the 'invincibility' the Ring gave you depends on each person, that it was sort of abstract, that it gave you certain powers--? actually, i've been wondering at that too. As for the warrior, i believe he's Isildur, the son of King Elendil. Isildur used Elendil's broken sword-shard to cut off the Ring-finger. Since the Ring has somewhat a part of Sauron's soul 'grafted' into it, separating the Ring from Sauron would prove to be devastating, but for as long as It isn't destroyed a part of Sauron still lives. So technically Isildur didn't kill Sauron entirely. Hehe, just correct me, guys, okay?

[hypocriticHarkonnen]

PS there's actually a debate in another site about this whole cutting-the-Ring-Finger-off business.....

[Paige Turner]

Originally Posted by hypocriticHarkonnen

PS there's actually a debate in another site about this whole cutting-the-Ring-Finger-off business.....

Who, whoa, whoa. You go to other sites? I'm not liking the sound of that.

[j. d. worthington]

Okay -- Sauron can't be destroyed. Tolkien makes that obvious in the books. He is one of the original order of beings dating back to before the creation of Arda, "The World"; in Christian terms, he'd be termed one of the hierarchy of Hell, under Lucifer/Satan (Melkor/Morgoth), a fallen angel. He can be robbed of his physical being, but not his power, his existence. He can be weakened, but that "spirit of malice" that is blown about after the destruction of the Barad-Dur will take root again and, if enough fall under its sway, its power will grow. Tolkien began a story that dealt with this very thing taking place in the Fourth Age, showing the incursion of corruption in Gondor, though he was not able to take it very far.

Yes, it was Isildur, Elendil's heir, who cut off the One from Sauron's hand. This happened during the final battle on the plains before the doors of Mordor at the end of the Second Age -- in fact, Sauron's fall was the actual milestone which marked the end of that Age, and could be done because of both Sauron's weakened state and chance, as well as the fact that all the heirs of the Royal House of Gondor are descended from Elrond's brother, another half-elven, and so they carry some of that power within them, though it is limited and can be virtually lost if they become corrupt. After all, even Sauron's master, Morgoth, was maimed by Elven blades during the First Age, Fingolfin's sword piercing his foot and laming him forever after, so that he could never have quite the level of fearsome majesty he had before.

The problem here is that the films, even in extended versions, simply cannot cover the richness and complexity of the history that Professor Tolkien created -- after all, the background behind LotR took up huge chunks of his life, and the massive working and reworking of that book alone is something of an epic in itself. And, frankly, many of the questions you're asking simply couldn't be answered without reference to the books themselves. That's the pitfall of tackling such an incredibly textured work as Tolkien's opus. As for the detail, that's precisely what you're asking about. Tolkien puts that detail in because he is making every effort to make the world real, solid, with all the depth and textures of a "secondary creation", in his terms. It's that very detail that has given the book such life over the years, and why it is unlikely anyone will ever quite accomplish the same again, because so much of this was worked out before he ever submitted any of the manuscript to the publisher, taking literally a decade and a half before the first part of it ever saw print. A modern, or professional writer, would be utterly mad to do such a thing, as it means no money is coming in from the writing in the meantime. I'm not saying you must read the books, but they really are the best source for the answers you're seeking. There are also some books that might help, as well: Robert Foster's The Complete Guide to Middle Earth, The Tolkien Companion by J. E. A. Tyler, and A Tolkien Bestiary by David Day, all have very good, concise answers to many of these questions, and the Bestiary also has some very lovely artwork, to boot. They also tend to include citations from the books, so that you can refer to the novel and get more detail without having to read the entire novel for answers to specific questions.

[Nesacat]

Originally Posted by hypocriticHarkonnen

PS there's actually a debate in another site about this whole cutting-the-Ring-Finger-off business.....

And the site would be

[Xeon]

LOL.....thanks a lot, everyone!(especially JD).
Yes, I must admit : Tolkien's books are very full of details and each detail has it's own layer within layer of details; each layer is a story of it's own/ His works are simply wonderful and yes, I agree that in time to come, it's not very possible for any writer to be a parellel to him anytime soon.
I've never seen such rich works written by any author before.

However, I don't really like the plot of LOTR, mainly because I personally dislike those "quest" type of fantasy and having a hobbit as the main character kinda puts me off. That's why I take better to Narnia, as the main heroes are mainly those "heroic" and "kingly, noble" types.

Say, one last question : in Fellowship of the Ring(the movie), there's this part where Arwen rode a horse while carrying an injured Frodo and the 9 Nazguls(those hooded specters) chase them. Then, Arwen and Frodo reached a river and the Nazgul continued. When all seems lost, Arwen recited a spell and there's this large gush of water made up of seemingly alive horses(water horses/water bears?) charging madly at the 9 Nazguls.

My curious question is : is there a name for the spell or any description of it? It just looks so cool, though. On the books, did Tolkien describe anything about this spell?

Thanks all!
Xeon.

[hypocriticHarkonnen]

Originally Posted by Nesacat

And the site would be

i just used it for reference...

http://forums.theonering.com/viewtopic.php?t=58109

[pyan]

Originally Posted by Xeon

When all seems lost, Arwen recited a spell and there's this large gush of water made up of seemingly alive horses(water horses/water bears?) charging madly at the 9 Nazguls.

This is one of the problems in not having read the books, but relying on the film for the story. Tolkien doesn't have Arwen Evenstar rescue Frodo: the elf that aids the travellers to the Ford is Glorfindel, a powerful Elf-lord, and (relying on memory here,) I believe that the river is actually raised by Elrond himself. I would think that the change was made to "tighten" the storyline, and to show the valour of Elf-maidens: certainly I would be very surprised if Elrond would let his precious daughter out unescorted into such danger - there is no way she could have stood up to the Witch-king by herself.