Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: The eagles aren't a plot hole in LotR.
  • Subject: The eagles aren't a plot hole in LotR.
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: The eagles aren't a plot hole in LotR.

And so the war of Gods and Demons shall begin. Tomorrow will end with your heart in my hand!

Love ya! =3

Finally!! Thank you! Somebody gets it!

  • 12.23.2012 3:00 PM PDT

"It is the cruelest fate, to have written words that meant well and see them made wicked and unwise. What was meant to encourage life, used instead to justify taking it."


Posted by: Aang the Avatar

Posted by: DngerlyAwkwrd


So the Great Eagles are intelligent, sentient beings who have business of their own to attend to. How is this a dumb explanation in Tolkien's context?


What business could they possibly have that's more important than the entire fate of Middle Earth?

True, this is left pretty vague and makes the Eagles seem a bit selfish. But there are more explanations to why they wouldn't help. Since Mordor was so heavily fortified they couldn't hope to pass through unscathed, if alive at all.

  • 12.23.2012 3:01 PM PDT

Make a thread saying you will counter any argument against armor lock...

Then respond with Adapt.

"War, the original crack"
-Albert Einstein

They're a plot hole in the NFL.

  • 12.23.2012 3:01 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: DngerlyAwkwrd

Posted by: Aang the Avatar

Posted by: DngerlyAwkwrd


So the Great Eagles are intelligent, sentient beings who have business of their own to attend to. How is this a dumb explanation in Tolkien's context?


What business could they possibly have that's more important than the entire fate of Middle Earth?

True, this is left pretty vague and makes the Eagles seem a bit selfish. But there are more explanations to why they wouldn't help. Since Mordor was so heavily fortified they couldn't hope to pass through unscathed, if alive at all.


Yup, that's what I said in my original post. I choose to believe that the Eagle's didn't fly them there because there's no chance for any of their survival.

Not because they were "Proud creatures that were too busy doing other things".

  • 12.23.2012 3:02 PM PDT

Posted by: Aang the Avatar
Posted by: DngerlyAwkwrd
So the Great Eagles are intelligent, sentient beings who have business of their own to attend to. How is this a dumb explanation in Tolkien's context?


What business could they possibly have that's more important than the entire fate of Middle Earth?
let's just say that before LOTR, gondor wasn't called "the white city."

  • 12.23.2012 3:03 PM PDT

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.

Posted by: Aang the Avatar
Posted by: DngerlyAwkwrd
Posted by: Aang the Avatar
Yup, that's what I always believed too.

The "Eagles are intelligent beings who make their own decisions" is the crappiest explanation I've ever heard.

Even though it's the explanation Tolkien himself gave.

And it is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard.

"Why did the lions in Lion King establish a monarchy?"
"Because they're thinking and articulate creatures in the Disneyverse and can establish their own government."
"That is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard."

"How come in Harry Potter the giant willow tree attacks people?"
"Because it exists in a magical world where some trees can become autonomous."
"That is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard."

"What is the deal with the Muppets being recognized as if they were alive?"
"Because in the Muppet world humans and puppets live alongside one another like it's no big thing."
"That is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard."

  • 12.23.2012 3:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: dahuterschuter
Posted by: Aang the Avatar
Posted by: DngerlyAwkwrd
Posted by: Aang the Avatar
Yup, that's what I always believed too.

The "Eagles are intelligent beings who make their own decisions" is the crappiest explanation I've ever heard.

Even though it's the explanation Tolkien himself gave.

And it is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard.

"Why did the lions in Lion King establish a monarchy?"
"Because they're thinking and articulate creatures in the Disneyverse and can establish their own government."
"That is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard."

"How come in Harry Potter the giant willow tree attacks people?"
"Because it exists in a magical world where some trees can become autonomous."
"That is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard."

"What is the deal with the Muppets being recognized as if they were alive?"
"Because in the Muppet world humans and puppets live alongside one another like it's no big thing."
"That is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard."


None of those situations could be interpreted as plot holes. By the way if I wasn't clear, I am speaking of the movies right now. I feel Peter Jackson didn't really help explain why the Eagles didn't fly them at all, especially in the Hobbit. Why didn't the Eagles fly them all to the mountain?

  • 12.23.2012 3:06 PM PDT

He threw down a glove you made the mistake
Of picking it up now you're gone
The choosing of guns or fighting with swords
The choice of weapons is done
He'll tear you apart as soon as you start
You know you don't have a chance.


Posted by: mastesargent

Posted by: ANKLE5
Umm...no. They were major plot holes. Gandalf could've easily cloaked their entry into Mordor.
Against an Eye that sees through basically everything? No.

You just said a bigger plot hole.

  • 12.23.2012 3:11 PM PDT

"It is the cruelest fate, to have written words that meant well and see them made wicked and unwise. What was meant to encourage life, used instead to justify taking it."


Posted by: theslatcher

Posted by: mastesargent

Posted by: ANKLE5
Umm...no. They were major plot holes. Gandalf could've easily cloaked their entry into Mordor.
Against an Eye that sees through basically everything? No.

You just said a bigger plot hole.

If you're implying "If Sauron can see everything, why can't he see where the Ring is?", Gollum in the books stated "He sees everything, but not everything at once,". Even Sauron has limited power.

  • 12.23.2012 3:14 PM PDT

Tej~


Posted by: RosesBiggestFan
Posted by: mastesargent

Posted by: petarded2
ok, then why not ride the eagles like, half-way? or even like 90% of the way? boromir wouldn't have died, then.
Because the Fellowship was meant to travel secretly. Riding giant eagles across the continent isn't what I'd call secret.

They're only prolonging their mission to save the world by walking. But it's ok because they're being secret.
The entire plan relies on them being secret and sauron not knowing what's happening, you start flying around on eagles and you can say goodbye to saving the world.

  • 12.23.2012 3:18 PM PDT

Posted by: DngerlyAwkwrd
Posted by: theslatcher
Posted by: mastesargent
Posted by: ANKLE5
Umm...no. They were major plot holes. Gandalf could've easily cloaked their entry into Mordor.
Against an Eye that sees through basically everything? No.

You just said a bigger plot hole.

If you're implying "If Sauron can see everything, why can't he see where the Ring is?", Gollum in the books stated "He sees everything, but not everything at once,". Even Sauron has limited power.

I'd just like to add that I've always wondered why Sauron looks straight at Frodo in Mordor but loses interest a few seconds later and turns out to have the attention span of a doormat. When he saw Frodo.

  • 12.23.2012 3:22 PM PDT

Tej~


Posted by: Chupanebre627
I'd just like to add that I've always wondered why Sauron looks straight at Frodo in Mordor but loses interest a few seconds later and turns out to have the attention span of a doormat. When he saw Frodo.
What's more important, a hobbit or a giant army at your gates?

  • 12.23.2012 3:23 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

In my opinion, I don't care who laughs last or first. As long as I laugh in the process, everything is good.

With using the Eagles, there'd be no story at all. Seems reason enough not to use them. I don't see why people care so much.

  • 12.23.2012 3:27 PM PDT


Posted by: SunGlassed Skunk

Posted by: Chupanebre627
I'd just like to add that I've always wondered why Sauron looks straight at Frodo in Mordor but loses interest a few seconds later and turns out to have the attention span of a doormat. When he saw Frodo.
What's more important, a hobbit or a giant army at your gates?

The ring?

  • 12.23.2012 3:33 PM PDT

"It is the cruelest fate, to have written words that meant well and see them made wicked and unwise. What was meant to encourage life, used instead to justify taking it."


Posted by: Chupanebre627

Posted by: SunGlassed Skunk

Posted by: Chupanebre627
I'd just like to add that I've always wondered why Sauron looks straight at Frodo in Mordor but loses interest a few seconds later and turns out to have the attention span of a doormat. When he saw Frodo.
What's more important, a hobbit or a giant army at your gates?

The ring?

The scene wasn't in the book. But it's pretty pointless in the movie, making Sauron look like a fool.

  • 12.23.2012 3:34 PM PDT


Posted by: DngerlyAwkwrd

Posted by: Chupanebre627

Posted by: SunGlassed Skunk

Posted by: Chupanebre627
I'd just like to add that I've always wondered why Sauron looks straight at Frodo in Mordor but loses interest a few seconds later and turns out to have the attention span of a doormat. When he saw Frodo.
What's more important, a hobbit or a giant army at your gates?

The ring?

The scene wasn't in the book. But it's pretty pointless in the movie, making Sauron look like a fool.

Oh, well that sucks, I was hoping a reference in the book would have my answer.

  • 12.23.2012 3:36 PM PDT

"It is the cruelest fate, to have written words that meant well and see them made wicked and unwise. What was meant to encourage life, used instead to justify taking it."


Posted by: Chupanebre627

Posted by: DngerlyAwkwrd

Posted by: Chupanebre627

Posted by: SunGlassed Skunk

Posted by: Chupanebre627
I'd just like to add that I've always wondered why Sauron looks straight at Frodo in Mordor but loses interest a few seconds later and turns out to have the attention span of a doormat. When he saw Frodo.
What's more important, a hobbit or a giant army at your gates?

The ring?

The scene wasn't in the book. But it's pretty pointless in the movie, making Sauron look like a fool.

Oh, well that sucks, I was hoping a reference in the book would have my answer.

I guess it was just thrown in to add a bit of suspense while Aragorn and his army negotiate with Sauron's emissary, and to physically show Sauron's gaze turning. This bugged me a bit though, since the book never described Sauron's eye as a magic spotlight.

  • 12.23.2012 3:39 PM PDT


Posted by: DeclinedA1
I think the Nazgul would have seen the eagles and killed them.

  • 12.23.2012 3:40 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Time was your ally human. But now it has abandoned you. The Forerunners....have returned. And this tomb... is now yours". - The Didact


Posted by: Aang the Avatar

Posted by: dahuterschuter
Posted by: Aang the Avatar
Posted by: DngerlyAwkwrd
Posted by: Aang the Avatar
Yup, that's what I always believed too.

The "Eagles are intelligent beings who make their own decisions" is the crappiest explanation I've ever heard.

Even though it's the explanation Tolkien himself gave.

And it is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard.

"Why did the lions in Lion King establish a monarchy?"
"Because they're thinking and articulate creatures in the Disneyverse and can establish their own government."
"That is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard."

"How come in Harry Potter the giant willow tree attacks people?"
"Because it exists in a magical world where some trees can become autonomous."
"That is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard."

"What is the deal with the Muppets being recognized as if they were alive?"
"Because in the Muppet world humans and puppets live alongside one another like it's no big thing."
"That is by far the dumbest explanation I've ever heard."


None of those situations could be interpreted as plot holes. By the way if I wasn't clear, I am speaking of the movies right now. I feel Peter Jackson didn't really help explain why the Eagles didn't fly them at all, especially in the Hobbit. Why didn't the Eagles fly them all to the mountain?


Because Smaug would turn the poor birds into roasted chicken.

  • 12.23.2012 3:54 PM PDT

Second acct: RC Zerg Rushes

Alright, here we go again. Everyone listen the hell up.

Eagles are the servants of Manwe, one of the Valar. The Valar no longer interfere in the affairs of Middle Earth, because the last time they did it, stuff went breasts up and lots of bad things happened. Thus, the Valar tasked Gandalf, Saurman and the other three Istari, whom are Maiar (a tier below the Valar on the scale of magical powers) to basically "regulate" Middle Earth at their discretion. Sauron is also a Maiar, one of the most powerful, which is why he has the magical ability to go up against the other powerful magical beings of Middle Earth.

So, the Eagles are the personal servants of Manwe and do stuff at his discretion. The rest of the time, they just fly around and do Eagle stuff because they can. They only show up after a request from Gandalf to Manwe, requests which Gandalf only sends when Manwe's personal intervention is necessary. That's what the butterfly/moth thingy in the movies symbolizes.

Also, the Eagles just flying into Mordor doesn't work. Mordor is the realm of Sauron, the most powerful of the Maiar. He controls the Nazgul who, with their flying mounts, are perfectly capable of intercepting and killing the Eagles.

The entire reason that the Fellowship was so small is that it was necessary to avoid detection on the way to Mount Doom. Sauron possessed the military might to stop any overt attempt to bear the Ring to Mount Doom, so stealth was the only way.

FLYING EAGLES ARE NOT STEALTHY. THEY ARE ALSO VERY SUSCEPTIBLE TO FLYING NAZGUL AND ORCS WITH ARROWS.

  • 12.23.2012 3:57 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2