Page 2 of 2

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 13:56
by Freakzilla
Redstar wrote:I've read it, and it is easier. But I certainly don't consider it as worthy a read.


No but it piqued my interest enough to make it through LotR.

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 14:06
by Redstar
Freakzilla wrote:
Redstar wrote:I've read it, and it is easier. But I certainly don't consider it as worthy a read.


No but it piqued my interest enough to make it through LotR.

To be perfectly honest I hated The Hobbit with a passion. I thought it was horribly written and a logic fail.

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 14:44
by Freakzilla
Redstar wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
Redstar wrote:I've read it, and it is easier. But I certainly don't consider it as worthy a read.


No but it piqued my interest enough to make it through LotR.

To be perfectly honest I hated The Hobbit with a passion. I thought it was horribly written and a logic fail.


More than: Why didn't the eagles just fly Frodo over Mount Doom so he could just drop the ring in?

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 14:46
by Redstar
Nice.

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 14:56
by GamePlayer
I won't apologize for the first 150 pages of Fellowship of the Ring. Tolkien is lucky the rest of the trilogy is so damned good. I'd recommend giving it an honest try. If people here can read multiple books by a hack like KJA, they can easily soldier through LotR's rough start :)

Regarding recommendations, my point is not to get people into the genres. I believe that next to impossible. My desire is for those I know to read the best of the genres in the desperate hope that they will do so and can at the very least comment upon them intelligently. It's hard enough as is to persuade people to read. I'd rather they read one great book rather a cross-over novel, knowing full well that they won't read any more regardless of the outcome.

Trust me, I've long ago abandoned hope people would broaden their horizons. If one book is the best I can expect, than I choose to recommend one of my "holy three" :)

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 14:57
by GamePlayer
Freakzilla wrote:More than: Why didn't the eagles just fly Frodo over Mount Doom so he could just drop the ring in?


The obvious reason: the Nazgul and their winged beasts.

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 14:57
by TheDukester
Freakzilla wrote:More than: Why didn't the eagles just fly Frodo over Mount Doom so he could just drop the ring in?

Lord of the Rings: The Short Version:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yqVD0swvWU

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 15:12
by Redstar
TheDukester wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:More than: Why didn't the eagles just fly Frodo over Mount Doom so he could just drop the ring in?

Lord of the Rings: The Short Version:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yqVD0swvWU

Dune: The Short Version:

RM Mohiam stabs Paul after the Gom Jabbar. Book ends.

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 15:26
by A Thing of Eternity
Redstar wrote:
GamePlayer wrote:But I've pretty much stuck to my bare minimum three, which I recommend to almost everyone with whom I have a rapport of some kind:

If you read only one sci-fi book, it should be Dune.
If you read only one fantasy book, it should be Lord of the Rings.
If you read only one comic book, it should be Watchmen.

LotR is pretty unreadable, in my opinion. I waded through the first 200 pages before they even got to the Council of Elrond... I'm still meaning to pick up from there. :?

I've read the other two, and glad I have. Watchmen is the only graphic novel I've read, and though I have have read a few comic books, they're really not my thing. And Dune is a great science-fiction book, but I don't think I'd personally recommend it as the sole representation of the genre.


The beginning is slow, but trust me, LoTR is one of the best stories ever written in any genre. Once you make it into The Two Towers you'll be hooked for life.

GamePlayer wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:More than: Why didn't the eagles just fly Frodo over Mount Doom so he could just drop the ring in?


The obvious reason: the Nazgul and their winged beasts.


No shit. I don't think that would have went well.

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 16:30
by SadisticCynic
But no-one knows about the winged beasts until they are seen (or felt) just above Rauros when Legolas shoots one down in the dark (one up for Elven eyesight). At first the Nazgul are expected to take steeds. However I imagine the malice of Sauron would pretty much annihilate the will of anyone who openly challenged him eye to eye.

Love LOTR! :D

Posted: 09 Apr 2009 21:39
by GamePlayer
The fell beasts as they've become named were described as creatures from older eras. So it's safe to say they've been around for a while, even if the Nazgul didn't mount them in the early part of the Fellowship. And in answer to the next obvious question, the fell beasts likely weren't rode because of the attention they draw, while the black riders astride horses can be much less conspicuous traveling in the lands of men.

Posted: 10 Apr 2009 10:51
by SadisticCynic
I know they've been around for awhile but isn't it said that they became big enough to be ridden because they'd been raised by Sauron himself, presumably where none of the 'good guys' would have been?

However I suppose there is perhaps room for them in the Second Age and the War of the Last Alliance. The Nazgul would have been present then since Sauron had the Nine and at least six of the Seven - the Dwarves hold that the greatest of the Seven was given to Durin by Celebrimbor or one of the Elves of Eregion - and so perhaps they were used also in that war(with the fell beasts)... [Goes into yet another LOTR daydream] :D

Re:

Posted: 11 Apr 2009 07:53
by Freakzilla
TheDukester wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:More than: Why didn't the eagles just fly Frodo over Mount Doom so he could just drop the ring in?

Lord of the Rings: The Short Version:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yqVD0swvWU



Awesome! :lol: