|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aranarth
The Shire
Dec 21 2014, 11:33pm
Post #1 of 25
(1057 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Mountain worms?
|
Can't Post
|
|
When I first saw the Mountain worms mentioned in BOTFA I nearly fell out of my chair. I went home and looked it up in the Hobbit, and nothing. With this new creature, it creates so many tactical problems. For example: why did Azog not use them to tunnel inside the Lonely Mountain, why didn't they fight the dwarves and reek havoc.........
|
|
|
Eruonen
Half-elven
Dec 21 2014, 11:36pm
Post #2 of 25
(648 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes, it was an unnecessary creature....a quibble point for me in
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
an otherwise very enjoyable film. I guess I have gotten somewhat used to PJs eccentricities in these films. Not that I like them but I expect them.
|
|
|
sharku
Rivendell
Dec 21 2014, 11:38pm
Post #3 of 25
(590 views)
Shortcut
|
1) why did Azog not use them to tunnel inside the Lonely Mountain,
2) why didn't they fight the dwarves and reek havoc.........
Same reasons the eagles didn't just drop the Ring in Mt Doom, I guess. Or the Bond villian always talks rather than shoots.
But more specifically:
1) Dwarves had fortified the foundations of the mountain with superhardened worm-proof granite. Besides, there was a massive magma vault preventing the worms from tunneling within 10 miles of the place.
2) Maybe the worms had just bathed and didn't reek much at all?
(This post was edited by sharku on Dec 21 2014, 11:38pm)
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Dec 21 2014, 11:38pm
Post #4 of 25
(651 views)
Shortcut
|
|
They are an interpretation of the were worms
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Mentioned by Bilbo in the book.
Presumably they tunnel through earth rather than solid rock.
|
|
|
Xanaseb
Tol Eressea
Dec 21 2014, 11:40pm
Post #5 of 25
(539 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I immediately thought of Dune (Frank Herbert) and that PJ had ripped it off - and not justifiably either IMO :( //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"So your own praise will forever keep your name green,
Both here on Earth and on the stage of the stars" - J.G.Kittel, writing about the composer Jan Dismas Zelenka (1740)
Zelenka music sample link
__________________________________________
Join us over at Barliman's chat all day, any day!
__________________________________________
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Dec 21 2014, 11:43pm
Post #6 of 25
(554 views)
Shortcut
|
They made sense to me – I assumed from the look of the Dwarves' fortifications that they were built of (and on) hard stone, which would have been impossible for the worms to have drilled through. I saw them as a device for creating passages through which the goblins could emerge (not as any kind of 'fighting machine').
I believe worm-like creatures are mentioned in Tolkien's work, as someone pointed out the other day.
|
|
|
AshNazg
Gondor
Dec 21 2014, 11:50pm
Post #8 of 25
(582 views)
Shortcut
|
I think the idea was that the orcs from Gundabad turn up by surprise. You can't really be caught by surprise by a gigantic army. Dain, at least, would have seen them coming.
In the book they communicate through their underground tunnels and then follow Dain to the mountain. I think the worms were there to A) hide the orcs, so that the others didn't seem unexplainably oblivious to the army, And B) to shelter the goblins and trolls from the sun.
But, to be honest there are so many massive plot holes in this series that by the time the worms popped up I just accepted it. Thinking about anything in these films just leads to unresolvable questions. So it's just one more thing IMO. Not really a problem at this point. Switch your brain off and enjoy the pretty colours
|
|
|
AshNazg
Gondor
Dec 21 2014, 11:59pm
Post #9 of 25
(532 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Also, even if Azog had dug under Erebor...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
He'd still have to deal with the armies afterwards, he wanted to wipe out the line of Durin afterall. So what would tunneling into Erebor really achieve?
|
|
|
AshNazg
Gondor
Dec 22 2014, 12:02am
Post #10 of 25
(505 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Worm often means dragon in M-E, but hey ho //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Dec 22 2014, 12:04am
Post #11 of 25
(524 views)
Shortcut
|
Sorry... IN TRUTH? Frank Herbert read the Hobbit
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
in about 1956...He was inspired by THAT Phrase
"Wereworms in the Desert in the Far East..."
...just like "Countless" other writer's since
JRRT's
Wealth of Fantasy Ideas in his Books...
~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
INcluding that WOMAN
who is the Wealthy-iest person in England
{Who Bomby refusezzz to name...in print}
Bomby already wrote about this TOPIC..here...
But THAT POST..iz already
buried HERE..on about pg. 6
of these Forums.
YOU need to Believe Bomby since he has been reading MOST all Fantasy Novels
since the early 1960's, {70's,80's 90s} etc..
IF you can't TRUST bomby
WHO can you Trust?
www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
|
|
|
Eruonen
Half-elven
Dec 22 2014, 1:26am
Post #13 of 25
(448 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Based on word origin, which JRRT was certainy aware of as a linguist
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"The word for dragon in Germanic mythology and its descendants is worm (Old English: wyrm, Old High German: wurm, Old Norse: ormr), meaning snake or serpent. In Old English, wyrm means "serpent", and draca means "dragon". Finnish lohikäärme directly translated means "salmon-snake", but the word lohi- was originally louhi- meaning crags or rocks, a "mountain snake".[citation needed] The prefix lohi- in lohikäärme is also thought to derive from the ancient Norse word lógi, meaning "fire", as in Finnish mythology there are also references to "tulikäärme" meaning fire-snake, or fire-serpent."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_dragon
So a "wer (man) worm" would be a manlike creature that can shapeshift into a dragon or serpent. Those were awfully large shapeshifting "worms". Allowing for Beorn to be larger as a bear than as a man, the size is still extreme.
(This post was edited by Eruonen on Dec 22 2014, 1:27am)
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Dec 22 2014, 1:52am
Post #14 of 25
(420 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Based on word origin, Gandalf was a dwarf or an elf.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Tolkien played about with a range of etymologies and linguistic games - not always as one might expect.
We can't read forward from an etymology to a meaning, with the sort of certainty which rules out any other interpretation.
|
|
|
Eruonen
Half-elven
Dec 22 2014, 2:03am
Post #15 of 25
(398 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I do think there is a difference between a personal name and
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
a specific creature name. Gandalf was just one name of many that he used...Mithrandir, Olorin, Tharkun etc. Whereas wereworm is basically a descriptive term. However, the creature was never detailed by JRRT.
|
|
|
DigificWriter
Lorien
Dec 22 2014, 2:09am
Post #16 of 25
(435 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Were-Worms are this Trilogy's version of the Great Beasts...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
... where Jackson and Co. took a throwaway reference out of the books and used it to fuel their creativity.
I personally see no problem with this.
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Dec 22 2014, 2:37am
Post #17 of 25
(379 views)
Shortcut
|
If we had no descriptions and worked straightforwardly from etymologies then we would imagine Orcs as demons, rather than goblins, and Ents as giants, rather than walking tree(herd)s. It's not precise enough to imagine resultant creature with enough certainty to say that is the only possible interpretation.
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Dec 22 2014, 3:14am
Post #18 of 25
(377 views)
Shortcut
|
Well, done there once more, Bomby!
It's that woman again…
|
|
|
Eruonen
Half-elven
Dec 22 2014, 4:17am
Post #19 of 25
(336 views)
Shortcut
|
|
True, however, orcs look like demons and Ents look like giants.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Both are descriptive names.
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Dec 22 2014, 7:58am
Post #20 of 25
(280 views)
Shortcut
|
Thang you...OH! "Glorious ONE"!..//
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
|
|
|
adt100
Rohan
Dec 22 2014, 3:56pm
Post #21 of 25
(231 views)
Shortcut
|
|
TBF, the book is filled with eccentricities and 'plotholes' in equal measure too!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Dec 22 2014, 4:02pm
Post #22 of 25
(209 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm not suggesting that the creatures are divorced entirely from their etymologies, but neither are the were-worms in the film.
My point is you can't guess the creature from the etymology with any degree of certainty. If I asked you, on the basis if etymology alone, to draw an Orc, you wouldn't draw a goblin but a demon instead. If I asked you to draw an Ent, you would produce a picture of a giant, not of a walking tree. And this is in instances where Tolkien specified the etymology he was thinking of!
It doesn't work as a forward process. We can't look at the etymology and say that therefore, without any doubt, the creature must look like X, thus it doesn't seem to me to make sense to do that in the case of the worms either.
|
|
|
Aranarth
The Shire
Dec 22 2014, 4:12pm
Post #23 of 25
(219 views)
Shortcut
|
Quite true Eruonen, the movie was great. The wereworms were just a curiosity of mine.
|
|
|
Aranarth
The Shire
Dec 22 2014, 4:14pm
Post #24 of 25
(205 views)
Shortcut
|
Oh I just found it, thanks. That makes sense.
|
|
|
hobbitylass
Bree
Dec 22 2014, 5:46pm
Post #25 of 25
(213 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I had the same reaction to them
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
My brain kindof seized up and went "Did I really just see that?"
though instead of "Dune" my first thought was "Tremors" if anyone knows of that movie.
I was really glad they only popped out the one time and then were never seen again.
And I was also pleased to find out that they can be traced back to the book and are not purely a PJ thing - though they do have a distinct PJ look about them.
|
|
|
|
|
. 