Really? Why is that even a debate? It’s been a little while since I’ve read the books, but I seem to remember Durin’s Bane as being described as having the shape of a man, thus no wings.
Other Balrogs are perhaps less clearly described. Unless there’s some line that explicitly describes a balrog with wings, I’d assume they don’t have them, and even then I’d assume it applies to only the particular balrog in question.
A better Balrog related debate would be determining the exact number of them and whether or not any survived in Middle-Earth into the fourth age. It’s possible there are two or more still kicking around.
Okay. First off, why would a creature that lives exclusively under a mountain have wings? Second, I’m now invested in this controversy I and want to know more.
They didn’t start under the mountain. They are, effectively, the same creatures as the wizards but corrupted. What makes the scene epic is that Gandalf was facing his match.
10 minute video? Shit that’s barely scratching the surface. There are dissertations out there arguing both sides. I don’t think anyone has settled the matter.
What dissertations? Setting aside interpretation, were there factual errors in that video? I’ve read the books. I’ve now seen the video. The controversy seems to center mostly on a failure of reading comprehension and an ignorance of both literary devices and various uses of the word fly (which is particularly ironic given a certain exclamation made especially popular by the movies).
Now for my controversial take: This “controversy” is pretty emblematic of the many ways the films distorted and mutilated Tolkien’s stories and characters.
Do Balrogs have wings according to JRR Tolkein?
Really? Why is that even a debate? It’s been a little while since I’ve read the books, but I seem to remember Durin’s Bane as being described as having the shape of a man, thus no wings.
Other Balrogs are perhaps less clearly described. Unless there’s some line that explicitly describes a balrog with wings, I’d assume they don’t have them, and even then I’d assume it applies to only the particular balrog in question.
A better Balrog related debate would be determining the exact number of them and whether or not any survived in Middle-Earth into the fourth age. It’s possible there are two or more still kicking around.
Okay. First off, why would a creature that lives exclusively under a mountain have wings? Second, I’m now invested in this controversy I and want to know more.
They didn’t start under the mountain. They are, effectively, the same creatures as the wizards but corrupted. What makes the scene epic is that Gandalf was facing his match.
Oh, my naive friend. This is a rabbit hole that doesn’t end, one might call it a balroghole.
Now I’m even more invested. And I’ve absolutely taken sides.
https://youtu.be/eXKnO8DO9tU
I consider this matter settled.
10 minute video? Shit that’s barely scratching the surface. There are dissertations out there arguing both sides. I don’t think anyone has settled the matter.
What dissertations? Setting aside interpretation, were there factual errors in that video? I’ve read the books. I’ve now seen the video. The controversy seems to center mostly on a failure of reading comprehension and an ignorance of both literary devices and various uses of the word fly (which is particularly ironic given a certain exclamation made especially popular by the movies).
Now for my controversial take: This “controversy” is pretty emblematic of the many ways the films distorted and mutilated Tolkien’s stories and characters.