Saul Zaentz dies at 92

[fbnaulin]

Interesting information about the balrog. Is there any illustrator that despicted him in a purist way?

[doctheweasel]

Interesting information about the balrog. Is there any illustrator that despicted him in a purist way?

The problem is that there is no singular "purist" way (e.g. wings vs. no-wings).

[Stormcrow]

I can't find any pictures online that depict the balrog as Tolkien described it.

[Angelalex242]

Must not be a particularly inspiring view of it, then. The Balor=Balrog depiction is the one that seems to bring the crowds. And ultimately, it's the depiction that brings in the most money for Middle Earth Enterprises and/or Tolkien Estates and/or Peter Jackson that matters.

[Rich H]

Well we need something similar to the way Sauron was depicted in the latest 'Hobbit' film considering their somewhat shared heritage. So, lets go with this...

[poosticks7]

Rich that was very naughty!

[Stormcrow]

Must not be a particularly inspiring view of it, then.

Damn that Tolkien guy for getting it wrong!

The Balor=Balrog depiction is the one that seems to bring the crowds.

And just how did you determine that?

[Simaruk]

Maybe this balrog will do:
http://www.tolkienguide.com/modules/wiw ... wship+1998

[Rich H]

Maybe this balrog will do:
http://www.tolkienguide.com/modules/wiw ... wship+1998

Actually, that is pretty damn close to how I imagine the Balrog - great find, Simaruk.

I'd have loved to have seen that on screen but I do think it would have been scarier than the Balor-esque creature Jackson did - far more disturbing, especially if it moved on screen how Stormcrow described earlier in this thread; the lack of sound, or more subtle sounds, can be more discomforting in the hands of a clever filmmaker than more bombastic ones. Therefore with that in mind, Jackson simply isn't a subtle enough filmmaker to bring that to life, and even if he was (and they had gone with something along the line of the above image) I think the film would have received a higher classification that it did - which New Line would obviously want to avoid.

For what it's worth I did really like the Bridge of Khazad-dûm scene in FotR. The Balrog wasn't how I imagined but I did think it largely worked as a powerful scene and had some great imagery, composition, and cinematography. There were some elements that I didn't like (eg, the yawn inducing Aragorn/Frodo broken stair balancing act before it, Gandalf hanging onto the bridge then letting go, the annoying slow motion afterwards) but on the whole it was a strong scene and set up the second half of the film pretty well.

[James Harrison]

And ultimately, it's the depiction that brings in the most money for Middle Earth Enterprises and/or Tolkien Estates and/or Peter Jackson that matters.

That is a poor point of view. Sadly if a Balrog is depicted from the films Tolkien Estates gets 0% or any revinue from it... they got 0% of film revenue - they (and thus Tolkiens family) only get money on things derived from the books, not the films...

On of the reason's I'm not a lover of Tolkien Enterprises; now I understand it they are just about money. Tolkien Estates is about Tolkiens work, preserving it and letting it flourish as intended...

Tolkien wrote his books to enrich the literately world; because it was objectively good (and enjoyable no doubt)... Tolkien enterprises exists to enrich themselves. I should not judge Saul, but I do not love his company in the slightest.