Re: PJ's interpretation ofAragorn - am I alone ?

"RufusTFirefly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> "David Eppstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >  "A Tsar Is Born" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Fine, except if you are going to try to believe that Moria was NOT
>  designed
> > > as a mindless fun-house action-movie prop but as a long-lasting
>  civilization
> > > for creatures as disinclined to whimsy as dwarves, a free-standing
>  extremely
> > > awkard staircase over an abyss makes NO sense.
> 
> Given that all the stairs and archways shown in the film tend to reinforce
> the notion that the Dwarves must have been very agile in their chosen
> dwelling, it makes sense.
> 
> From a storytelling point of view it makes sense also.  You are about to
> have significant scene set on the Bridge of Khazad-dum (sp, sorry), in which
> you want to imply the risk of collapse, but nothing you have shown in
> traversing Moria implies any danger of collapse.  So create a sequence
> demonstrating that the Balrog's physical presence is bringing everything
> down, at that the heroes are at risk, and you get an exciting action
> sequence to boot.  Works for me.

With regard to the stairway, it might make sense defensively to
require invaders to come up a narrow staircase, exposed to missile
fire and dropped rocks without cover. It might also make sense to make
the staircase collapsible, so that the defenders could easily remove
it if needs be. Similar ideas would apply to the bridge.

However, it makes no sense to have the Balrog living underground for
over 1,000 years in a place where he causes random cave-ins wherever
he goes. Sooner or later a big chunk of something would have landed on
him. Not to mention the fact that he would have completely trashed the
place. As for the need to imply the danger of collapse prior to the
bridge, what need was there? The plot question is how the party is
going to make it out before the Balrog gets them. You give that point
away too soon if you show things collapsing before they get to the
bridge. And if the Balrog automatically makes fragile structures
collapse, then why did Gandalf need to hold the bridge in the first
place?