Ferocious Veldt Roarer Posted November 6, 2017 Share Posted November 6, 2017 6 hours ago, Calibandar said: Lol, exactly what I thought when I read the negativity here. I also don't see why the LoTR tv show adaptation has to be criticized because it "should be another series". They are probably looking for something to approach the success of the GoT franchise and thus you go to Tolkien. It's not a bad idea. The TV show is going to look and feel differently, have way more time, who knows, it might be good, and the Jackson films will always be there anyway. The six epic words that make everyone's heart beat 200 a minute, their palms sweat, their eyes water: "who knows, it might be good". Serious mode on, this is the major problem: the idea of an another adaptation of LOTR doesn't seem more exciting than that. Not for me, and, looks like, not for the rest of the naysayers here. It might be good, true, but won't be significantly (if at all) better than Jackson's LOTR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveSumm Posted November 6, 2017 Share Posted November 6, 2017 Given there's been no official announcement, is it not possible this will be set in Middle Earth but not the actual story of tLotR? I don't know how the rights work, but maybe even set in the same universe as the films? A kind of late shared universe? If it's just the same story again, I'll have to echo everyone else here, this is just pointless. Fellowship is the most faithful of the films, so what will the first season do differently? Depict Hobbiton more accurately? Cast everyone more effectively? Even if they nailed most of the cast, what if, say, Pippin isn't as good? He'll just be 'that guy who isn't as good as film Pippin'. And eeeeeeevery aspect will be judged in the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williamjm Posted November 6, 2017 Share Posted November 6, 2017 16 hours ago, polishgenius said: You could never adapt Malazan straight up, season-per-book style, but increasingly I think that with balls and a little bit of luck you could set up a massive extended universe based on the series. Intro a TV show as a semi-prequel following the Bridgeburners up to the Fall of Pale, the rest of GotM could be adapted fairly standard, second series style, and after that if it's successful you're golden to start spinning off from there. While I can see a Bridgeburners TV series potentially working, I think the obvious beginning for an adaptation would to do the Chain of Dogs - it's self-contained, doesn't require any previous knowledge, it's quite episodic so well-suited for a TV show and it's probably the best thing Erikson ever wrote. 55 minutes ago, DaveSumm said: Given there's been no official announcement, is it not possible this will be set in Middle Earth but not the actual story of tLotR? I don't know how the rights work, but maybe even set in the same universe as the films? A kind of late shared universe? As I understand it they are forbidden from using any material from anything Tolkien wrote that isn't LOTR or The Hobbit, because Christopher Tolkien still controls those rights. I think they could however just make up whatever they wanted as long as it wasn't similar to the existing material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted November 6, 2017 Share Posted November 6, 2017 9 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Do you mean Christopher? Well yes, unless they froze JRRT's head or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted November 6, 2017 Share Posted November 6, 2017 Reminds me, there was an article waaaaaay back when TFotR first came out detailing how if the Council of Elrrond followed the book exactly it would be its own 3 hour movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted November 6, 2017 Share Posted November 6, 2017 21 minutes ago, williamjm said: While I can see a Bridgeburners TV series potentially working, I think the obvious beginning for an adaptation would to do the Chain of Dogs - it's self-contained, doesn't require any previous knowledge, it's quite episodic so well-suited for a TV show and it's probably the best thing Erikson ever wrote. There were actually plans for this to happen at one stage, but they fell apart. Supposedly because Erikson decided he didn't want Malazan being adapted only in part, although I strongly suspect that it was never as far along to being funded as might have been wished. Shame, because a Band of Brothers style Chain of Dogs miniseries would be amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted November 6, 2017 Share Posted November 6, 2017 1 hour ago, Darth Richard II said: Well yes, unless they froze JRRT's head or something. I've never seen Christopher Tolkien referred to as "Tolkien" before. I always assume it is JRR when people say "Tolkien". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corvinus85 Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Darth Richard II said: Reminds me, there was an article waaaaaay back when TFotR first came out detailing how if the Council of Elrrond followed the book exactly it would be its own 3 hour movie. That's an exaggeration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 29 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I've never seen Christopher Tolkien referred to as "Tolkien" before. I always assume it is JRR when people say "Tolkien". Me either, but surely context made it clear. Both the fact that Tolkien is dead and that Tolkien is on record being open to the idea of movies and understanding that they need to make changes to books. Heck, JRR once suggested cutting Helm's Deep from an adaptation. Take that, book purists! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 2 hours ago, williamjm said: While I can see a Bridgeburners TV series potentially working, I think the obvious beginning for an adaptation would to do the Chain of Dogs - it's self-contained, doesn't require any previous knowledge, it's quite episodic so well-suited for a TV show and it's probably the best thing Erikson ever wrote. As I understand it they are forbidden from using any material from anything Tolkien wrote that isn't LOTR or The Hobbit, because Christopher Tolkien still controls those rights. I think they could however just make up whatever they wanted as long as it wasn't similar to the existing material. I wonder how that works in terms of the appendixes? (or whatever the plural is if that is grammatically incorrect). Does that come bundled into the rights of LOTR? I guess if they were not actually doing the LOTR story, they could spin something about the Second Age with a focus on the forging of the Rings of Power and The Last Alliance. I suppose that kind of falls within the scope of the novels right? Or we could end up with some stretched out story focusing on Dale, Mirkwood, Lothlorien and the battle of Dol Guldur (I.e. the Northern War of the Ring). Or Balin’s Moria expedition. I dont really want any of these things because I know already I would only complain about them but if there must be an adaptation I would rather they tried something “new” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, polishgenius said: Me either, but surely context made it clear. Both the fact that Tolkien is dead and that Tolkien is on record being open to the idea of movies and understanding that they need to make changes to books. Heck, JRR once suggested cutting Helm's Deep from an adaptation. Take that, book purists! I bet he never suggested sending Haldir and the Elves of Lothlorien to Helms Deep though, since they were tied up in their own important stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Bass Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 This adaptation sounds really interesting to me. If it actually gets picked-up to do, the showrunners are going to know that it will be compared heavily to the film trilogy, and it will be fascinating to see how they try and distinguish it. As Anti-Targ said up-thread, they could probably flesh out all of the loose ends and "happening at the same time as the main narrative" stuff to bulk up several seasons of it. The main narrative from LOTR would mostly be a way of framing everything going on (maybe only dedicate 2-3 episodes per season out of an 8-10 episode season to it - beginning and ending the season with main narrative episodes). . . . Of course, that would also be astronomically expensive even for a TV series with a $100-150 million/season budget, unless they heavily restricted the episode count per season. If it were up to me, they'd do an Aragorn prequel series. There's lot of stories there, lots of potentials for cameos and new locations, he travels everywhere (including the far east, meaning you could have the Blue Wizards show up on screen), and it wouldn't have to be insanely costly for all of it. 17 minutes ago, polishgenius said: Heck, JRR once suggested cutting Helm's Deep from an adaptation. Take that, book purists! If you didn't care about Merry Brandybuck, you might even be able to cut almost the entire Rohan storyline out. Just have them answer the call of Gondor for aid, and show up at Isengard after the Ents fight their way through it to siege. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 56 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I've never seen Christopher Tolkien referred to as "Tolkien" before. I always assume it is JRR when people say "Tolkien". Well it was late and I was on my phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fionwe1987 Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 Hmm... one thing a TV show will emphasize is the lack of good female characters in LotR, especially in Fellowship. you have Galadriel, and maybe Arwen, and that is it. I sincerely hope we don't get another elf-dwarf love-triangle to compensate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Darth Richard II said: Well it was late and I was on my phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myshkin Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 54 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said: Hmm... one thing a TV show will emphasize is the lack of good female characters in LotR, especially in Fellowship. you have Galadriel, and maybe Arwen, and that is it. I sincerely hope we don't get another elf-dwarf love-triangle to compensate. Arwen’s a good female character? I remember her being a complete throwaway character whose only purpose was to give Aragorn a bit of backstory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loge Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 5 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said: I wonder how that works in terms of the appendixes? (or whatever the plural is if that is grammatically incorrect). Does that come bundled into the rights of LOTR? That's what they used for the Hobbit movies. My understanding is that they have no rights to the setting as such, just the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings books. So making up stuff and just use Middle Earth as a setting isn't an option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 6 hours ago, fionwe1987 said: Hmm... one thing a TV show will emphasize is the lack of good female characters in LotR, especially in Fellowship. you have Galadriel, and maybe Arwen, and that is it. I sincerely hope we don't get another elf-dwarf love-triangle to compensate. Which is the bind that Tolkien unfortunately created for adaptations down the road. If you create new characters they are always going to be met with some derision from purists. I know friends and boarders have suggested some gender swapping and I think this is a case where it's worth considering. There'll still be backlash (a project this big will always piss off some vocal online folks) but it's harder for people to complain if the character is otherwise identical. I'm indifferent to the project but in a way where I'd still be watching the thing. The showrunners will really determine my excitement for the show. Not sure if there are any creators coming to the end of a show's run where they could jump over. I wouldn't want Walking Dead or GOT anywhere near it. Definitely no Peter Jackson as he proved with Hobbit that extending the material (at least in the way he did) does not improve an adaptation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eggegg Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 9 minutes ago, red snow said: Which is the bind that Tolkien unfortunately created for adaptations down the road. If you create new characters they are always going to be met with some derision from purists. I know friends and boarders have suggested some gender swapping and I think this is a case where it's worth considering. There'll still be backlash (a project this big will always piss off some vocal online folks) but it's harder for people to complain if the character is otherwise identical. I'm indifferent to the project but in a way where I'd still be watching the thing. The showrunners will really determine my excitement for the show. Not sure if there are any creators coming to the end of a show's run where they could jump over. I wouldn't want Walking Dead or GOT anywhere near it. Definitely no Peter Jackson as he proved with Hobbit that extending the material (at least in the way he did) does not improve an adaptation The differences between the hobbit and lotr productions were huge though. Where Lotr was a passion project, something they’d been trying to do for years,hobbit was something they had little interest in, and were forced into it at the last minute. Take a hugely chaotic production behind the scenes and I’m amazed those movies aren’t even worse. That said, Jackson shouldn’t be near any new production of this property , he’s had his vision and I’d rather see someone else’s ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted November 7, 2017 Share Posted November 7, 2017 What they should do is make a Keeping Up Appearances style comedy starring Lobelia Sackville-Baggins, Otho And Lotho, possibly set in between The Hobbit and LOTR. The exciting conclusion could be Lobelia finally getting Bag End and those damned spoons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.