LOTR prequel TV series 2.0

[Werthead]

On 10/5/2020 at 6:26 PM, Corvinus85 said:

I believe they finished some time ago, and are in post-production. It was announced I think in August.

Ah, that's right. They shut down for COVID in March at the same time as WoT and restarted again in July, and then wrapped in August.

[The Marquis de Leech]

On 10/5/2020 at 10:23 PM, Ser Drewy said:

Some rumours are floating around that the show may feature nudity (and, potentially, sex): https://knightedgemedia.com/2020/10/nudity-may-be-featured-in-amazons-lord-of-the-rings-tv-series/

I am still waiting and seeing:

https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/10/07/naked-tolkien-the-amazon-lotr-tv-series-and-sex/

Sure, this might be a disaster, but I don't think nudity and sex is inherently a problem, at least at the thematic level.

[Ser Drewy]

13 hours ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

I am still waiting and seeing:

https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/10/07/naked-tolkien-the-amazon-lotr-tv-series-and-sex/

Sure, this might be a disaster, but I don't think nudity and sex is inherently a problem, at least at the thematic level.

Pretty much. There's no real way to know one way or another until further down the line. The quality of the show is impossible to decide when we've pretty much nothing to go on so far. 

It has led to some strange comments, though, with an especially annoying dosage of "LOTR is a children's story, it has no room for nudity or sex!" from people unaware that there is indeed nudity, to an extent, in Tolkien's work (as well as torture, abuse, suicide, incest and other 'mature' content). 

[Gaston de Foix]

Amongst the many terrible things in the Hobbit movies was the suggestion that a dwarf-elf relationship could actually take place. 

So long as we don't get that and we have the sex done tastefully (i.e., no rape scenes or incest), I don't have a problem with nudity or sex. 

[Corvinus85]

14 hours ago, Gaston de Foix said:

Amongst the many terrible things in the Hobbit movies was the suggestion that a dwarf-elf relationship could actually take place. 

So long as we don't get that and we have the sex done tastefully (i.e., no rape scenes or incest), I don't have a problem with nudity or sex. 

Why?

[Stannis Eats No Peaches]

50 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

Why?

I think you could ask that question about every creative choice in the Hobbit films.

[Corvinus85]

1 hour ago, Stannis Eats No Peaches said:

I think you could ask that question about every creative choice in the Hobbit films.

That it true, but the elf-dwarf idea itself is not necessarily terrible, other than maybe it robs Gimli of being the first dwarf to fall in love with an elf.

[RhaenysBee]

Oh this is all over my news feeds. 
as someone who isn’t even sure about watching this prequel in the first place, I’m quite lost at why I feel the need to blab into this discussion. Maybe because I’m incorrigibly drawn to controversial topics or maybe because GoT had put such a large emphasis on its sexual content which distorts the perception of sex in fantasy a little. After GoT, I feel like it’s easier to have a polarized view on the topic. 

I suppose it all comes down to how and to what extent sex and nudity is presented in this prequel. LOTR certainly doesn’t need, wouldn’t benefit from, doesn’t deserve the kind of pornographic showcasing of brothel life that Game of Thrones loved to deliver. On the other hand there is also a lack balance between Disney level PG implications of romance and a lot more mature take on violence and gore. If the audience is accepting of one, I don’t see a reason why they should be so implicit about the other. It’s also important to note that there’s a scale stretching between platonic love plus wedding kisses and pornographic brothel scenes for the heck of it. There is a middle ground that’s tasteful and relevant in terms of world building, characterization or even plot. And that’s where I feel that LOTR could in fact benefit from well chosen and executed sexual content. 

The OG Lotr films (which I love dearly) always felt to me as though they lacked in world building and characterization. There are various peoples and cultures in Middle Earth and we find out so very very little about who they are. It shows in some throw away lines (Elves are elegant, cultured and have a sense of superiority, dwarves are more worldly, they, much like the hobbits enjoy food and music and fun. Humans... struggle a lot and are defensive and selfish but protective of their own with a strong sense of duty and righteousness. Everyone is proud in their own way and beyond that...). how do these peoples relate to their own, how are their societies structured? What are their morals, how do those compare and contrast? What’s okay as a Human but unacceptable as an Elf and vice versa. How do these societies and peoples react to interjections and merges between them? There is a huge one of those in Lotr and it’s never ever addressed from a societal point of view. 

How did all the elves aside from her immediate family feel about Arwen’s choice? Were they cool with it, did they silently judge, did they disagree but accept, did Elrond ever have political struggle or social tension because of the prospect of his dauther’s marriage to a human? Or are elves limitlessly free to love? What did the people of Gondor think  of this arrangement? Did they love the idea of an elven queen, were they skeptical and tribal, did they need time to warm to the idea? And slowly onto the topic in the limelight, how do elves and humans feel about out of marriage sexual relations, does it differ, which one triumph over the other if it does? Was Aragorn really abstinent for fifty odd years? Did that cause issues for anybody or how did this engagement even work? These are interesting questions to explore to enrich characters and the world we are in. 

And there’s the question of more world building and more characters. A typical human town (such as Bree or Laketown) would for sure have an establishment for the lonely travelers - do hobbits have such, do dwarves? How do they feel about these? Are they intrigued or disgusted? There’s at one point a throwaway line about how Theoden neglected Eowyn - would he as king and her uncle be normally arranging a match for her? Would that be to a rider of Rohan or to a foreigner as basis of international alliance? The same might be asked in connection with Denethor’s bachelor sons, or Theoden’s own son and nephew. Is it not a practice in middle earth to use marriage as political alliance, does this differ in various cultures?

From the uglier angle, do Easterlings, Haradrim and pirates just chop people up or do they pillage, rape and take captives? Do orcs and mountain men/clans (I forget the term for the faction Saruman set on Rohan)? How do all the peoples of middle earth relate to this if so? These are all peoples by the way that we have minuscule information about. They are just ‘wicked men’.  There’s an extended scene In which Faramir talks to a freshly captured Frodo and tells him that the southern soldier they shot down was no less dutiful to his mission than Frodo and Sam, and he wonders where the soldier came from and if he was truly evil at heart. That is the depth and layer I would expect a Lotr series to explore. 

Onto nudity without sexual context. It does seem that there’s a difference between elves and, most starkly, dwarves though humans as well when it comes to cleanliness. Are elves just genetically predisposed to stay clean in spite of everything or do they simply wash more? Does this baffle other peoples? Why? Historically cleanliness had been a roller coaster, sometimes it was regarded holy and pure while other times it was considered counterproductive to avoiding sickness. Are these beliefs represented in how the peoples Of middle earth relate to cleanliness? 

So yes, I do think it’s perfectly all right for a Lotr prequel to include sexual content and nudity - as long as it is done in a manner and amount that enriched the story. Wasting screentime on showing good looking actors and actresses naked to attract a demographic with such preference or to follow perceived or real entertainment industry trends is however self-serving and unlikely to yield the desired success. Lotr could benefit from a lot of building and detailing of its societal context and sex and nudity is one aspect to explore. Or so I think.  

 

[Corvinus85]

2 hours ago, RhaenysBee said:

The OG Lotr films (which I love dearly) always felt to me as though they lacked in world building and characterization. There are various peoples and cultures in Middle Earth and we find out so very very little about who they are. It shows in some throw away lines (Elves are elegant, cultured and have a sense of superiority, dwarves are more worldly, they, much like the hobbits enjoy food and music and fun. Humans... struggle a lot and are defensive and selfish but protective of their own with a strong sense of duty and righteousness. Everyone is proud in their own way and beyond that...). how do these peoples relate to their own, how are their societies structured? What are their morals, how do those compare and contrast? What’s okay as a Human but unacceptable as an Elf and vice versa. How do these societies and peoples react to interjections and merges between them? There is a huge one of those in Lotr and it’s never ever addressed from a societal point of view. 

How did all the elves aside from her immediate family feel about Arwen’s choice? Were they cool with it, did they silently judge, did they disagree but accept, did Elrond ever have political struggle or social tension because of the prospect of his dauther’s marriage to a human? Or are elves limitlessly free to love? What did the people of Gondor think  of this arrangement? Did they love the idea of an elven queen, were they skeptical and tribal, did they need time to warm to the idea? And slowly onto the topic in the limelight, how do elves and humans feel about out of marriage sexual relations, does it differ, which one triumph over the other if it does? Was Aragorn really abstinent for fifty odd years? Did that cause issues for anybody or how did this engagement even work? These are interesting questions to explore to enrich characters and the world we are in. 

And there’s the question of more world building and more characters. A typical human town (such as Bree or Laketown) would for sure have an establishment for the lonely travelers - do hobbits have such, do dwarves? How do they feel about these? Are they intrigued or disgusted? There’s at one point a throwaway line about how Theoden neglected Eowyn - would he as king and her uncle be normally arranging a match for her? Would that be to a rider of Rohan or to a foreigner as basis of international alliance? The same might be asked in connection with Denethor’s bachelor sons, or Theoden’s own son and nephew. Is it not a practice in middle earth to use marriage as political alliance, does this differ in various cultures?

From the uglier angle, do Easterlings, Haradrim and pirates just chop people up or do they pillage, rape and take captives? Do orcs and mountain men/clans (I forget the term for the faction Saruman set on Rohan)? How do all the peoples of middle earth relate to this if so? These are all peoples by the way that we have minuscule information about. They are just ‘wicked men’.  There’s an extended scene In which Faramir talks to a freshly captured Frodo and tells him that the southern soldier they shot down was no less dutiful to his mission than Frodo and Sam, and he wonders where the soldier came from and if he was truly evil at heart. That is the depth and layer I would expect a Lotr series to explore. 
 

Your critique is very similar to GRRM's one critique of LOTR. It would be interesting if this show attempted to develop this world with these questions in mind.

[DMC]

I'm just looking forward to some orc sex.  Uruk-hai indeed.

[Rhom]

18 minutes ago, DMC said:

I'm just looking forward to some orc sex.  Uruk-hai indeed.

Forget whether or not Balrogs have wings... the world wants to know if they have nards?!!?

[.H.]

Indeed, we need to get down to the real hard-hitting question of "whether a Million of Maiar testicles may not fit upon a Needle's point?"

[Ser Drewy]

20 hours ago, Gaston de Foix said:

Amongst the many terrible things in the Hobbit movies was the suggestion that a dwarf-elf relationship could actually take place. 

So long as we don't get that and we have the sex done tastefully (i.e., no rape scenes or incest), I don't have a problem with nudity or sex. 

Jackson did give us some pretty bizarre nudity in the extended cut of The Hobbit.

[RhaenysBee]

4 hours ago, Corvinus85 said:

Your critique is very similar to GRRM's one critique of LOTR. It would be interesting if this show attempted to develop this world with these questions in mind.

Is that where the question “Okay, but what was Aragorn’s tax policy?” originates from? (Or is that just something random I read on the internet and mistakenly attribute it to GRRM?) Yes, by the way, the political and social world building had always been a huge part of ASOIAF’s appeal for me. I do think GRRM ended up overdoing it, much like everything else, but the general idea that a vast story in a fictional world needs social, economic, political and legal context is something I wholeheartedly agree with, mostly because I’m a sucker for anything related to sociology and history. 

As for the prequel, I have no faith that detailing Tolkien materials with such is something any production wants to take on. At the end of the day I’m still strongly Team Sequel and I can’t help being skeptical, distrusting and pessimistic about this series. 

[Gaston de Foix]

9 hours ago, Corvinus85 said:

Why?

Because dwarves have a different creator and are a fundamentally different species.  It's wrong for the same reason a human-hobbit relationship would feel wrong. 

All the inter-species relationships,  Thingol-Melian (Elf-Maia) and the three human-elf relationships (Beren-Luthien, Tuor-Idril, Aragorn-Arwen) are of physically similar beings. 

I admit in each instance the relationship between human and elf was transgressive but not quite in the same way.  Whether you like it or not Tolkien's world has a sliding scale of nobility and beauty from Valar to Maia to Elf to human.  Dwarfs and Ents stand apart from that in large part because Aule and Yavanna created them. 

[Werthead]

19 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

Because dwarves have a different creator and are a fundamentally different species.  It's wrong for the same reason a human-hobbit relationship would feel wrong. 

All the inter-species relationships,  Thingol-Melian (Elf-Maia) and the three human-elf relationships (Beren-Luthien, Tuor-Idril, Aragorn-Arwen) are of physically similar beings. 

I admit in each instance the relationship between human and elf was transgressive but not quite in the same way.  Whether you like it or not Tolkien's world has a sliding scale of nobility and beauty from Valar to Maia to Elf to human.  Dwarfs and Ents stand apart from that in large part because Aule and Yavanna created them. 

Humans and halflings may have a common origin though, and in most respects apart from size they are relatively close to one another, certainly far moreso than humans and elves.

[Valandil]

44 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Humans and halflings may have a common origin though, and in most respects apart from size they are relatively close to one another, certainly far moreso than humans and elves.

Hobbits are Men, ie also the secondborn children of illuvatar, elves are the firstborn children of illuvatar. Don’t have the quote to hand but in one of his letters I think, Tolkien describes elves and humans as physically the same race. It’s their spirit or fëar that is different, Elves’ being bound to ëa for all of time, Therefore capable of being rebodied after dying in the world. Humans fëar has the gift of illuvatar which allows them to leave the circles of the world after death. 
they can, and obviously, have reproduced, whereas a dwarf and an elf couldn’t, nor dwarf and man presumably. Hobbits are human, nothing barring reproduction. Except maybe access difficulties 

[Gaston de Foix]

13 minutes ago, Valandil said:

Hobbits are Men, ie also the secondborn children of illuvatar, elves are the firstborn children of illuvatar. Don’t have the quote to hand but in one of his letters I think, Tolkien describes elves and humans as physically the same race. It’s their spirit or fëar that is different, Elves’ being bound to ëa for all of time, Therefore capable of being rebodied after dying in the world. Humans fëar has the gift of illuvatar which allows them to leave the circles of the world after death. 
they can, and obviously, have reproduced, whereas a dwarf and an elf couldn’t, nor dwarf and man presumably. Hobbits are human, nothing barring reproduction. Except maybe access difficulties 

So where does the size disparity come from?

Tbh, I've never been able to reconcile the sentient races that populate Middle-Earth with Tolkein's first and second-born dichotomy. 

[Werthead]

Nineteen new castmembers announced (and Maxim Baldry finally confirmed), although their roles are not confirmed.

Mostly low-key names. The biggest new name is British writer, actor and comedian Sir Lenny Henry (probably best-known in the SFF space for being the co-creator of Neverwhere with Neil Gaiman).

[Corvinus85]

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

Nineteen new castmembers announced (and Maxim Baldry finally confirmed), although their roles are not confirmed.

Mostly low-key names. The biggest new name is British writer, actor and comedian Sir Lenny Henry (probably best-known in the SFF space for being the co-creator of Neverwhere with Neil Gaiman).

What about Peter Mullan? And we got Cynthia Addai-Robinson of Spartacus fame.