The Lord of the Rings The War of the Rohirrim

It won't.

Given Morgoth has already been mentioned in Lord of the Rings I'd say it's fair game.

 

And the third Hobbit film.

 

Sure - the Tolkien Estate figures it can make a lot more money off of the latter.

Because LotR the book is so determinedly sexless, when I think of it the IP's ̶c̶o̶r̶r̶u̶p̶t̶i̶o̶ er, creative and unique interpretations at the hands of the Estate, and the money that changes hands, I tend to think of naughty stuff. I think of middle-aged male beneficiaries using leftover change from the mansions they bought from the millions upon millions Amazon and others pay them for this and that license to solicit carnal favors from fetching ladies less than half their age. Maybe they have said women wear pointy ears and play-act as Lothlórien elf-maidens, or maybe they aren't remotely interested in Middle-earthiness at all. Just imagine what ol' modest Catholic John Ronald Reuel would have thought, had he dreamt what illicit and sinful delights his quaint scribblings about garden-loving little persons might one day permit...

(Did @Guy Gardener write some post years ago that inspired all this? This sounds like a Guy train of thought.)

 

I don't think Hunt for Gollum is going to be a multi-movie story, I think we're just going to be more stand alone movies besides War of the Rohirrim and Hunt for Gollum set in Middle Earth.

 

I would certainly hope so. Middle Earth is such a fun setting, and Tolkien's ideas are far more interesting than most fantasy works out there (both his contemporaries and modern). The only fantasy series or settings I enjoy right not are Tolkien and Sanderson.

Given that Tolkien used Norse and Germanic and other mythologies to craft his sub-creation, I welcome people exploring inside Middle Earth. If it's bad, then fine. No harm, no foul.

 

I hope so. But considering how they stretched The Hobbit into 3 movies with long running times, I'm not confident.

 

I'm pretty sure if The Hunt for Gollum was intended to be another trilogy or something like that, they would have said so in the initial announcement since that's what the series is known for.

 

The Hobbit wasn't intended to be a trilogy either. I don't see them bringing everyone back to make a one off Gollum movie.

 

Deadline interview with Peter Jackson, Andy Serkis and Philippa Boyens.

https://deadline.com/2024/05/the-lo...ter-cannes-saved-original-trilogy-1235917510/

 

Agreed, however it does seems to me that the story would require at the very least Gandalf and Aragorn.

 

There are plenty of times where they bring popular teams back for just one movie. And it sounds like they have other movies planned, I just think it'll just be a bunch of one offs, like what we're going to be getting from Star Wars now.

 

Well, that was a lot of words, saying nothing. But enough about Peter Jackson's Tintin movie! *ba-dum, tsh!*

Okay, I finally thought of an interesting flick to be made from The Hunt for Gollum: it turns out that, long before he gave up his wild ways, settled down, and found the Ring, Sméagol was a traveling rock star, the Bon Jovi of the Gladden Fields, if you will. In his madness, Gollum retraces the path of his old band, so Aragorn, too, will end up visiting the sites of their greatest gigs. He'll arrive at an inn, and one of local old-timers will regale those present with the story of how the infamous rock god/sex maniac Sméagol rolled through and painted the town purple (don't ask!). Then he'll go to the the next town, and the pattern will repeat, except with increasing debauchery. (The extended Blu-ray cut will be unrated, and banned in most Middle Eastern countries due to copious and gratuitous nudity.)

There will be lots of bardcore performances of 80s hair metal classics like Def's Leppard's "Animal" and Warrant's "Cherry Pie," a real Guardians of the Galaxy-style sales multiplier. The actual "hunt for Gollum" will just be fifteen or twenty minutes of bookend/flash-forwarded scenes, with the rock music biopic the main attraction.

Quentin Tarantino will call it his favorite movie of the year... but countless online wags will snark that the historic number of on-screen bare feet was the key factor. Turns out Sméagol had a thing for hobbit-maidens' ankles, you see.

(And bums.)

(And bosoms.)

(And, yes, he loved pipe-weed, too.)

(And yes, there will be officially licensed marijuana pipe-weed.)

 

Honestly, if they're going to do this film I'm assuming that they're going to stick in every recognizable name they can, although I'm sure they're recast all of them. Aragorn and Gandalf are literally a must, but they could easily add Legolas and even Thranduil because the Mirkwood elves were involved with holding Gollum for a time. Plus they could probably easily justify Elrond or maybe even the whole White Council depending on how they want to stretch things. Honestly, if a known LOTR character is alive during the time period and could be stuck into the story by even the flimsiest thread I think they could potentially show up.

This isn't me supporting that idea, just what I think they could do.

 

Will they, though, or will they Tarkin them? Bloom was so shiny-smooth in LotR his face would probably be relatively easy to animate by human standards (even by The Hobbit, the shape of his head was distractingly different). And how does one replace McKellen and Hugo Weaving?! I could definitely picture Jackson and Serkis de-aging/animating them, as long as McKellen and Weaving agree/participate. Recasting Aragorn, however, likely will be necessary.