They will hate it regardless.
But, even Tolkien changed his mind on Elves having beards.
Spoilers Lord of the Rings TV series
- Thread starter Cyrus
- Start date
But, even Tolkien changed his mind on Elves having beards.
That's pretty good. My favorite line: What, did you fuck him between first and second breakfast?A take on elves and humans having romantic relationships in this TV Series.
How much time is there between the creation of the rings and Sauron's defeat by the Last Alliance of Men and Elves in the books?
Yup, like I said earlier in the thread, I always found it a little odd how Tolkien spread out this events over thousands of years. I get he was going for a sweeping historic epic but it still feels odd.
I agree that the time spans in Middle Earth are often unnecessary long. Though for the Second Age, I guess this was partially caused by Numenor. I mean those guys lived for centuries (the kings even longer than the regular people) and Tolkien wanted them to rise up to their zenith and then experience a slow. gradual decline to rock bottom. With lifespans like that the whole rise and fall is gonna eat up a couple millennia.
It's important to remember that Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy was itself "lightning in the bottle." New Line took a huge gamble greenlighting the trilogy as a trilogy, and if Fellowship had failed... well, let's not think about that. The next two films would still have come out, but they'd probably have been butchered in the running times, the extensive Two Towers reshoots wouldn't have happened, etc.
There's a book titled The Frodo Franchise that takes a look at how Jackson hit at the right time -- the internet was close to mainstream, the DVD market was taking off and had lots of possibilities for expanded content that Jackson really took advantage of. And there was an intense marketing effort that got people -- like my sister, who I would have never thought would ever want to watch it -- in the theater to see it.
Will the television series be "lightning in a bottle"? I doubt it. I'm not saying it is going to fail, that's not what I mean. But Amazon's expectations for the series are... what? Drive sign-ups on Amazon Prime? (That's a mature market; there's not a lot of growth there.) Sell more books? (They'll get a cut as the seller.) Get a cut of the licensing based on the series?
I remain a little skeptical that a streaming series can truly achieve mainstream penetration in the way a movie or a broadcast (basic or premium) television series can due to barriers to entry (both monetary and technological) that cable television or a movie theater don't have.
I have some serious problems with Jackson's adaptations, particularly the end of RotK (and I was so disappointed in The Hobbit that I only saw the first one), but overall I agree with you.
"The Greatest Love Story Ever", you mean?
I'll live without it, but I assume their adventures will be referenced.I've never been part of the fandom, but there was a time when I read all 4 books (including the appendices) about once a year and I've struggled through The Silmarillion twice. If they can pull off an interesting and entertaining series based on Tolkien's works, I'll be happy. We shall see.
I think for Amazon/Bezos it is primarily a prestige project and a way to lure even more customers to Amazon and Amazon Prime ( as if there's a significant portion of the population that has not used Amazon in the last year). Mainstream is changing however and not at a slow pace - personally i can't remember when i actually sat down in front of my TV to watch something.
Sure it's bigger than my monitor ( which is not small) but in the years since i became a streaming customer ( first Netflix, then Amazon Prime because i already had Prime Membership and finally Disney+) my habits have also changed - i am not willing anymore to sit through TV ads, i want to watch something according to my timetable and not the TV station's etc. I don't believe i'm the exception and it will only change more towards streaming in the years and decades to come and if companies don't stake their claim now they'll be left in the dust.
For that to happen you have to have big name programs, either A List actors that you can tie to your service through exclusive contracts or well known franchises ( like Tolkien's works) so i guess this may be another, realistic, reason besides being another vanity project for Bezos.
Yeah I wasn't a big fan of the Hobbit movies either (started out OK, but went off the rails somewhere in Mirkwood) but then I always thought it would have been better suited as a mini-series than a movie.
I do agree with his decision regarding RotK though. There's no way you could subject a movie audience to Scouring of the Shire; there was already 20+ mins of wrap-up to get through and the Scouring would require at least an extra 40 to even do an abridged version. Honestly, I wish he'd been so restrained with The Hobbit movies.
But one can agree or disagree about his narrative decisions, but I think the basic approach to the depiction of the world and the fidelity of it all was fairly consistent, even at it's most extraneous, or at it's greatest departures from the text.
While I believe the Hobbit films are a poor adaptation LOTR films are still the best example of adapting a novel to film.
As a trilogy, The Hobbit is poorly adapted, I agree.
However, as I've maintained for years after the third film's release, there's an excellent (albeit long) adaptation hidden inside of it trying to break free. I've watched a couple of fan edits that prove this and they're mostly seamless, containing just what's from the original novel, although The Battle of the Five Armies is still a bit unwieldy in both versions thanks to so much happening before Bilbo finally gets the knock on the head. I know its unlikely we'll ever get an official release of just the novel as a single film, but at least there are edits out there that allows viewers to enjoy The Hobbit properly.
In other words, as Reverend already noted, PJ didn't have the restraint he showed with Lord of the Rings and needed a better editor the second time around.
However, as I've maintained for years after the third film's release, there's an excellent (albeit long) adaptation hidden inside of it trying to break free. I've watched a couple of fan edits that prove this and they're mostly seamless, containing just what's from the original novel, although The Battle of the Five Armies is still a bit unwieldy in both versions thanks to so much happening before Bilbo finally gets the knock on the head. I know its unlikely we'll ever get an official release of just the novel as a single film, but at least there are edits out there that allows viewers to enjoy The Hobbit properly.
In other words, as Reverend already noted, PJ didn't have the restraint he showed with Lord of the Rings and needed a better editor the second time around.
In terms of content, the two Hobbit scripts were shot exactly as originally written and conceived of by Guillermo Del Toro, PJ, Fran, and Phillipa; said scripts just generated enough material as written and shot to create 2 full 3-hour films and most of a third 3-hour film, with the material that was added to complete said third film actually being far less comprehensive than people believe.
There was also far less 'extraneous' stuff added to the two scripts as originally written and conceived of than people believe.
There was also far less 'extraneous' stuff added to the two scripts as originally written and conceived of than people believe.
The extraneous material is still very apparent.
I heard it was suppose to be up around 8:45 EST.
Since the Super Bowl is Pacific time it might be that zone.
Similar threads
