Re: look and feel - What’s fascinating about when The Rings of Power is set, is that its approx 4000 - 5000 years before Frodo sets forth with the Fellowship - and yet, despite this, Rings of Power looks very much like it has connective tissues with Jackson’s adaptations stylings - which is what I hoped for and think they have achieved (basing of course what is seen in the trailer).
My copies of the LOTR trilogy all have pictures from the movies as covers, specifically a picture of a character taken from the movies on each cover (Frodo, Saruman and Aragorn for Fellowship, Two Towers, and RotK respectively), but they have the same text as any other regular version of the books. They aren't even the only books I own that have covers based on their adaptations. Its weird that anyone wouldn't realize that probably the majority of books that become movies get a new printing when the movie is coming out, and with a cover that usually ties into the adaptation.
Since much of the art and even scene blocking in some instance in Peter Jackson's LOTR was based on Ted Naismith's illustrations, among others (and he was asked to join the production but had to decline for personal reasons), you're barking up a very flimsy tree. Dozens of pages and you're still finding reasons to not like something audiences have not yet seen and which you apparently won't watch. Outstanding.
I bought a box set of LOTR back when the movies were being released. The dust jackets are all movie related depictions; but the books themselves are just reprints of the editions I read in 1982 and 83.
Alan Lee and John Howe were famous Tolkien illustrators who joined the LotR production as concept designers or something. My favorite BTS were videos of Howe or Lee just sitting in a field and sketching Hobbiton over it...then the next part is the finish sets during production!! Jackson worked hard to make the look of the films, especially with architecture, have a strong resemblance to the illustrated LotR editions. Something I wish LOTRO would have done
What the actual fuck are you talking about? I was supporting Asbo Zaprudder's post about how books getting reprinted with covers referencing a new adaptation was a common thing, mentioning how the LOTR trilogy books I own were a version printed while the movies were coming out and so they have covers taken from the movies, but with the same interior contents as any other version of the LOTR trilogy. My post that you are referencing had literally nothing to do with the upcoming show, it was specifically responding to a post talking about book covers relating to adaptations of the books in question. It was LOTR related, but not related to the upcoming show.
The interview with the showrunners has allayed some of my fears - they're definitely geeks and Tolkein fans. Now we'll just have to see if the show is enjoyable.
I'm not a huge fan of my ROTK edition with the Viggo cover. I would have preferred something old-school like this:
I had this version as a kid but over the years it ended up in really bad shape, with a missing front cover and held together with duct tape.
That's a cool cover. My LOTR trilogy books might have movie related covers, but my copy of The Hobbit has a more artistic cover So you misread my post, either accidentally or on purpose, and then complain when called out on it? I wouldn't be talking about being "communicative" if I were you
The 1984 Dune movie was novelized (it went the full circle: book -> movie -> book). I'm afraid that they might try to publish a book based off of the stories told or frankly any new material not by Tolkien, and try to pass it off as genuine. Since, we're discussing editions, I have this one: http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?729072 The art under the dust jacket on the actual book is my favorite from all the editions.
Genuine what? Based off someone's work is nothing new. Tom Clancy did it for years. If people want to know they'll find it. If they don't no cover will change their mind. To quote Heinlein, "You can lead a child to knowledge but you can't make him think!"
OK, it just seemed to me like some of the costumes and designs were going for a different approach, like with the Numenorians looking more Ancient Rome than Medieval Europe, but maybe not. There are a lot of books and comics that I never would have been interested in if it weren't for their adaptations. Hell, the main reason I read LOTR when I did was because the trailer for Fellowship of the Ring was cool, and I wanted to read the books before That is insane, I don't think I have ever heard of the original source material being altered to match an adaptation. There have been novelizations of adaptations of other books, but they have always indicated in some way that it's based on the adaptation and is not the original source material. I can't see them doing that, and I'm not sure if they'd be allowed to legally. I'm pretty sure they'd have to say that it's based off the show, and even if they don't have to, I'm pretty sure they'd want to, since they're going to be wanting to attract fans of the show, not just Tolkien fans. Not to mention trying to pass something from the show off as something Tolkien wrote (assuming that's what you meant) would just end up alienating the Tolkien fans and that is the absolute last thing they're going to want to do. Yes, the show is going to need to attract people who aren't Tolkien fans, but they're still going to need to get the Tolkien fans on their side. They are going to most likely be the most vocal group when it comes to opinions on the show, and if they're smart, they're going to want to do everything they can to get them on their side. I have these ones:
So? The original works still exist. Tangentially, I've been rereading The Sandman and there's an exchange between Dream and Hob Gadling during one of their once-every-century meetings where Hob complains about how some fool gave King Lear a happy ending. Dream responds with: "That will not last. The Great Stories will always return to their original forms."