BIG, EARLY NEWS: Amazon buying LOTR to make a Series

Not whitegold ring chat. The one ring chat.

Moderator: High Lord Tolkien

User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19621
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

High Lord Tolkien wrote:So far I'm the closest. :D
Are you sure about that? :D
APPENDIX A - THE NUMENOREN KINGS - ... Numenor and its line of kings that eventually lead to ruin and the scattering of the realms in exile might work as a multi-season series.
Seems a Numenor series could also be made.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
Cagliostro
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9360
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Colorado

Post by Cagliostro »

So.....LOTR fan fic? Bah!

Might be good, but it's a bit depressing to see all the stuff of my youth plumbed for every last penny. But I would be excited about a Covenant film.
Image
Life is a waste of time
Time is a waste of life
So get wasted all of the time
And you'll have the time of your life
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

Cagliostro wrote:But I would be excited about a Covenant film.
We need to pitch it as "ur-Lord of the Ring: Game of Stones".
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

I wouldn't. Not unless it was a series of long films. :D

Think the HBO series idea would probably be best...1 season per book would give you 10...

And GoT is basically over now...

--A
User avatar
Brinn
S.P.O.W
Posts: 3137
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2002 2:07 pm
Location: Worcester, MA

Post by Brinn »

Amazon is looking for it's version of GoT. Unfortunately, LotR will not be the solution. GoT has violence, sex and political intrigue. LOTR is geared to a much different audience and won't pick up the casual viewer that isn't already a fan of fantasy. GoT brought in non-fantasy fans and that's why it's become some a cultural phenomenon. LotR doesn't have a broad enough appeal to achieve that same effect.
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. John Stuart Mill
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

(Nice to see you around, Brinn.)

I agree with all that ... But as I said earlier, I think for the amount of money flying around, someone must have demonstrated a good, practical idea in all this. And the next sensation need not be in the same mold as the previous. Perhaps we shall be surprised.
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19621
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

I disagree, Brinn. You can get boobs in a fraction of a second on the Internet, if that's what you want. No one watches GoT for boobs. That's just bonus. :biggrin: If you don't like magic and monsters, the show would be unwatchable. Now, granted, it has great characters and an intricate plot. If not for that, no amount of magic and monsters could capture a widespread audience. However, that just means it's *good* fantasy. If the LOTR series is also good (characters, plot), then it will gain a widespread audience. LOTR is one of the most widely read books in history. It already has a built in audience of millions. The movies made billions. [Someone did demonstrate a potential for financial success of this story in a visual medium: his name was Peter Jackson!] This is a no-brainer.

As SRD says, fantasy is the oldest form of storytelling. I think everyone has the potential to like it, when it's done well. The human spirit is geared toward these metaphors for reasons that are embedded in our DNA.

Besides, there is plenty of violence in LOTR. There is also lots of "political" intrigue. These can be played up, if necessary.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

Filming in 2019, airing in 2020?
... Amazon has revealed to them that shooting on the new Middle-earth series will begin in 2019, with the goal to begin airing the new first episodes in 2020. The 2020 goal is designed to fill the void Game of Thrones will leave after the final season airs, likely now to be in 2019.

... If accurate, this news suggests that Amazon may be further down the road than we thought in deciding on which story-line(s) from J.R.R. Tolkien's universe they'll follow in the first season. [Link]
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

So wait, they're going to squeeze in another season of GoT? Or just delay the last one?

Anyway, maybe agree with Z about GoT still being for fantasy fans, (although, that said, the GF isn't much of one and still watches it), but the magic and monsters certainly weren't much in evidence in the first several seasons...was more like a mediaeval thing...knights in armour type stuff.

--A
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

I think it's been known for a while that the last season of GoT is pushed way out into Jan (I think) of 2019.

I think GoT is only incidentally fantasy. It's more of a period piece, really - political intrigue wrapped up in personal relationships. That it is in an imaginary world only frees it from being tied to the constraints of real history, allowing a new story to be created. (So in a way it is an alternate history.

You can argue that the same is true about LOTR. But LOTR emphasizes the fantasy elements and the world-building over the rest, while Got emphasizes the politics and the relationships over the rest.
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19621
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

The very first scene of the GoT is a White Walker. Everything after that is set against the backdrop of a faded magic/monsters that are now returning to the world. Even the absence of magic/monsters, in as much as it occurs, is used to emphasize how people have forgotten the magical aspects of their world, a kind of complacency that has lulled them into thinking that the threats of the past are gone, leaving them with more "important" things like political intrigue. But as the story progresses, this is shown to be foolishness, a distraction from what's truly important. Certain vital characters--like Dany--have their destinies entirely driven by this "return of magic" theme by giving birth to her 'children,' which then makes magic stronger for the entire world.

This entire series is a wakeup call for the fantastic, in direct opposition to those who doubt or dismiss it. The overarching plot is a fight against monsters that unites humanity over and above its petty tendencies for political intrigue. It brings out what is human about all of us--despite our familial or political differences--precisely in contrast to inhuman monsters (or corruption of humanity into monsters, since White Walkers came from humans).

This is definitely fantasy.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Well sure, but they don't start rubbing your face in it until at least the dragons are big, and even then most "scenes" don't include a magical or fantastical element.

--A
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19621
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

I admit that the magic gets more prevalent as the show proceeds. But I'm stunned that others don't think of this as fantasy. Perhaps it's because it feels so "realistic." Or at least gritty.

Major plots points are determined by magic (e.g. Dany's rise to power). Who wins a war is determined by magic (Stannis vs Renly). Four characters are resurrected from the dead (including Catelyn in the books). Westeros is divided by a giant magical wall, on the other side of which is an Army of the Dead, White Walkers, Children of the Forest, wargs, etc.

Major characters arcs depend crucially upon magic. Arya becomes a magical assassin. Bran becomes the Three Eyed Raven. Melissandrea is a magical priestess. John is the resurrected "prince who was promised." Dany would be nothing if her people hadn't witnessed her survive a fire (not to mention her dragons). Varys was scarred by a wizard making him who he is, a eunuch who is terrified of magic. Stannis is driven entirely by his belief in Melissandrea's magic (to the point of burning his own daughter). The Hound becomes convinced of magic by staring into the flames.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

GRRM wrote:I was also reading a lot of historical fiction. And the contrast between that and a lot of the fantasy at the time was dramatic because a lot of the fantasy of Tolkien imitators has a quasi-medieval setting, but it's like the Disneyland Middle Ages. You know, they've got tassels and they've got lords and stuff like that, but they don't really seem to grasp what it was like in the Middle Ages. And then you'd read the historical fiction which was much grittier and more realistic and really give you a sense of what it was like to live in castles or to be in a battle with swords and things like that. And I said what I want to do is combine some of the realism of historical fiction with some of the appeal of fantasy, the magic and the wonder that the best fantasy has.

As much as I love historical fiction, my problem with historical fiction is that you always know what's going to happen. You know, if you're reading about the War of the Roses, say, you know that the little princes are not going to come out of that tower. Fantasy, of course, doesn't have that constraint. You can still have that driving force, which I think is one of the things that people read books for, what's gonna happen next? I love this character, but god, is he gonna live, is he gonna die? I wanted that kind of suspense.
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19621
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

Interesting. I'd say he successfully merged the two, historical fiction and fantasy.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

Sure. I think the point is that it can be appealing to non-fantasy fans, (like the GF) because if you dip into it at any given point, chances are that it won't be something "fantastical" happening.

As a fan of both fantasy and historical fiction, it works on multiple levels for me. And I sorta like the subtlety of the magic stuff. Most of it is not done with any fanfare.

(Talking only about the books here, haven't been watching the series really.)

--A
User avatar
Brinn
S.P.O.W
Posts: 3137
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2002 2:07 pm
Location: Worcester, MA

Post by Brinn »

That quote from GRRM that Wayfriend posted above nails it. One is gritty and realistic and the other is more fairy tale fantasy. I hope it's good but it will never be able to match the tone of GoT and many people who tune in thinking they are going to find the next GoT are going to be disappointed.
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61651
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by Avatar »

I dunno, if they do something like Numenor, they could make it gritty... :D

--A
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

I am sure people tuned into season 1 of Game of Thrones expecting the Lord of the Rings. It turned out to be a different kind of thing, and the different kind of thing turned out to be a big hit.

I see no reason to believe this new series can't follow a similar path to a similar result.
User avatar
High Lord Tolkien
Excommunicated Member of THOOLAH
Posts: 7376
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:40 am
Location: Cape Cod, Mass
Been thanked: 3 times
Contact:

Post by High Lord Tolkien »

https://www.maxim.com/entertainment/exp ... ons-2018-6

Well I was wrong. A young Aragorn.....Bleah.
Such a rich history and they're covering Aragorn's teenage years. :D

Yeah I know, the Arwen love story and familiar characters like Galadriel and Elrond and Gandalf can be used so the movie loving noobs won't be lost.

Hopefully we'll get the heroic Aragorn from the books and not the dweeb from the movie.
https://thoolah.blogspot.com/

[Defeated by a gizmo from Batman's utility belt]
Joker: I swear by all that's funny never to be taken in by that unconstitutional device again!


Image Image Image Image
Post Reply

Return to “J.R.R. Tolkien Forum”