Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 17

[Lord]

But he didn't want the LOTR trilogy either right? That's pretty devilish there. If he had hated the controversial Hobbit moves and said no more then I could understand him. But he wanted no LOTR, he gets no sympathy from me.

He doesn't like Jackson fine. Try and find someone who he thinks will do say Children of Hurin right and have the estate with script approval in the contract if possible. No one would complain about him wanting a quality product.

He found the movies to be against the spirit of the books, i think the man has a right to have an opinion if he oesn't feel like his father's work is being properly represented.

 

[InCali]

If they ever do more Middle earth movies, what story should they do next, i know The Silmarillion would be the next brand, but there many stories in there, which one to take first?

Ainulindalë and Valaquenta.

Then go straight into the Quenta Silmarillion:

The Beginning of Days
Of Aulë and Yavanna (This a key chapter as it deals with how the Silmarils came to be and even tells you about the beginnings of the dwarves and ents)
Of the Coming of the Elves

From there, you have a couple of options. Probably go to

Of Thingol and Melian

But, you could go straight to Eldamar (That sounds funny to me, but it was unintentionally so ) after Thingol was separated and come back to that later. It's pretty well laid out in the book although there are some overlapping timelines (Tuor and Turin for example).

My opinion is that this book is screaming for a high quality mini-series. The characters change for a lot of reasons (death being a main one) and this could be done over a period of years (a la Game of Thrones). It could be AWESOME and blow GoT completely out of the water.

 

[InCali]

He found the movies to be against the spirit of the books, i think the man has a right to have an opinion if he oesn't feel like his father's work is being properly represented.

Amen.....I mean Aman.

I don't want to see a book like The Silmarillion improperly done and by that I mean it needs to follow THE BOOK!!! I've already had to deal with Tauriel, the elves of Lorien at Helm's Deep, Sam and Frodo arguing/Frodo driving Sam away on the last legs of their quest, no Fog on the Barrow-downs or Tom Bombadil, and so on ad nauseam.

Whew....I feel better now......

 

[regnak]

He found the movies to be against the spirit of the books, i think the man has a right to have an opinion if he oesn't feel like his father's work is being properly represented.

And so does his son. Once Christopher is gone the heirs should be free to have more movies made if they wish. People make it seem as if Christopher can stop this from the grave.

 

[regwec]

I'm of the same opinion. Of course I would love to see some or all of the Silmarillion as films, if those films do the works justice. I would rather have no films than bad ones, however.

As for what to adapt next- if it is the will of Hollywood to strive for a comic-booky tone and to expand the source material with fan fiction, then I suggest a Pixar version of Farmer Giles of Ham.

It is a story I actually like very much.

Edit: Dominic West for Farmer Giles, Jeremy Irons for Chrysophylax. Done.

 

[regnak]

I'm of the same opinion. Of course I would love to see some or all of the Silmarillion as films, if those films do the works justice. I would rather have no films than bad ones, however.

As for what to adapt next- if it is the will of Hollywood to strive for a comic-booky tone and to expand the source material with fan fiction, then I suggest a Pixar version of Farmer Giles of Ham.

It is a story I actually like very much.

Who do you think would do a good job on parts of the Silmarillion?

 

[InCali]

I'm of the same opinion. Of course I would love to see some or all of the Silmarillion as films, if those films do the works justice. I would rather have no films than bad ones, however.

As for what to adapt next- if it is the will of Hollywood to strive for a comic-booky tone and to expand the source material with fan fiction, then I suggest a Pixar version of Farmer Giles of Ham.

It is a story I actually like very much.

I agree. Either do it right or don't do it at all. I hadn't considered Farmer Giles. That might actually be kind of funny, lighthearted, and cool. I might go see it as a lark. For some reason, I don't care that much if liberties are taken with it. I'm not 100% sure why.

Heck, I'd probably pay just to hear them pronounce his full name (going to get it now)...... Ngidius Ahenobarbus Julius Agricola de Hammo

Too funny. Thanks for the post. That one got a big grin on my face.

EDIT: Let me change that....I "would" go see it.

 

[InCali]

Who do you think would do a good job on parts of the Silmarillion?

Yeesh......that's a good question. I "think" there are probably quite a few people who could do a really nice job, but the main issue is "how" they approach making the film (or mini-series....my preference). It's a great story and reaches deep into mythology. Tolkien drew on so much to create this world and The Silmarillion is the rock, the foundation upon which everything else rests. My advice would, obviously, be to just follow the book and don't listen to those people who say "Well, the general movie-goers won't be interested unless.....". I believe people would LOVE the story on screen as written because IT'S A GOOD STORY.

EDIT: I'd love to see the void, the creation, a zoom in to Arda, and the bright starlight. Ultra cool stuff could be done there and I think it would really draw people in......

 

[regwec]

I think the attitude of the studio is more of a risk than the aptitude of the director. The Silmarillion simply couldn't survive being dumbed down into a generic, tweenage, audience-tested, CGI-choked, cartoon. Audiences should either be trusted to cope with the story as it is written, or it shouldn't be adapted at all.

 

[DKDetective]

I think the attitude of the studio is more of a risk than the aptitude of the director. The Silmarillion simply couldn't survive being dumbed down into a generic, tweenage, audience-tested, CGI-choked, cartoon. Audiences should either be trusted to cope with the story as it is written, or it shouldn't be adapted at all.

Yeah, I have trouble seeing The Similarillion adapted properly in any form, let alone as a film or series of films with the way Hollywood is these days. I think there is greater hope for the main story, the Quenta Silmarillion, to be done justice as a lengthy miniseries on a prestige cable channel, but then there would be budget issues of course. However, the budget issues might force them to do more in camera and steer clear of Jackson's CGI excesses.

 

[Iceman]

Simon and Royd support the films, Christopher and the others don't.

I don't know the family structure. Is Royd Christopher's brother or another of his sons? And these 3 (including Simon) are the ones who are relevant right?

I really think the other Tolkien materials can be adapted well. The Hobbit was too small a property for a guy like PJ who wants to go as large as possible with this kind of material. He was more suited to LotR where it's difficult to go too big.

Would the Tolkien estate objections remain if they had more control (& right of veto - to be exercised in Alfrid situations) of the creative process? Maybe a film studio would be willing to work under restrictions if the expected sums added up and they would get exclusive rights to everything Tolkien for the next century.

 

[Bruce Malone]

And so does his son. Once Christopher is gone the heirs should be free to have more movies made if they wish. People make it seem as if Christopher can stop this from the grave.

How much control does he have of the estate? If he puts it in his will that no movies could ever be made from his and his fathers works, would that be binding?

 

[Iceman]

Yeah. It's pretty wild that he started the writing as essentially a linguistic study/exercise. The stories filled in around that. At a very young age, he showed an immense talent for languages. He was a Language and Literature Professor at Oxford. I believe I read somewhere that, in those days, there was only 1 or 2 professors on a board of study.

I remember reading about his history and it was very interesting to see how it all gradually developed. I don't share that fascination with made up languages beyond it sounding authentic in the pages of the book when used, but the guy was a bit of a genius in that field.

 

[InCali]

Yeah, I have trouble seeing The Similarillion adapted properly in any form, let alone as a film or series of films with the way Hollywood is these days. I think there is greater hope for the main story, the Quenta Silmarillion, to be done justice as a lengthy miniseries on a prestige cable channel, but then there would be budget issues of course. However, the budget issues might force them to do more in camera and steer clear of Jackson's CGI excesses.

I think that cinematograpy slightly in excess of Game of Thrones could, for the most part, work. The Ainulindalë and Valaquenta could be done quite quickly and their addition would really enhance what comes after in the Quenta Silmarillion.

The thing is if the Tolkien family were to decide (I don't want to write Christopher's obituary just yet) this could be put to film, might they then just say "Hey, if we're going to do this, we might as well make a LOT of money"? Then some studio gets their grimey claws on this and the next thing you know, we have an elf named Loopylin the Light or some such thing.

 

[InCali]

How much control does he have of the estate? If he puts it in his will that no movies could ever be made from his and his fathers works, would that be binding?

Christopher Tolkien is 90 years old. I was looking into parts of this and saw some stuff about why Peter Jackson "couldn't" make more Tolkien films. I think they should have said why Peter Jackson "shouldn't" make more Tolkien films.

My opinion about Mr. Jackson is sinking quickly. I get the impression he'd really enjoy frelling up yet another book with (what can loosely be described as) his "interpretations". He seems so smug and proud after butchering "The Hobbit" (probably) more than LotR.

 

[Iceman]

Future projects don't necessarily have to have Jackson helming. And being as respectful as possible, if Christopher Tolkien is 90 a change to the rights situation can't be that far away.

 

[regwec]

Maybe a film studio would be willing to work under restrictions if the expected sums added up and they would get exclusive rights to everything Tolkien for the next century.

That wouldn't be within their gift: The Hobbit and LOTR will be out of copyright in less than 30 years' time. The Silmarillion is less clear because of Christopher's editorial role, but that will expire 70 years after he passes away at the latest.

How much control does he have of the estate? If he puts it in his will that no movies could ever be made from his and his fathers works, would that be binding?

No- if you bequeath something as a complete gift, the donee can do whatever they like with it. That includes intellectual property. If Christopher writes it into trust, then the beneficiaries can still do what they like with it once they hold legal as well as equitable title, which they can demand if they are legal adults and in agreement.

The point is that you can't give someone something with permanent limitations put on its use; because in that respect you would still be retaining an interest in equity, which you can't have once you're dead. It is different if you instruct trustees that somebody can't inherit trust property unless they meet certain conditions (usually reaching legal age, or getting married, or having children).

 

[InCali]

Future projects don't necessarily have to have Jackson helming. And being as respectful as possible, if Christopher Tolkien is 90 a change to the rights situation can't be that far away.

I'd change "don't necessarily have to have Jackson helming" to "shouldn't have Jackson helming". (And I'm being as respectful to him as possible).

 

[Iceman]

That wouldn't be within their gift: The Hobbit and LOTR will be out of copyright in less than 30 years' time. The Silmarillion is less clear because of Christopher's editorial role, but that will expire 70 years after he passes away at the latest.

Does that mean they enter public domain at that point?

I'd change "don't necessarily have to have Jackson helming" to "shouldn't have Jackson helming". (And I'm being as respectful to him as possible).

Haha.

I'd like to see someone new get a shot for any future films but I'm still grateful for the LotR films. Those could have been a hell of a lot worse in many other director's hands and with the EEs they're my favourite trilogy.

 

[regwec]

Does that mean they enter public domain at that point?

Yes- expect LOTR to be Kindle's most downloaded book in about 2043.

I'd like to see someone new get a shot for any future films but I'm still grateful for the LotR films. Those could have been a hell of a lot worse in many other director's hands and with the EEs they're my favourite trilogy.

I will certainly agree with that much. Getting the movies funded and made at all was a phenomenal achievement, and it is a blessing that PJ and co were at that point humble and respectful enough of the book to render it onto film in a recognizable form.

 

[Iceman]

Yes- expect LOTR to be Kindle's most downloaded book in about 2043.

I'm not totally clear what that would mean. Could people who wrote new stories after that date (with the purpose of making money rather than fan fiction) use things from LotR or would that still be restricted?

I will certainly agree with that much. Getting the movies funded and made at all was a phenomenal achievement, and it is a blessing that PJ and co were at that point humble and respectful enough of the book to render it onto film in a recognizable form.

I don't think PJ has a particular fondness for the story of The Hobbit necessarily, and saw it more as a vehicle to do more LotR related material. If he'd been told he had to keep it to one film I suspect he would have walked. I've been much less harsh on him than I would have if I'd had a similar attachment to the book that I do for LotR and the extended more adult Tolkien-verse. And I have some loyalty just based on the fact that he was the guy to take on the huge task of putting this key work to film and he didn't F it up. When I first heard the films were being made I didn't know if they were going to be treated any more seriously than previous fantasy films had to that point.

 

[InCali]

I'd like to see someone new get a shot for any future films but I'm still grateful for the LotR films. Those could have been a hell of a lot worse in many other director's hands and with the EEs they're my favourite trilogy.

I can see why you liked it. Still, there was SO much that could/should have been done. With some foresight, there could easily have been more than 3 films (though that would have been a huge undertaking for a cast that did a TON of filming all at once). What would I have liked (to name just a few)?

Farmer Maggot
The Elves on the Road from Hobbiton
More accurate Old Forest
Tom Bombadil/Fog on the Barrow-downs
More accurate Prancing Pony up to meeting "Arwen" (ie Glorfindel)
Way more accuracy of the events leading up to and including the time spent in Rohan (This part REALLY got butchered).

That's a start, but, I agree, that it was much truer than The Hobbit. I've heard Jackson say that adding all of the above would have (essentially) wrecked the movie and I get to respectfully disagree.

 

[regwec]

I'm not totally clear what that would mean. Could people who wrote new stories after that date (with the purpose of making money rather than fan fiction) use things from LotR or would that still be restricted?

As far as I am aware, it is a free-for-all, with the caveat that (obviously) you can't subsequently copyright Hobbits because you have written a Hentai comic which features them.

This is why Dracula and Sherlock Holmes pop up in everything, but why James Bond and The Joker don't.

 

[Iceman]

I can see why you liked it. Still, there was SO much that could/should have been done. With some foresight, there could easily have been more than 3 films (though that would have been a huge undertaking for a cast that did a TON of filming all at once). What would I have liked (to name just a few)?

Farmer Maggot
The Elves on the Road from Hobbiton
More accurate Old Forest
Tom Bombadil/Fog on the Barrow-downs
More accurate Prancing Pony up to meeting "Arwen" (ie Glorfindel)
Way more accuracy of the events leading up to and including the time spent in Rohan (This part REALLY got butchered).

I would have preferred the 6 film treatment relating to each of the splits in the books. I like that the EE is split into 6 in that way and he could have really gone to town on each of those parts adding in many of those aspects. I think some of the early parts from the FotR book needed to be cut for the theatrical edition of the film or the pacing would have turned members of the general audience off but most of this could be added back for the EE which is for fans. Every adaptation misses out elements that are fan favourites and many of my favourites were cut completely (I've mentioned before but in particular Glorfindel, Prince Imrahil & the sons of Elrond). All things considered the guy did seriously well and his overall achievement on those films easily outweighs his mistakes. Plus imagine a Michael Bay LotR.

That's a start, but, I agree, that it was much truer than The Hobbit. I've heard Jackson say that adding all of the above would have (essentially) wrecked the movie and I get to respectfully disagree.

And he didn't seem to care about impact on the movies (wrecking for purists) of adding absolutely everything and much more with these Hobbit films! I'm in the advantageous situation that The Hobbit text means maybe 10% of what LotR means to me (I've only read it once). And because it's not ruining my childhood (as a LotR or Silmarillion farce would have done) I'd be able to enjoy these films even just as tech demos of fantasy battles and fantasy worlds with some nice character moments thrown in even if the overall project had the substance of Transformers sequels (and they had a bit more than that even to the most hardcore critics ).

 

[Iceman]

As far as I am aware, it is a free-for-all, with the caveat that (obviously) you can't subsequently copyright Hobbits because you have written a Hentai comic which features them.

This is why Dracula and Sherlock Holmes pop up in everything, but why James Bond and The Joker don't.

So strange to think that any new author could use Gandalf or Aragorn or the Nazgul on a whim. I bet a lot of current authors invent characters that are pretty much the same in everything but name anyway. And I'd say the majority of fantasy writers have borrowed something from those texts.