"Other opportunities include exploring additional movies based on iconic characters such as Gandalf, Aragorn, Gollum, Galadriel, Eowyn and other characters from the literary works of J.R.R. Tolkien"
Please, don't.
Please, don't.
Not to mention that, when you keep something going forever, it will eventually turn to shit. I dislike long running TV shows for the same reason: give me two or three seasons of your best, not six seasons where I’m questioning why I’m still watching between the premiere and finale of each.
If you’re gonna do a franchise, at least do something that doesn’t have already widely successful media.
Not franchises, but I’m also sick of remakes that are complete total ass. I came across the “new” Hawaii 5-0 on TV and was actually livid at how they ruined that series. Every character felt like a douchebag, and they really put effort into making it as corny as possible.
I'm not sure where you draw the line. Some of my favourite LotR and Star Wars content wasn't what people would consider the main event, so if it meant not being able to have things like KotOR or various Middle Earth games, I'd rather we didn't draw a line at all.
I know, I'm focussing on the good, and there is some absolute trash out there... But I think both sides are important to consider before banning rewrites and spin-offs.
Frodo: This is what?
Sam: If I take one more step, it'll be the farthest away from Tolkien I've ever been.
An inclusive and safe community should celebrate the Marvel-ification of the LotR universe ;-)
Istari are sent after the events of Silmarillion end, after War of the Ring.
https://www.silmarillionwritersguild.org/reference/character...
There are many, many stories that can be written both in the past of Tolkien's trilogy (i.e. adapt the Silmarillion and other myths), or in the future - how does the Shire develop? What about the kingdoms of men? You can have an entire A Song of Ice and Fire epic about the intrigues between kingdoms after the elves leave. Or a much smaller adventure about hobbits from Bagend going where they shouldn't - trespassing in Tom Bombadil's domain, searching for treasure, with most of them dying for really pissing off old Tom, delivering the message that nature should be respected, as it is not evil, nor good, but simply exists for itself.
Or check out the highest rated fanfiction, pay the author a few hundred thousand and adapt that. It will be cheaper and safer than trying to turn Middle Earth into something it is not.
The IP helps with the marketing efforts, but that’s about it.
Though I am surprised that with all the wealth of books out there for inspiration, how bad Hollywood movie plots are.
I saw a preview of The Call of the Wild remake, where the sled dogs are racing away from an avalanche. The whole thing looks like a Disneyworld ride. That's not the theme or point of the story at all. Too bad.
I'll have to disagree :). The only remake that was better to the original is John Carpenter's "The Thing".
(The 1987 original is rarely seen).
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0016544
or the 1929 Ben Hur. Yes, the sea battle and chariot race in the 1929 version were great, but the rest needed a remake.
The remakes after the 1959 version were all "what were they thinking" pointless.
Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" remake was much better than the earlier animated version.
Jackson's "Hobbit" trilogy was just unwatchable. It seems like after the huge success of LotR, everyone around Jackson said nothing but "yes sir, yes sir, three bags full sir!"
It lacked the immortal “Where there’s a whip, there’s a way” marching song from the animated Return of the King, so that’s debatable.
Somebody is taking a dump of something I cherish, with no care for its beauty and with money as a priority. It feels like somebody broke my trust or some social contract and walked away with the benefits and little consequences.
It may sound stupid, and it's definitely irrational since it's just a movie, but sometimes after I see this kind of action, I experience it as a personal insult for some weird reasons.
Novels tend to be written one person. They get written at that person's pace. Sometimes authors stop for years, then return to books. A lot of them have tons of uncompleted chapters, scenes and such sloshing around.
Films are a group effort. They're produced by a company. They hire people, set schedules. All that results in different strengths and weaknesses. Thematic consistency or artistic integrity tend to be strengths of the solo artist. Hence the difference in quality between novel and film story quality.
Also, a lot fewer films get made. That means there are a lot fewer people who get to try, and the chances of exceptional quality goes down.
Also co-authors, advisors, friends and all sorts of contributors. That said, the author is the sun and editors' role is to help authors write their book. The editor is not under the impression that it is their book.
One of the best things about books is that it triggers the imagination, every reader imagines a slightly different version of the characters and settings.
Once a visual portrayal exists, it's quite difficult to not 'see' that character in your imagination as that version, be it Daniel Radcliffe, Ian McKellan, Sean Astin, or whoever.
Not that it "destroys" it as such, but it does affect/influence it.
E.g I never watched the new Ghost In Th Shell movie because the 1995 anime is one of the most influential films I have seen as a kid and I don’t want to meddle with those memories. Similarly I skipped most movie adaptations of book I liked. There are enough great movies to choose from.
Microsoft spent years "exploring" a Halo film.
(It must be said, I think a studio might bite on a Gandalf film, but I doubt there's enough in any of the others.)
There is no sane framework for using state violence to enforce property laws over who is allowed to write stories over fictional characters. These characters don’t belong to anyone.
These remakes however get made by people being paid to spin out low tier content based on the IP that Tolkien painstakingly created. They’re coasting on his work and will tarnish his creation just to make a quick buck.
It’s a shame. They should make their own IP instead, but of course that’s too risky in the pursuit of profit.
> In 1966 a fan of his stories wrote to him detailing a 'sequel' to The Lord of the Rings that he planned to write. Tolkien forwarded the letter to his publisher denouncing 'this young ass' for his 'impertinent contribution to my troubles' and asking for their lawyers to write a suitably-worded letter refusing permission. [1]
I can't help but wonder if Tolkien, if he was alive today, would think of modern writers "working with his material" in similar terms.
I’m not fan of copyright laws either, but this is a misrepresentation
Non-commercial fanfic often slides under the radar, but it is not legal except in the unusual case where the copyright holder has given explicit permission.