Lord of the Rings TV series gets multi-season order at Amazon

[davem]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Good point, but the article *calls* it a "LotR series" and says specifically that the deal concerns "global TV rights to 'Lord of the Rings'". Even the direct quote from the representative for the Estate and Harper Collins calls it "the first-ever multi-season television series for The Lord of the Rings".

I'd take that mention of Lord of the Rings as a reference to something the public recognise. How many people know what the Silmarillion is, or would associate it with Lord of the Rings? And the main thing to keep in mind is that the rights to LotR still belong with the Zaentz Company, so what would Amazon be paying $200 mil to the Tolkien Estate for?

[Kuruharan]

My bet is on a young Aragorn, although some kind of adaptation of the Sil might be possible.

I guess if they really want to go full on Game of Thrones they could do the Kin-strife.

EDIT: I take it all back. It just hit me: The Children of Hurin.

It has the grimness, the unhappy ending, and the requisite incest.

EDIT EDIT: Although, who owns the rights to The Children of Hurin?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

My bet is on a young Aragorn, although some kind of adaptation of the Sil might be possible.

I guess if they really want to go full on Game of Thrones they could do the Kin-strife.

Warners have licensed the movie rights for the Aragorn story from Zaentz as it is, so there's no need for any Estate involvement, let alone the handing over of all that money to them. I wouldn't rule out some Third Age stuff, I'm just genuinely confused about what the Estate has to sell, if it isn't The Sil stuff.

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by davem

Warners have licensed the movie rights for the Aragorn story from Zaentz as it is, so there's no need for any Estate involvement, let alone the handing over of all that money to them. I wouldn't rule out some Third Age stuff, I'm just genuinely confused about what the Estate has to sell, if it isn't The Sil stuff.

I've revised my original opinion (see above), but this does pose an interesting question of where the line is regarding what is considered included within a particular work.

The most generous interpretation would say that anything included in the appendices of LOTR could be considered off limits, but I can't think that interpretation would hold water because that would be so sweeping.

[Zigûr]

I can't substantiate this, but I feel like I remember there being some kind of grey area due to the substantial overlap between The Silmarillion and the Appendices.

I think I've mentioned before my "maybe I just dreamt it" impression that there was some stipulation that if a narrative element was mentioned in both the Appendices and The Silmarillion (or other material not part of the film rights) but not in the main text of The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings it could not be adapted, but if it was mentioned in the body of The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings proper it could be regardless of whether it was mentioned in The Silmarillion et al.

But as I say, I can't back that up. If there's any truth to it, it might explain the Estate's involvement, but I'll be the first to admit that I'm reaching.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

I can't substantiate this, but I feel like I remember there being some kind of grey area due to the substantial overlap between The Silmarillion and the Appendices.

I think I've mentioned before my "maybe I just dreamt it" impression that there was some stipulation that if a narrative element was mentioned in both the Appendices and The Silmarillion (or other material not part of the film rights) but not in the main text of The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings it could not be adapted, but if it was mentioned in the body of The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings proper it could be regardless of whether it was mentioned in The Silmarillion et al.

But as I say, I can't back that up. If there's any truth to it, it might explain the Estate's involvement, but I'll be the first to admit that I'm reaching.

I think I can recall one poster claiming this... but he wasn't exactly what I'd call a reliable source.

This affair seems to be getting more peculiar the more we hear about it, doesn't it? Is it possible Zaentz only holds the film rights and not the TV rights?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

I think I can recall one poster claiming this... but he wasn't exactly what I'd call a reliable source.

This affair seems to be getting more peculiar the more we hear about it, doesn't it? Is it possible Zaentz only holds the film rights and not the TV rights?

It's possible-but the Zaentz rights seen to cover video games as well as films, so I'd assume TV would be part of the rights as well. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midd...th_Enterprises