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

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Well, they'll have to augment Tolkien's rather limited cast of female characters just to get to requisite number of boobies onscreen

I'm pretty sure it is a foregone conclusion that they are going to do that anyway.

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

I'm pretty sure it is a foregone conclusion that they are going to do that anyway.

Which... isn't a bad thing?

I mean, except the titillation part. But if a 'suggested by The Lord of the Rings' TV show has to exist, then one that used only characters and events from the books (outside the actual timeline of the War of the Rings) is going to be very shallow and empty. Middle-earth is an amazingly rich tapestry of geography, history, and cultures, but Tolkien only sketched in a few actual people outside specific times.

So more people will absolutely have to be added in, and honestly I'd rather they be 'new' than the alternative of shoehorning everyone into spaces that are already there. If the story is Young Aragorn, do we really want every character in Gondor to be Baby Ioreth, Baranor Father of Beregond, the rangers Mablungsdad, Damrodsdad, and Anbornsdad...?

If they're going to do this, then I would much rather see genuinely new characters reflecting the diversity and lack thereof of Gondor, Rohan, Bree and so forth, than having them succumb to Star Wars disease (which has recently provided a story about the Stormtrooper who stunned Princess Leia at the start of the first film - he was of course a conflicted person with a rich inner life).

Obvious caveat: it would be nice if the new characters were from Middle-earth, rather than the Westeros refugees we're probably in line for...

[William Cloud Hicklin]

then one that used only characters and events from the books (outside the actual timeline of the War of the Rings) is going to be very shallow and empty.

I got news for you: It's gonna be shallow and empty no matter what.

[Morthoron]

Lord of the Schwing.

[Andsigil]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

I got news for you: It's gonna be shallow and empty no matter what.

And filled to the brim with PC tropes to the point that it's hardly recognizable as a Tolkien work.

[skip spence]

Wow, how did this happen? I'm genuinely shocked the estate sold them the rights. Then again I'm not. Christoffer is old and the younger generation would be hard put to decline a (I'm sure) very significant offer.

There was a time not that long ago this would excite me somewhat, at least instill a little vain hope that the series perhaps would be good after all. Not so now. There's really no chance of that. Not for Tolkienistas like us.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by skip spence

There was a time not that long ago this would excite me somewhat, at least instill a little vain hope that the series perhaps would be good after all. Not so now. There's really no chance of that. Not for Tolkienistas like us.

Sadly, you're right.

Tolkien himself said way back in 1955 that he thought LOTR was "unsuitable for 'dramatisation'". He was quite correct. The language, story, and characterizations are sublime and distinctive enough to make an accurate adaptation, as least as far as the ephemeral qualities, impossible. Another GoT clone with swords, sorcery, violence, and maybe as much skin as they can get away with. Why do an adaptation of someone else's work if you're just going to undo it?

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Sadly, you're right.

Tolkien himself said way back in 1955 that he thought LOTR was "unsuitable for 'dramatisation'". He was quite correct. The language, story, and characterizations are sublime and distinctive enough to make an accurate adaptation, as least as far as the ephemeral qualities, impossible. Another GoT clone with swords, sorcery, violence, and maybe as much skin as they can get away with. Why do an adaptation of someone else's work if you're just going to undo it?

Why remake classic films or TV shows at all? Why disembogue ubiquitous sequels ad nauseam (Rocky, Die Hard, Halloween, Fast and Furious, Star Wars, Godzillas, King Kongs, et al)? Did we need two Hulk remakes within a five year period? Which number re-adaptation of Superman, Batman and Spiderman are we on? I've lost count.

There was a period when remakes were more sporadic but better done, usually replacing a silent film that movie viewers would no longer watch (Robin Hood, Ben Hur and The Hunchback of Notre Dame come to mind), but now there seems to be a decided dearth of original ideas reaching the screen, or at least the proliferation of remakes and sequels seems to have saturated the market. Often, it seems genuinely surprising when someone offers a film of genuine depth and originality, and not just a reiteration of a well-worn theme.

Hell, they continue to reuse the "Wilhelm scream" (372 movies and counting). What, you can't come up with one on your own?