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

[Zigûr]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

I think beyond any of those, it will fail due to clueless showrunners and hack writers. It will be, to borrow from Douglas Adams, something almost, but not entirely, unlike Tolkien.

I can't imagine how it will possibly work in an artistic sense, admittedly, but I'm sure (as it always does with these things) it will initially be touted as the best thing ever made and then the pendulum will swing the other way and it will become the worst ever. Or maybe it will trip straight out of the gate. I suppose only time will tell.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

I can't imagine how it will possibly work in an artistic sense, admittedly, but I'm sure (as it always does with these things) it will initially be touted as the best thing ever made and then the pendulum will swing the other way and it will become the worst ever. Or maybe it will trip straight out of the gate. I suppose only time will tell.

If it's wildly successful, I fear it will be due to a disconnection with what I consider the "spirit" of Tolkien's works.

What I get from these books I can find nowhere in contemporary culture, and with the current rush to dump everything older than ten years for the ideal of "progress", I am not at all hopeful the show would have anything for me to appreciate.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Personally, I was going to watch the series (subscribe to a streaming service? Not if I can avoid it) - ignoring the Tolkien connection and just seeing what they come up with. Once it's out, I'm happy to give it a try on behalf of the lot of us Downers and then bring back report. Though, if anyone is expecting Tolkien, I rather fear they might be disappointed.

My question is, how can anyone expect Tolkien from anything besides the books themselves? Okay, perhaps I am being hypocritical here - I myself find Tolkien in some paintings (but one could argue that those are static and only offer an illustration to the text itself, and only to a certain moment) and I found it in a card game (well, that had illustrations - so the same as above - and flavour text from the books) and tabletop roleplaying games (where the chief component is one's imagination).

But a film - or a series - has the problem that it offers a "whole package" and does not leave anything to imagination. Even if it somehow managed to be 100% faithful to Tolkien in spirit (to be fair, I would be happy with, say, 60%; or more than 50%, which is something that gets close to what PJ managed - but already that does not qualify as Tolkien, in my book. And yes, I know I am very strict about this), so, even if it succeeded, it would be visually and in terms of atmosphere probably completely different from what I perceive to be "Tolkien". And if by some miracle myself and the director have the same vision, then fifty other people won't.

I am always reminded of this quote from On Fairy-Stories:

Originally Posted by On Fairy-Stories

Should the story say “he ate bread,” the dramatic producer or painter can only show ”a piece of bread” according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own. If a story says “he climbed a hill and saw a river in the valley below,” the illustrator may catch, or nearly catch, his own vision of such a scene; but every hearer of the words will have his own picture.

So, no, I am certainly never expecting Tolkien and absolutely not "my" Tolkien. It will, at best, be a decent adaptation - or in this case, a decent "fanfiction". Likely I will perceive it about as close to Tolkien as I would a handheld console game from thirty years ago composed of four brown pixels that are supposed to be Orcs. (That hypothetical game could actually be more satisfying to me as it would leave more to imagination.)

Originally Posted by Zigûr

I can't imagine how it will possibly work in an artistic sense, admittedly, but I'm sure (as it always does with these things) it will initially be touted as the best thing ever made and then the pendulum will swing the other way and it will become the worst ever. Or maybe it will trip straight out of the gate. I suppose only time will tell.

Very interesting. My approach is usually the other way around: I am repulsed (and usually do not desire to watch it in the first place), then I may grudgingly admit that it has some good points. Eventually I may grow to accept that it is not that bad, and even though it is not Tolkien, it deserves recognition for the work put into it and for the parts where the creators clearly tried. (That, if I have to spell it out, was literally how I felt about PJ's films.)

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

My question is, how can anyone expect Tolkien from anything besides the books themselves?

But this is being sold as offering something of the sort. The consumer bases their choices on the statements of the marketing.

What we are pointing out here is that Amazon is engaging in what might be referred to as terminologial inexactitude motivated by greed for gain.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

But this is being sold as offering something of the sort. The consumer bases their choices on the statements of the marketing.

What we are pointing out here is that Amazon is engaging in what might be referred to as terminologial inexactitude motivated by greed for gain.

Just the same thing that PJ did, as far as I am concerned - or that the makers of all these LotR video games are doing, for that matter.

But, at the same time, I assume that an average, not-as-geeky-as-us person will understand Amazon's advertising as "something like PJ's LotR" (very broadly speaking), and that is, while it will not make *me* consider it "Tolkien" any more, acceptable in terms of what it is doing - as much as PJ's films were acceptable. (And, to be fair, they were.)

So, it will likely be a matter of how acceptable it is. If it is roughly similar to PJ, maybe worse in some ways, but also maybe better in some ways, then it still fits the generic category of "commercial adaptations of LotR for wide public".

Would I wish that they were done more faithfully? Sure. But like I said, even that has a limit (you are never going to make Bree or Boromir look 100% the way I imagine them to look).

Is it motivated by greed? I sadly assume that it is, because what in this rotten world of commerce, that Amazon is a prime example of, is not? But then one hopes that there are at least some individuals present who do it out of love for Tolkien (and note that I am intentionally saying love and not enthusiasm; enthusiasm can spawn a ton of fanfictions that can however be as far from Tolkien as Batman versus Predator).

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Just the same thing that PJ did, as far as I am concerned - or that the makers of all these LotR video games are doing, for that matter.

My intense hatred of his...actions (I will not dignify them with the word "effort") in this regard are a matter of copious public record...parasites trying to stand on the shoulders of a giant because their own meager offerings are so inadequate.

But then one hopes that there are at least some individuals present who do it out of love for Tolkien

It is a matter of public record that those people have been deliberately run off.

[Boromir88]

I go back and forth all the time about the Amazon series, currently I'm at a "maybe I'll watch the series a few years later if people I know and respect say it's great and worth it. And if they say it's a flop then maybe I'll watch it 10 years later."

My problem with the trend in Hollywood and Amazon, Disney...etc is it's just laziness and uninspired. There's nothing wrong with trying to create stories that are relatable to different audiences, or has a positive message you want to get out...but Melkor have mercy, CREATE YOUR OWN.

Changing races, genders, adding in love interests to a story when there isn't one will inevitably be a cheaper, lazier product. In my opinion it just tells me right off the start "Hey, I can't write an inspiring, good asian/latino/gay/female character, so I'm going to use a large brand like Tolkien to sell it."

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Changing races, genders, adding in love interests to a story when there isn't one will inevitably be a cheaper, lazier product. In my opinion it just tells me right off the start "Hey, I can't write an inspiring, good asian/latino/gay/female character, so I'm going to use a large brand like Tolkien to sell it."

I agree with what you said in general but... in this particular case, this specific thing you named isn't probably going to be a problem. Because exactly, if this is going to be taking place somewhere in the Second Age, then you don't know anything about the people's races, genders and love interests (apart from that if there is, say, Númenorean king who has a known wife, obviously he should be married to her; but aside from such a case anything goes).

This whole thing will be about inventing new characters besides some five known Isildurs and co. But Isildur's second-in-command, Isildur's best childhood friend, the person who bullied Isildur at school, Isildur's kind teacher who secretly let him study Elvish... all these are open to create. And yes, the only question is whether the creators will make these INTERESTING, and not just random and un-Tolkien-y straw figurines. That's their only job.

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

"Hey, I can't write an inspiring, good asian/latino/gay/female character, so I'm going to use a large brand like Tolkien to sell it."

That right there is basically everything that is wrong with contemporary pop culture summed up in a single sentence.