Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Great Middle Earth Bake-Off!

The Children of Hurin could probably be one or maybe even two seasons.

Anything in the Silmarillian could be a good TV show. Or one about the fall of Arnor. Remaking any of the stuff that's been made so far, that however is unacceptable.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Anything in the Silmarillian could be a good TV show. Or one about the fall of Arnor. Remaking any of the stuff that's been made so far, that however is unacceptable.

Would you really be that heartbroken if they remade the Hobbit?

I'm strangely comfortable with the idea, myself.

Granted though, that really isn't enough plot points for a multi-series venture if you want to maintain good narrative pacing.

I'd kind of like to see it just be called Middle Earth, and free up the creative group to hop around all over Tolkein's universe. Moria the series, detailing the rise and fall of Balin would be awesome to watch- but again, it isn't something that should be stretched out too far.

We have it on good authority from a fellow Dakkaite who is great friends with Christopher Tolkien, the best friends, that the Tolkien estate would never allow any creative to deviate so far from the source material like Jackson did ever again.

 malamis wrote:
If it goes the route of Shadow Of Mordor/War and puts some meat on ancillary characters ... good times approach

Butchering the lore material? No thanks.

I heard it was going to be an Animal Planet show..."Mumaks: Misunderstood Giants".

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
We have it on good authority from a fellow Dakkaite who is great friends with Christopher Tolkien, the best friends, that the Tolkien estate would never allow any creative to deviate so far from the source material like Jackson did ever again.

I think its been reported a fair few times that Jackson deviated too much with Hobbit. Lord of the Rings most accepted the deviations as part of the result of trying to cram 3 huge books into only 3 films. Hobbit though got odd and added loads of things that didn't need adding at all. A shame as it should have fitted into two or three films very neatly.

kronk wrote:

 reds8n wrote:


..Or perhaps we'll finally get an answer as to how/why the orcs are familiar with the concept of a "menu".

Mordor has tons of restaurants, silly.

But you need a reservation.

One does not simply walk in...

Totally exalted.




Honestly, it's hard for me to be interested in any sort of prequel, especially when you know that there are certain "safe" characters. Any attempt to fake them dead is completely wasted, as you are aware they are firmly in place in later installments. Unless, of course, you are going to Abrams it...

Any time you see the film of a book, if you've read the book, you know the outcome of the film. The point of watching is the visual and aural treat, the production values, the quality of the performances and so on.

Obviously there may be some people who went to see LoTR or The Hobbit without ever having read the books, but it surely must have been a minority. (That said, in my family, neither my wife nor daughter have read any of the books so I was the odd one out...)

Moria the series, detailing the rise and fall of Balin would be awesome to watch- but again, it isn't something that should be stretched out too far.

That would be incredible, I love the Balin story.

The hobbit films weren't great to watch due to the massive over reliance on CGI, so I hope they keep CGI to a minimum in a future telly series.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think setting it in the 4th age about the cult of Morgoth would make a decent drama and they would have more freedom about what happens since Tolkein never wrote that part.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Any time you see the film of a book, if you've read the book, you know the outcome of the film. The point of watching is the visual and aural treat, the production values, the quality of the performances and so on.

Obviously there may be some people who went to see LoTR or The Hobbit without ever having read the books, but it surely must have been a minority. (That said, in my family, neither my wife nor daughter have read any of the books so I was the odd one out...)

A minority? Who didn't read a book? Not in America!

Seriously though, reading never had that kind of cultural penetration here.

 Kroem wrote:

I think setting it in the 4th age about the cult of Morgoth would make a decent drama and they would have more freedom about what happens since Tolkein never wrote that part.

True, but I think that could lose a lot of people. Especially since you'd be making it up as you went along.

I think it would be best to at least get the Silmarilian out of the way, and myriad of other material, before you started with a half baked idea that Tolkien himself trashed.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Any time you see the film of a book, if you've read the book, you know the outcome of the film. The point of watching is the visual and aural treat, the production values, the quality of the performances and so on.

Obviously there may be some people who went to see LoTR or The Hobbit without ever having read the books, but it surely must have been a minority. (That said, in my family, neither my wife nor daughter have read any of the books so I was the odd one out...)

A minority? Who didn't read a book? Not in America!

Seriously though, reading never had that kind of cultural penetration here.

Tough cheese for them, frankly.

I would take a Hobbit show that covers what happens in the shire during the trilogy. Or just a sitcom set in the shire. Nothing really ever happens but they always make a big deal over nothing. That could be entertaining.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
We have it on good authority from a fellow Dakkaite who is great friends with Christopher Tolkien, the best friends, that the Tolkien estate would never allow any creative to deviate so far from the source material like Jackson did ever again.

And yet Sexy Shelob exists.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
I would take a Hobbit show that covers what happens in the shire during the trilogy. Or just a sitcom set in the shire. Nothing really ever happens but they always make a big deal over nothing. That could be entertaining.

Real Housewives of Hobbiton. Backbiting Sacksville-Bagginses, drama, and a whole lot of awkward staring.

Those aren't even her real feet. I hear her mother had a thing for Proudfeet.

Who doesn't? You know what they say about Proudfeet....

I apologize, that should never be made. I would rather see a Japanese Gollom based fishing/quiz show where he tricks Orcs and Goblins into implausibly elaborate traps. Cleanse your mental palate with something else that should never have been made.

Kilkrazy wrote:Any time you see the film of a book, if you've read the book, you know the outcome of the film. The point of watching is the visual and aural treat, the production values, the quality of the performances and so on.

Obviously there may be some people who went to see LoTR or The Hobbit without ever having read the books, but it surely must have been a minority. (That said, in my family, neither my wife nor daughter have read any of the books so I was the odd one out...)

Did you ever see "First Blood"?

And "I, Robot" went exactly the same way as the book itself. Even better, since robot as menace stories where ones that Isaac Asimov specifically stated that he hated.

I haven't seen First Blood. I don't know anything about it.

I, Robot is a collection of short stories. The film is based on a few elements and plot lines out of that, with an strong action theme to justify Will Smith, and a new ending pasted on.

If I remember correctly Asimov wrote several books of short stories about robots. It would be more correct to say that he wrote the stories for magazines, and they were collected into the books in the order of their timeline.

First Blood was the first Rambo movie, a phenomena of US Cold War culture. The other phenomena is that it was the FIRST of those movies, especially since the film was an adaptation of a novel that ended with Rambo's character getting killed ala "Of Mice And Men" by his former commander.

I'm aware of what is contained in the "I, Robot" book. It is sitting on my shelf next to almost everything sci fi the man ever wrote. And that is why I pointed out the difference. I guess I could have also listed "I Am Legend" as one that ends differently...




HOWEVER


My original point was in the context of the cinematic medium. ANY prequels are hamstrung by being prequels, and usually manage to blow up continuity while they're at it. You could call it being Enterprise-d. THAT is why I'm usually not on board with prequels. I was dreading AbramsTrek because it was advertised as a prequel, and wasn't really stoked until I heard it was essentially a reboot. That is why I think prequels peter out in the end. No real sense of danger is there unless you know the character isn't in the later movies. Episode 1 from Star Wars is a great example. I really only gave a gak about Qui Gonn and Darth Maul, because I didn't know where they were eventually going to end up.

True, but I think that could lose a lot of people. Especially since you'd be making it up as you went along.

I think it would be best to at least get the Silmarilian out of the way, and myriad of other material, before you started with a half baked idea that Tolkien himself trashed.

Fair point, I just liked what they did with the 4th age total war :-)

Some bloke did a synopsis of the Silmarillian in the LOTR section of this forum recently, it actually seemed pretty cool.
I had always been warned off it by even the biggest Tolkien anoraks!

 Manchu wrote:
The Children of Hurin could probably be one or maybe even two seasons.

Read that recently - wow it was depressing. Not sure it would make a great show - It would make Hell on Wheels look like a comedy.

Beran and Luthien would work - I'd watch that!

That Dance Battle ruled. I would totally watch that as a Step It Up type of movie.

 Just Tony wrote:

My original point was in the context of the cinematic medium. ANY prequels are hamstrung by being prequels, and usually manage to blow up continuity while they're at it. You could call it being Enterprise-d. THAT is why I'm usually not on board with prequels. I was dreading AbramsTrek because it was advertised as a prequel, and wasn't really stoked until I heard it was essentially a reboot. That is why I think prequels peter out in the end. No real sense of danger is there unless you know the character isn't in the later movies. Episode 1 from Star Wars is a great example. I really only gave a gak about Qui Gonn and Darth Maul, because I didn't know where they were eventually going to end up.

I think the Prequel curse really only applies to movies which have original storylines. If you're adapting a book you don't really have that problem. You're already railroaded to an extent by the plot of the book, and anybody who has read the book knows. I mean, its not like the Hobbit's problem was that we knew certain characters were gonna make it and others were not.

Silmarillion would hypothetically be the same way. We all know how the various story lines end. It's the inbetween bits and how it gets represented that is the spectacle here.

'It's Always Sunny in Dol Goldur'? You gotta admit, Danny DeVito would be a great Hobbit!

 Easy E wrote:
Why?

They should do a Drizzit TV show! <Ducks flying fruit>

I'd probably watch that to be honest. D&D has had some great settings over the years with plenty of material to adapt.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
We have it on good authority from a fellow Dakkaite who is great friends with Christopher Tolkien, the best friends, that the Tolkien estate would never allow any creative to deviate so far from the source material like Jackson did ever again.

And yet Sexy Shelob exists.

Ssshhh! You might make people think I'm talking about the same poster who claimed he killed a bunch of gang members in Texas and taught Gary Gygax how to roll dice.

 Just Tony wrote:
First Blood was the first Rambo movie, a phenomena of US Cold War culture. The other phenomena is that it was the FIRST of those movies, especially since the film was an adaptation of a novel that ended with Rambo's character getting killed ala "Of Mice And Men" by his former commander.

I'm aware of what is contained in the "I, Robot" book. It is sitting on my shelf next to almost everything sci fi the man ever wrote. And that is why I pointed out the difference. I guess I could have also listed "I Am Legend" as one that ends differently...




HOWEVER


My original point was in the context of the cinematic medium. ANY prequels are hamstrung by being prequels, and usually manage to blow up continuity while they're at it. You could call it being Enterprise-d. THAT is why I'm usually not on board with prequels. I was dreading AbramsTrek because it was advertised as a prequel, and wasn't really stoked until I heard it was essentially a reboot. That is why I think prequels peter out in the end. No real sense of danger is there unless you know the character isn't in the later movies. Episode 1 from Star Wars is a great example. I really only gave a gak about Qui Gonn and Darth Maul, because I didn't know where they were eventually going to end up.

So, out of interest - do you just never rewatch/reread anything ever?

Yodhrin wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
We have it on good authority from a fellow Dakkaite who is great friends with Christopher Tolkien, the best friends, that the Tolkien estate would never allow any creative to deviate so far from the source material like Jackson did ever again.

And yet Sexy Shelob exists.

I'm not sure I want to know, but I think I NEED to know. I'm terrified of where to look, though...

Yodhrin wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
First Blood was the first Rambo movie, a phenomena of US Cold War culture. The other phenomena is that it was the FIRST of those movies, especially since the film was an adaptation of a novel that ended with Rambo's character getting killed ala "Of Mice And Men" by his former commander.

I'm aware of what is contained in the "I, Robot" book. It is sitting on my shelf next to almost everything sci fi the man ever wrote. And that is why I pointed out the difference. I guess I could have also listed "I Am Legend" as one that ends differently...




HOWEVER


My original point was in the context of the cinematic medium. ANY prequels are hamstrung by being prequels, and usually manage to blow up continuity while they're at it. You could call it being Enterprise-d. THAT is why I'm usually not on board with prequels. I was dreading AbramsTrek because it was advertised as a prequel, and wasn't really stoked until I heard it was essentially a reboot. That is why I think prequels peter out in the end. No real sense of danger is there unless you know the character isn't in the later movies. Episode 1 from Star Wars is a great example. I really only gave a gak about Qui Gonn and Darth Maul, because I didn't know where they were eventually going to end up.

So, out of interest - do you just never rewatch/reread anything ever?

I also replay video games, but we're talking about the premise of a series. Enterprise suffered from this, Smallville became more reboot than prequel, and the less said about Episodes 1-3 the better. My point is that not everyone goes into something looking for a flashy retelling of something they read, some people go in to experience something they aren't yet exposed to, and the prequel thing sort of kills that because of having to get everything to fit in the "slot" at the end to lead into the series it originates from.

I understand what you are saying. I feel it is an argument for not writing prequels.

In the case of LoTR, The Hobbit was written and published about 20 years before LoTR. In a rational world it would have been filmed first, but LoTR was the "grand property".

The Hobbit films were made as a way of exploiting the various resources that had been built up during the filming of LoTR.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To be blunt they were a bit of a cash-in.