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.

http://natfka.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-hobbit-and-lotr-licensing.html

Faeit 212 wrote:It seems the licensing for the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings has been extended. This doesnt mean that the game will keep pushing out new releases, but it will supported for the next half decade at least.


Please remember that these are rumors.

via Steve the Warboss
GW have the licences for the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings extended for 5 years.

I believe it. Which isn't to say we'll get any more models released (although I live in hope), but I can see GW renewing the licence just so no one else can get their hands on it and so they aren't left with a ton of stock.

Now I'd hope that at some point we'll see a bunch of new plastic kits, a revised version of WotR that needs a slightly less insane model count and one last Big Book To Rule Them All (with any profile you could wish for in it), but I doubt we'll see any of that.

 Paradigm wrote:
I believe it. Which isn't to say we'll get any more models released (although I live in hope), but I can see GW renewing the licence just so no one else can get their hands on it and so they aren't left with a ton of stock.

I concur. I cannot imagine GW voluntarily giving up on something and leaving it to others.

I hope so! LOTR is the only way GW are holding my interest right now.

That's a shame. GW aren't doing anything useful with the license, I'd rather someone else pick it up.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
That's a shame. GW aren't doing anything useful with the license, I'd rather someone else pick it up.

Ditto. I don't want to believe it. Especially if they're not doing to do anything with it. (things that might conceivably, but are highly unlikely to, include 'good things')

Technically, GW's Middle-earth license is rather narrow, even though it consumes the main portion of the Middle-earth canon.

I have spoken to the Tolkien Estate about a license for the Earlier Ages of Middle-earth, and this License is still available.

It is rather expensive, and the Tolkien Estate really doesn't want to allow anyone to have it (which accounts for the expense).

And... If it were up to the Tolkien Estate, they would pull Jackson's and Saul Zaentz's Licenses, which would pull GW's as well. They have made it very clear that they regret having ever sold the licenses to Zaentz that they did, and that Peter Jackson ever had anything to do with the production.

But expect all parties to cling to those licenses like their life depended on it.

MB

I'm sure the Tolkien estate is very displeased with the feth ton of money they made from that. why did we make tens of millions why oh why

Sony and Spider-Man spring to mind.

 namiel wrote:
I'm sure the Tolkien estate is very displeased with the feth ton of money they made from that. why did we make tens of millions why oh why

I'm going to assume that the Tolkien Estate was financially comfortable beforehand, and in any case money isn't everything, especially where a well-loved piece of art is involved.

(and I don't pretend to know anything about such things, but was said license a one-off payment, or did it involve royalties in amy way? How much of those 'tens of millions' did the TE see?)

 Vermis wrote:
Sony and Spider-Man spring to mind.

 namiel wrote:
I'm sure the Tolkien estate is very displeased with the feth ton of money they made from that. why did we make tens of millions why oh why

I'm going to assume that the Tolkien Estate was financially comfortable beforehand, and in any case money isn't everything, especially where a well-loved piece of art is involved.

(and I don't pretend to know anything about such things, but was said license a one-off payment, or did it involve royalties in amy way? How much of those 'tens of millions' did the TE see?)

Well according to wikipedia the "Tolkien Trust" recieved a payment of 24 million pounds.

But my understanding was that when you say the Tolkien Estate regret having sold the license that it was very much Christopher Tolkien we are talking about. Though I don't really know what's doing on, I just heard the story of him disowning one of his sons because they wanted to help with the films while Christopher wanted to distance himself from the films.

 namiel wrote:
I'm sure the Tolkien estate is very displeased with the feth ton of money they made from that. why did we make tens of millions why oh why

The Tolkien Estate itself did not make untold Millions from the deal with GW.

And... Christopher Tolkien has said he would be willing to return everything they made off the movies if he could "un do them."

Their part of the returns was pitiful compared to the movies themselves.

And despite what they know they could make by licensing works such as the Narn i Chîn Húrin (The Children of Húri) they have stated that Peter Jackson will be having absoutely nothing to do with any future movies of the works of Tolkien.

It will probably be in the mid-20's before we see anything else done, and even then, I know the Tolkiens would like to see their father's/grandfather's works actually made into a a movie (and not something that is just "based upon...").

There is a good chance, though, that we will see parts of the various works again prior to that, as there are two or three documentaries being developed that will contain exposition of Tolken's fiction as a part of the Documentary. This allows limited depiction of his works without they wed for a license.

MB


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vermis wrote:
Sony and Spider-Man spring to mind.

 namiel wrote:
I'm sure the Tolkien estate is very displeased with the feth ton of money they made from that. why did we make tens of millions why oh why

I'm going to assume that the Tolkien Estate was financially comfortable beforehand, and in any case money isn't everything, especially where a well-loved piece of art is involved.

(and I don't pretend to know anything about such things, but was said license a one-off payment, or did it involve royalties in amy way? How much of those 'tens of millions' did the TE see?)

The Peter Jackson Tolkien movies (all six of them) have grossed over one Billion Dollars, collectively (including licenses and sales associated with those licenses owned by Jackson and Saul Zaentz).

The Tolkien Estate saw roughly $20Million out of that. And they sued for approximately ½ again that.

It is no secret among the academics who regularly correspond with the Estate that the Estate is livid over what Jackson did to Tolkien's works.

The changes he introduced were unnecessary.

Those who had never read the books would not know any different, while those who had read the books would notice the changes, and most have reported negative attitudes about those changes.

Jackson effectively gave the finger to Tolkien's biggest fans.

And... When talking to the Tolkien Estate, there is more than a little talk that this is by far the least of his assaults on Tolkien's works, or upon Tolkien's Estate.

MB

Worrying news; for the release of the HH plastics in May, the Hobbit/remaining LotR kits will be going direct only:
http://natfka.blogspot.com/2015/02/horus-heresy-gaming-set-release.html

I hope that's not true! That would be very disappointing. It sounds far fetched to me, so I hope it doesn't come to pass.

Ordinarily, I'd doubt it, but the original rumour about 30k and the resulting shifting of LotR came from the very reliable Hastings on Warseer. So while I do believe the licence has been extended, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see LotR go direct-only this year.

Doesn't bother me for the LotR range, I can get that cheap on Ebay, but I might have to move the rest of my planned Hobbit stuff up the planned order to get it before getting discount becomes impossible.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
That's a shame. GW aren't doing anything useful with the license, I'd rather someone else pick it up.

I had the exact same thought. Almost literally word for word, in fact.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BeAfraid wrote:

But expect all parties to cling to those licenses like their life depended on it.

Indeed. The best we can hope for would be some form of co-production in the future aka Spider-Man meeting The Avengers. It will be interesting indeed to see what happens once Christopher Tolkien passes away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Paradigm wrote:

Doesn't bother me for the LotR range, I can get that cheap on Ebay, but I might have to move the rest of my planned Hobbit stuff up the planned order to get it before getting discount becomes impossible.

I bought some more stuff this week for my Gondor force this week and it ain't so cheap any more on eBay. I'm hoping to close the book on my Gondor guys soon. Just a few more units to fill out... Then Rohan. Sadly, I think my Easterlings and Haradrim may end up far short of what I'd like, though I'll happily sub in Historicals as well - though I do very much like the "Official" Easterling designs. And I'll never get to do my Galadhrim the way I'd like, since the GW prices for the newest figures such as the cavalry are clownshoes.

 Paradigm wrote:
Ordinarily, I'd doubt it, but the original rumour about 30k and the resulting shifting of LotR came from the very reliable Hastings on Warseer. So while I do believe the licence has been extended, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see LotR go direct-only this year.

Doesn't bother me for the LotR range, I can get that cheap on Ebay, but I might have to move the rest of my planned Hobbit stuff up the planned order to get it before getting discount becomes impossible.

What does "Direct only" mean?

MB


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azazelx wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
That's a shame. GW aren't doing anything useful with the license, I'd rather someone else pick it up.

I had the exact same thought. Almost literally word for word, in fact.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BeAfraid wrote:

But expect all parties to cling to those licenses like their life depended on it.

Indeed. The best we can hope for would be some form of co-production in the future aka Spider-Man meeting The Avengers. It will be interesting indeed to see what happens once Christopher Tolkien passes away.

I have been building a relationship with Christopher Tolkien. It so far has amounted to nothing more than an introduction, but I understand he is codifying in his will any details of licenses for movies and others products (why does my spell-checker/autocorrect keep wanting to turn "products" into ATP-reductase???) will be dependent upon an approval of all content by the Tolkien Estate, which he said his father was irresponsible in not doing when he first sold Saul Zaentz the licenses to make a movie of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings.

And the lack of the stipulation could not be introduced with the sale of the license by Zaentz to Peter er Jackson and Weta (for which the word "irate" does not even begin to describe Christopher's feelings about Jackson's movies - my own feelings are pretty strong, and I use words like "rape," "assault," "mutilate" to describe what Peter Jackson did to Tolkien's works. Christopher has said these are an understatement).

Fortunately, we can look forward to more than a co-production.

The Silmarillion, the Narn I Chîn Húrin, and the Lay of Lethian as well as everything from Unfinished Tales, and The History of Middle-earth is available for License.

And, I am a part of a production company in Los Angeles that is looking to get those licenses (or some of them) in the future (The Tolkien Estate wants what is essentially a "purity test" before it will even begin to consider such licenses for anyone), and we have plans to demonstrate both our ability to technically deliver, as well as our ability to accurately portray Tolkien's creations (this is one of the reasons I seem like such a stick-in-the-mud where Middle-earth is concerned. I have to worry about faithfulness to Tolkien's words, without the introduction of my own biases, which is terrifically difficult).

But we are currently writing a script for a documentary about Tolkien's creation of Middle-earth, and looking for directors (my co-producer is graduating from UCLA with a documentary director who we are considering, as we all are very passionate about Middle-earth, yet he only wants to do docs).

If someone else manages to get a license for a production before we do, and their work meets the Estate's approval, then we will honor the Estate by trying to fit any production we do with the other (which then would begin a collaboration).

But Peter Jackson's stuff needs to be consigned to the realm of past-tense history, and new productions created as soon as the licenses are available that do not utterly destroy so much of Tolkien's works.

And... Since we are all gamers as well, we would look for a company that would support the game in a way that did not treat the customers so poorly (and provide a product that was more affordable).

MB

Purchasable via GW mail order only. Some stores can special order in Direct Only items, but the quality of their supply is ...variable, and the retailer discount is much smaller.

If the Tolkien estate was so butthurt over the way Jackson did the first 3 movies why would they license the hobbit? According to posts in this thread money was of no concern so why give him the second license? No it was not the same license. Actions speak much louder then hearsay.

Btw all statements of the Tolkien estate hating Jackson's work is nothing but hearsay until you get it on record.

 namiel wrote:
If the Tolkien estate was so butthurt over the way Jackson did the first 3 movies why would they license the hobbit? According to posts in this thread money was of no concern so why give him the second license? No it was not the same license. Actions speak much louder then hearsay.

Btw all statements of the Tolkien estate hating Jackson's work is nothing but hearsay until you get it on record.

They has no say over The Hobbit Saul Zaentz controlled the licenses, which included a percentage to the Estate.

All the Estate could do was hold up the production by threatening to sue for a greater percentage (which they did).

MB


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Christopher Tolkien basically is the Tolkien Estate at this moment:j

http://www.worldcrunch.com/culture-society/my-father-039-s-quot-eviscerated-quot-work-son-of-hobbit-scribe-j.r.r.-tolkien-finally-speaks-out/hobbit-silmarillion-lord-of-rings/c3s10299/

Worldcrunch - Christopher Tolkien wrote:What follows is the first ever press interview of Christopher Tolkien, the official executor of J.R.R. Tolkien's estate,

Read the full article: My Father's "Eviscerated" Work - Son Of Hobbit Scribe J.R.R. Tolkien Finally Speaks Out ...

So... Not exactly "hearsay" its its?

Do you know this thing called Google exists, and it allows one to pretty instantly verify basic claims and facts?

MB

"It is no secret among the academics who regularly correspond with the Estate that the Estate is livid over what Jackson did to Tolkien's works."

I really find this hard to believe. They should at least known that certain liberties would be taken. Lawyers are involved, negotiations, etc. You would figure that someone would of said to them, "You know once Hollywood gets it's grubby hands on this, it's more than likely it's not going to really follow the books."

I loved the book and the movies. I accept them as different. Peter Jackson did a very good job.