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.

Hey all thought I would let you know. GW is hiring a new designer for the LoTR team! Though I dont currently play LoTR, I still would love to see the game thrive and grow back into popularity.

One day I will give it a shot!

Heres the post: http://jobs.games-workshop.com/2016/01/20/middle-earth-model-designer-nottingham-uk/

They have also been looking for a writer to add to the middle earth background.

 JamesY wrote:
They have also been looking for a writer to add to the middle earth background.

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in... oh wait, wrong franchise.

 Vermis wrote:

 JamesY wrote:
They have also been looking for a writer to add to the middle earth background.

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in... oh wait, wrong franchise.

No... That still fits.

They have no more capability to add to the Middle-earth background than did Peter Jackson (although he did recently give an interview with a slight apology/mea culpa in it, where he basically said "Sorry, it was all Guillermo del Toro's fault").

That doesn't mean that no-one has the capability to add to Tolkien's canon. I have read several plausible accounts of the Mid-2nd Age, and of the Early 3rd that do not violate Tolkien's ideology and metaphysics for Middle-earth. And I have done what isn't "fiction" exactly, but rather "fictional-History" in an account of the Wars against the Wainriders in the 19th century Third Age done in the style of works like Plutarch's Histories, Procopius' Wars of Justinian, or Anna Komnene's Alexiad (it gives no real character to the people, and it really adds only a very few characters to his canon, mostly merely detailing those already existing).



MB

Pretty much all licenced LotR media is on a par with Star Wars' EU "canon" - in that it varies on how canonical it is. Despite the fact that the Star Wars has recently had a big, well-deserved and long-overdue clean-out, it's still a useful parallel to make.

To use the Star Wars grading system, things written by Tolkien himself (including contradictory elements) would be "G-Canon" which is the highest level. This was the 6 (at the time) films as well as Lucas' own writings and interviews.

The next level of Star Wars was "T-Canon" - meaning the TV Shows. This would be the equivalent of Christopher Tolkien's work.

At that point you get into "C", "S", "N" and "D" which has comics, books, videogames as well as Non-Canon and stuff for a show that was semi-cancelled. This is where the LotR videogames and all other add-on fiction live, including the stuff that GW have already created for SBG and WotR.

Anything written by BA or anyone else in a non-official, non-licenced-by-anyone capacity would be speculative fanfiction, the same as with any other IP. If you got approval from either the Tolkien Estate, Saul Zaentz, or did work for one of the many licencees and then published, it'd then be the equivalent of "C" or "S".

 Azazelx wrote:
Pretty much all licenced LotR media is on a par with Star Wars' EU "canon" - in that it varies on how canonical it is. Despite the fact that the Star Wars has recently had a big, well-deserved and long-overdue clean-out, it's still a useful parallel to make.

To use the Star Wars grading system, things written by Tolkien himself (including contradictory elements) would be "G-Canon" which is the highest level. This was the 6 (at the time) films as well as Lucas' own writings and interviews.

The next level of Star Wars was "T-Canon" - meaning the TV Shows. This would be the equivalent of Christopher Tolkien's work.

At that point you get into "C", "S", "N" and "D" which has comics, books, videogames as well as Non-Canon and stuff for a show that was semi-cancelled. This is where the LotR videogames and all other add-on fiction live, including the stuff that GW have already created for SBG and WotR.

Anything written by BA or anyone else in a non-official, non-licenced-by-anyone capacity would be speculative fanfiction, the same as with any other IP. If you got approval from either the Tolkien Estate, Saul Zaentz, or did work for one of the many licencees and then published, it'd then be the equivalent of "C" or "S".

Christopher Tolkien hasn't actually written anything about Middle-earth.

It was his father's wish that he would.

But Christopher balked when it came down to it.

All he has done has been to edit Tolkien's surviving works (which, if you understand Tolkien's Metaphysics allow enough information to actually complete the unfinished stories).

In terms of metaphysical authenticity, NONE of the Visual Media produced (movies, video games, miniature games, etc.) even make a presence of fitting into Tolkien's creation.

Rather, they belong to what Peter Jackson created, which has only an ephemeral connection to Tolkien's actual works (the original Trilogy of films being closer than this latter disaster of The Hobbit, which I could not even watch were it not necessary to write a criticism of for an academic work - and possible documentary being worked on).

I do have connections with the Estate, and I have read their requirements for future licenses (of the Silmarillion related works - which they have separated into roughly seven different licenses). These licenses demand what they are calling a "metaphysical authenticity" and remaining true to Tolkien's theological and ideological attributions for Middle-earth (which can be daunting for people whose only familiarity is with the novels. Even The History of Middle-earth, vols 1 - 12 do not delve completely into these areas.).

I've only accidentally familiarized myself with part of what they require due to a visit to the Bodliean Library when I was in my early-20s when I went to School in England in the early-1980s, and read much of what is now in The History of Middle-earth as well as several works that were not included in those volumes (because Christopher apparently felt that they would not be understood in context). It took me reading two of Tolkien's Biographies to put the works in Context (they had to do with the nature of Good-Evil, and the Theology of St. Augustine, Boethius, and the earlier Manichean Theologies - The Bogomils, Marcionists, Cathars, and the Templars subscribed to forms of Manicheanism, as did the Manicheans themselves; Manicheanism being a heresy - to the Catholics - that claimed that the God who created the world was not the same as the God of the New testament, and that Evil was not just the "absence of Good/God" as Traditional Catholic Theology taught, but was a tangible thing in itself... a "Substance" all its own, as was "Good." So you could literally have a "bucket of Good" and a handful or "Pure Evil." Tolkien of course rejected the first premise, that the God of the Bible who created the world in Genesis was also not the God of the New Testament, and whether he believed in the literal truth of the Christian Dualists, he at least had Middle-earth exhibit Dualistic Metaphysics).

But, it is this that really separates the various narrative works regarding Middle-earth. The purely descriptive works on Middle-earth (such as the Atlas, or the Maps of various cities), have varying degrees of authenticity (for instance Karen Fonstad's Atlas of Middle-earth is closer to the world Tolkien described than is Peter Jackson's depictions of it in the movies, which show a more "Early Renaissance" appearance that the Dark Ages, and Ancient appearance the world should portray), as they do not meddle with the Metaphysics (the underlying "How things work/exist" in Middle-earth).

I should point out that I do not adhere personally to Tolkien's beliefs, theology, or metaphysics as he expressed them for either Middle-earth or our world, but that these are simply the "rules" by which the universe works (sort of like "If you have a high "mitichlorian" count in the Star Wars universe then you will be "sensitive" to The Force).

But... I don't think that the analogy with Star Wars canon fits too well, as its creator is still living, and has a much more tenuous connection with that creation. Star Wars obviously is not taken as seriously as Tolkien took Middle-earth.

If you read up about the Catholic Principle of "Sub-creation" (which is almost heretical, but which they have carefully avoided having any sort of official stance upon), then you will discover how disturbing Tolkien's relationship to Middle-earth actually is. By some of his statements on Sub-creation, his attitudes toward certain elements of Middle-earth (best demonstrated in his reaction to a gift he received that had the One/Ruling Ring inscription in Black speech engraved upon it, his headstone where he and his wife are buried, and the Catholic Writings about "Sub-creation," then you get the impression that Tolkien believed Middle-earth to be an ACTUAL PLACE.

But that is another issue to that of "canon," although it touches upon why it is such a serious subject, and why Christopher refused to elaborate upon his father's work (as he shared the same beliefs re: Sub-creation).

MB

Wow. I am always interested in just how different your understanding of LoTR is to everyone else I have ever come across. It is illuminating.

I'm rather curious as to exactly what "new" material (minis and fluff) they will be producing for the game. AFAIK they are still limited to the six movies and the Hobbit and LOTR books. Looking at only these sources, it does seem they have mined them pretty thoroughly already.

The only thing I can think of from the movies might be the Iron Hills dwarfs from the BOFA (Dain and his people). I suppose they may revisit something they already did, or perhaps there are still a few undeveloped nuggets left in the appendixes of the LOTR books?

 mdauben wrote:
I'm rather curious as to exactly what "new" material (minis and fluff) they will be producing for the game. AFAIK they are still limited to the six movies and the Hobbit and LOTR books. Looking at only these sources, it does seem they have mined them pretty thoroughly already.

The only thing I can think of from the movies might be the Iron Hills dwarfs from the BOFA (Dain and his people). I suppose they may revisit something they already did, or perhaps there are still a few undeveloped nuggets left in the appendixes of the LOTR books?

Just off the top of my head, they could expand:-

-The Variags of Khand
-Cirdan's sea-elf colony
-Dain's dwarves from the Blue Mountains
-Anarion and the earlier Numenoreans generally

I'm sure if I dug through the book, I could find more.

The wars leading up to the Last Alliance never got much attention. If they wanted to expand into a completely new area then the easy option would be the first age...
Army of Balrogs anyone?
The big question is going to be what license's they manage to acquire when the current ones run out. This will show us what direction they head in.

 Optio wrote:
The wars leading up to the Last Alliance never got much attention. If they wanted to expand into a completely new area then the easy option would be the first age...
Army of Balrogs anyone?
The big question is going to be what license's they manage to acquire when the current ones run out. This will show us what direction they head in.

The Wars leading up to the Last Alliance are not included in Zaentz License, and thus not in New Line or GW's.

They only have from the Last Alliance to the end of the War of the Ring.

As for the License when this one runs out, When Saul Zaentz license expires, the Estate will not be re-negotiating any new Licenses.

As such, GW will essentially be in a position of having to box everything up.

About the only thing that will remain possible is that they retain the rights to continue producing what has already been produced.

That remains a fairly good possibility.

But the Tolkien Estate seems to be anxious to extinguish all record of Peter Jackson's portrayal of Middle-earth. His failure to understand the seriousness with which the Tolkien's take Middle-earth resulted in the Estate making it effectively impossible for future licenses to be obtained.

And dangling a Billion Dollars in front of them isn't likely to help, given the level of ideological commitment that the Estate members have.

It would be rather like asking the Pope to portray himself as an Atheist. The Pope would have a huge problem with that, even if you offered the Catholic Church Billions of Dollars, because it violates a core principle.

It is not impossible for future licenses to be obtained. But they now have to jump through so many hoops to prove that they will adhere to the expectations of the Estate that it rules out the vast majority of the Hollywood Establishment, who simply lack that kind of understanding (which isn't a slam, it is just expecting someone to know something that they do not understand they are expected to know).

MB


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh!

As for what GW could do.

As has been pointed out, they have the Khandirim, and the Variags (two different ethnicities). The Khandirim are the Natives of Khand, and the Variags are Easterling Immigrants from the Middle of the Third Age.

The Variags are essentially (in actual Middle-earth terms), Rus, or JomsVikings (The Nordics who settled on the Volga). The Khandirim are more of a mystery, but seem to be a Dark Ages North African sort of people, such as the Moors, or the Vandals' descendants (which is hard to determine).

The Haradrim themselves also were made up of MANY different Tribes. So GW could do some further Haradrim, that look different to those of the movies.

They still have a LOT that can be filled out from Gondor and Arnor, including Arthedain, Cardolan, and Rhudaur (where you can have the Dark Hill Men of Middle-earth, and ancestors of the Dunlendings portrayed).

But for Gondor itself, you have the entire Levy of the Fiefs that can be filled out with Proper figures (Such as Morthond Vale's Spearmen and Archers being proper Spearmen, and proper Archers, and not some modification of an Ithilien Ranger). You also have other troops from Linhir, Ethring, Pelargir, Calembel. Ethir Anduin, Anfalas, Dor-en-Ernil, Belfalas, Anfalas, Lebennin (the most wealthy Fief, with its seat at Pelargir), and so on...

Arnor is more obscure, but you do have MANY different areas that were fantastically wealthy, more so than Gondor, during the Early Third Age.

You have the Wainriders, from 1851 to 1945 TA, which were an Easterling Nation that would have been a sort of Cross between Bulgars, Magyars, and Mongols.

And, you could do miniatures for an Earlier Gondorian Force from this period as well, when Gondor still had Many Knights from the Forodan/Northmen of Rhovanion, the ancestors of the Éotheod/Rohirrim (Vidugavia, Marhari, his son Marhwini, and then their sons and descendants who colonized the upper Values of the Anduin around 1900TA).

You have the Kinstrife, which is where Vidugacia would come into things, when his daughter Vidumavia married Valacar, the heir of Gondor, and touched off the Kin Strife when their son, Vinitharya/Eldarcar inherited the throne and Castamir, a nephew of Narmacil II, usurped the throne of Gondor in a Civil war that would last from 1432 TA to 1447TA, but having Castamir's descendants in Umbar vie to re-take Gondor until well into the 19th century TA, when Telhumetar Umbardacil finally slays his last Descendants in 1810 TA.

Vinyarion, who succeeded Eldacar's Son Aldamir, indicating by his name (which is Gothic, rather than Númenórean/Sindarin derived from Saxon) that the Foradan/Northmen were still strong allies of Gondor.

And thus we would have a great many more Mounted in the armies of Gondor at this period.

We also have the various struggles between Elf and Dwarf in the Third Age (small as they might be), as well as the Goblin Wars of the Dwarves.

There are simply ALL Kinds of things that remain open in the License they have.

Yet I suspect that their fear of venturing too far from Peter Jackson's vision of Middle-earth will keep them from exploring these options at all.

MB

BeAfraid wrote:

 Optio wrote:
The wars leading up to the Last Alliance never got much attention. If they wanted to expand into a completely new area then the easy option would be the first age...
Army of Balrogs anyone?
The big question is going to be what license's they manage to acquire when the current ones run out. This will show us what direction they head in.

The Wars leading up to the Last Alliance are not included in Zaentz License, and thus not in New Line or GW's.

They only have from the Last Alliance to the end of the War of the Ring.

As for the License when this one runs out, When Saul Zaentz license expires, the Estate will not be re-negotiating any new Licenses.

MB

I know that's all their current licence covers, that's why I mentioned the need for licenses for new periods in the first place.
I would not be so quick to rule out new license. The fact GW is willing to start reinvesting back into the game is a good indication they have managed to sort something out for themselves.

Sounds to me like the Tolkien estate has an ideological pole up it's arse the size of the Eiffel Tower, and need to get on with their lives.

 Ketara wrote:
Sounds to me like the Tolkien estate has an ideological pole up it's arse the size of the Eiffel Tower, and need to get on with their lives.

That was perfect

You have the Kinstrife, which is where Vidugacia would come into things, when his daughter Vidumavia married Valacar, the heir of Gondor, and touched off the Kin Strife when their son, Vinitharya/Eldarcar inherited the throne and Castamir, a nephew of Narmacil II, usurped the throne of Gondor in a Civil war that would last from 1432 TA to 1447TA, but having Castamir's descendants in Umbar vie to re-take Gondor until well into the 19th century TA, when Telhumetar Umbardacil finally slays his last Descendants in 1810 TA.

Ah, the reigns of Castamir... oh wait, wrong franchise.

 Ketara wrote:
Sounds to me like the Tolkien estate has an ideological pole up it's arse the size of the Eiffel Tower, and need to get on with their lives.

I'm not entirely sure how to respond to this sudden bile, apart from wiping it off my shoes. How about, it's their baby, they can do what they like with it?

If it means the conception of Middle-Earth in the eyes of the movie-going, book-shunning public is dragged back from the Michael-Bay-Transformers bland-DnD-actioner direction it was going in, or at least slowed down a tad, then Vive la France.

 Vermis wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
Sounds to me like the Tolkien estate has an ideological pole up it's arse the size of the Eiffel Tower, and need to get on with their lives.

I'm not entirely sure how to respond to this sudden bile, apart from wiping it off my shoes. How about, it's their baby, they can do what they like with it?

If it means the conception of Middle-Earth in the eyes of the movie-going, book-shunning public is dragged back from the Michael-Bay-Transformers bland-DnD-actioner direction it was going in, or at least slowed down a tad, then Vive la France.

Bile? You're mistaken, and it's quite telling that you perceive it as such. I have nothing against the Estate itself making licensing decisions.

From what's been said above, the Tolkien Estate take themselves thoroughly too seriously. They didn't write the books, or invent the world (which is about the only justification for being so serious). Making out that other people perceive/imagine what is essentially an imaginary literary world of dwarfs and dragons 'incorrectly' is ridiculous. Applying that sort of rigid, obsessive, narrow minded thinking to a series about a couple of midgets wandering along with a magic ring is deserving of nothing more than casual scorn.

It's like when people here work themselves into fits of rage over female space marines. You tell them to step away from the keyboard, have a cup of tea, and start worrying about things that are actually important, instead of frothing over fantasy toy soldiers. Or in this case, fantasy elves and walking trees.

 Optio wrote:

BeAfraid wrote:

 Optio wrote:
The wars leading up to the Last Alliance never got much attention. If they wanted to expand into a completely new area then the easy option would be the first age...
Army of Balrogs anyone?
The big question is going to be what license's they manage to acquire when the current ones run out. This will show us what direction they head in.

The Wars leading up to the Last Alliance are not included in Zaentz License, and thus not in New Line or GW's.

They only have from the Last Alliance to the end of the War of the Ring.

As for the License when this one runs out, When Saul Zaentz license expires, the Estate will not be re-negotiating any new Licenses.

MB

I know that's all their current licence covers, that's why I mentioned the need for licenses for new periods in the first place.
I would not be so quick to rule out new license. The fact GW is willing to start reinvesting back into the game is a good indication they have managed to sort something out for themselves.

The Estate has given out no new licenses.

They are even seeing New Line, Middle-earth Enterprises, and Warner Bros over the most recent Video Games that were produced, claiming that THEY are a violation of the current Licenses owned by Zaentz, New Line, etc.

GW likely finally realized that they have a whole 3,000 years they can fill with their current licenses.

The game does extremely well when it is supported, and it isn't like the demand is non-existent, even among purist like myself I find a few things they have done to be pretty good (and many useful in non-Middle-earth settings as well).

So that they might decide to put some money back into it isn't so shocking.

This is something that I am following really closely, and at least one person at the Estate knows that I am sympathetic to their side of things regarding the Treatment of Tolkien's legacy (They REALLY HATE the gaming side of the media, as they feel it glorifies war, and death - not to mention some other things that are probably a little bit crazy - I understand their side, and I am sympathetic to some of it, even though I do not agree with all of it).

I would just like to see GW do some things that fit in with the current aesthetic that would also sell.... Given the success of the companies making "Not-40K" stuff, though, I should probably just go ahead and produce the few "Jackson aesthetic things I designed a few years ago (Easterling and larger Khandirim Chariots, Shields for the Haradrim, other far-Haradrim, and some Umbarrim soldiers).

But... Doing so could complicate things with the Doc I am helping with.

MB


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ketara wrote:

 Vermis wrote:

 Ketara wrote:
Sounds to me like the Tolkien estate has an ideological pole up it's arse the size of the Eiffel Tower, and need to get on with their lives.

I'm not entirely sure how to respond to this sudden bile, apart from wiping it off my shoes. How about, it's their baby, they can do what they like with it?

If it means the conception of Middle-Earth in the eyes of the movie-going, book-shunning public is dragged back from the Michael-Bay-Transformers bland-DnD-actioner direction it was going in, or at least slowed down a tad, then Vive la France.

Bile? You're mistaken, and it's quite telling that you perceive it as such. I have nothing against the Estate itself making licensing decisions.

From what's been said above, the Tolkien Estate take themselves thoroughly too seriously. They didn't write the books, or invent the world (which is about the only justification for being so serious). Making out that other people perceive/imagine what is essentially an imaginary literary world of dwarfs and dragons 'incorrectly' is ridiculous. Applying that sort of rigid, obsessive, narrow minded thinking to a series about a couple of midgets wandering along with a magic ring is deserving of nothing more than casual scorn.

It's like when people here work themselves into fits of rage over female space marines. You tell them to step away from the keyboard, have a cup of tea, and start worrying about things that are actually important, instead of frothing over fantasy toy soldiers. Or in this case, fantasy elves and walking trees.

Only they AREN'T "Making out what other people perceive/imagine...." about Middle-earth.

What they ARE DOING is stopping you from marketing, and making money off of, such imaginings when they have not given you permission to do so, since they own that "imaginary world."

And, they have made it very clear what they expect of anyone who wishes to portray Middle-earth.

Some of what happened with the first movie only created differences of style (although there WERE Metaphysical and Theological differences as well).

Such as the use of so much Early Renaissance Armor for the Gondorians. That was something that could have been overlooked very easily were it not for the more substantive Metaphysical differences, which I tend to agree with entirely.

But when The Hobbit happened (which to his credit, turns out to be mostly the fault of del Toro and not Jackson - although Jackson still has much to answer for), the Estate was furious.

Most people cannot seem to understand what it is like to have a creation used in a way that conflicts with their beliefs.

What happened to the Tolkiens was no different than an Artist discovering that Politicians are using their artwork to promote Policies with which they disagree, or a musician discovering that their songs are being used to promote some ideology they oppose.

You might disagree with either the artist or musician, or the policies or ideology.... Or you might agree with any one of them.

But it remains true that the artist/musician remains the owner of their creation, and that they control how it is used/depicted.

A "Story" is no different than a picture, sculpture, or song in that regard.

Edit: I missed the point about the "Female Space Marines."

THAT is completely missing the point, as well as having totally nothing at all to do with it.

The Estate itself isn't a group of "Fans." They OWN Middle-earth. So, what they say about Middle-earth is essentially law regarding Middle-earth.

If GW itself said "No Female Space marines."

Well, people would be completely free to convert Space marines into females. But don't expect GW to allow you to use them in sanctioned games, or to sell them as "Official Warhammer 40K Female Space Marines."

The Tolkien Estate would be the equivalent of GW, and NOT of the Fans who might complain, or "lose their minds" over "Female Space Marines."

So, as I have already pointed out (and the Estate themselves points out), They are who dictates what is and is not "Middle-earth," regardless of what anyone, personally, wishes to "imagine" about Middle-earth.

Just like GW is the final arbiter of what is and is not "Warhammer" or what is and is not a "Warhammer 40K Space Marine" (obviously only within the context of 40K, since they lost the case regarding ownership of the term "Space Marine").

MB

BeAfraid wrote:


Only they AREN'T "Making out what other people perceive/imagine...." about Middle-earth..

......snip.....

MB

So in other words, they're attempting to suppress other people's portrayals of a fantasy universe because despite not being the creator, they have decided that their idealised version is best and they hate the others.

Got it there, right?

In my eyes, that still jives with my initial assessment. There seem to be a lot of people here who think I'm questioning their legal right to determine who gets a license. I'm not. What I'm criticising is the mentality behind the license-granting decisions.Which appears to be, 'a pole up its arse the size of the Eiffel Tower' because it doesn't like what other people have imagined Middle Earth to be like (because it considers it to be an 'incorrect' way of portraying a fantasy world of elves and goblins to them').

In my opinion, if that's factoring into your business decisions to this extent around an intellectual property that is fantastical enough to involve evil midget-strangling trees, they need to go have a cup of tea, grant a few licenses, and get on with more important things in life.

That is the bit I find most ridiculous about all of this; the Estate did not 'create' Middle Earth any more than Jackson did, and from an artistic point of view, I think it could be very easily argued that they have no more or less right to decide the terms of this fictional setting. Yes, they might have the rights in a legal sense, but as far as it being 'their creation', absolutely not. So I think the artist/politician comparison falls flat there; it's not like, for example, the recent use of Adele's music by Donald Trump, it would be a more apt comparison if, say, Trump had used a Jimi Hendrix or John Lennon song. The ideologies might not align, but with the artists themselves dead, it's not down the record labels to try and speak with absolute conviction on what 'they would have wanted'.

Similarly, I do not think the Tolkien Estate can speak with any authority over Middle Earth in any sense but the legal one. As pointed out, even Christopher Tolkien added no new material beyond his father's notes. What right, artistically, does he have to set 'the law' regarding someone else's creation, whether that's his father's or not? He's not a creator or a contributor to the setting, he can't really know any better than anyone else what the exact intentions and beliefs behind the original text were.

I do find the whole situation the Tolkiens (or by the sound of it, mostly Christopher) have created here to be rather strange; it's no longer the bedtime story his dad told him, it's something that (in one form or another) has been experienced and enjoyed by millions of people, and millions more largely because of the films themselves, and to get all up tight about that seems rather pathetic to me. Surely it's a better tribute and testament to JRR Tolkien that so many people have experienced and enjoyed something created by him/from his work, than to have it be something that one can only enjoy 'in the right way', reading every single thing he ever wrote, including letters, essays and all kinds of stuff that really, as far as most people are concerned, might as well not exist and has no bearing on the actual story and setting themselves?

BeAfraid wrote:

 Optio wrote:

BeAfraid wrote:

 Optio wrote:
The wars leading up to the Last Alliance never got much attention. If they wanted to expand into a completely new area then the easy option would be the first age...
Army of Balrogs anyone?
The big question is going to be what license's they manage to acquire when the current ones run out. This will show us what direction they head in.

The Wars leading up to the Last Alliance are not included in Zaentz License, and thus not in New Line or GW's.

They only have from the Last Alliance to the end of the War of the Ring.

As for the License when this one runs out, When Saul Zaentz license expires, the Estate will not be re-negotiating any new Licenses.

MB

I know that's all their current licence covers, that's why I mentioned the need for licenses for new periods in the first place.
I would not be so quick to rule out new license. The fact GW is willing to start reinvesting back into the game is a good indication they have managed to sort something out for themselves.

The Estate has given out no new licenses.

They are even seeing New Line, Middle-earth Enterprises, and Warner Bros over the most recent Video Games that were produced, claiming that THEY are a violation of the current Licenses owned by Zaentz, New Line, etc.

GW likely finally realized that they have a whole 3,000 years they can fill with their current licenses.

As you have so pessimistically stated earlier in this thread, you do not believe they will be able to renew licenses for the game except to mabye carry on the current range. The fact that they are investing in the game shows that they have something lined up you don't know about. That's a lot of money to be dropping for the couple of years they have left at present. Last year in February they had managed to already negotiate the continued sale of their current range.

This means that speculating on periods outside the current 3000 years is not unrealistic. As much as you might know someone in the estate you are not part of it or its team of Lawyers. I am sure there are plenty of business decisions they discuss and you don't hear about.

 Paradigm wrote:
Similarly, I do not think the Tolkien Estate can speak with any authority over Middle Earth in any sense but the legal one.

Actually, their legal rights are also somewhat limited, as Prof. Tolkien SOLD many of the rights to LotR and the Hobbit. Not leased or licenced them. The whole thing turns even muddier with regard to the fact that the whole thing was done long ago before digital rights were a thing. I think the Estate will have a tough time of it when you consider things like the Mickey Mouse Protection Act and what that says about how these things almost always side with the bigger money.

Christopher Tolkien can be said to be almost as much of a Creator of Middle-earth than is Tolkien, since it was he and Michael who not just inspired Middle-earth's creation, but whose sensibilities Tolkien was pandering to when he created much of the later work.

Christopher's opinion, especially, was sought on a broad range of topics.

But all that aside, they are the closest thing that exists to being able to say what John Ronald Ruel Tolkien had in mind for the various peoples and places in Middle-earth, since he also left hundreds of paintings and drawings of these people and places (bemoaning the fact that he was not both more prolific and proficient at it as well).

He verbal descriptions are adequate to hint at it for that matter.

And people act as if this means that there is "One TRUE VISION of Middle-earth," which even the Estate does not pretend to.

This is like thinking that a differential equation has a single, fixed number as its solution (when for most differential equations, there are an infinite number of equations as solutions, often with an ordinally greater infinite number of numerical solutions).

Regardless of how you feel about that, they remain the people who possess the licenses.

As for the GW's current lines, The Estate for Saul Zaentz still owns the rights to The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit through Middle-earth Enterprises. GW can still renew its license for Tangible Properties though M-e Ent./New Line, etc.

But the Estate itself has been as clear as can be that they will license nothing to ANY of the current license holders for new properties, nor to anyone associated with Peter Jackson's productions.

GW still has a huge period with which to work and develop new Middle-earth miniatures should they drop the money to renew their licenses with Middle-earth Ent.

MB

It's weird to see people argue that companies that only want to squeeze every red cent out of the IP have as much as or even more moral right to the IP than the creator's family (who as have been pointed out are arguably co-creators) because they wish to preserve what they think of as the dignity of the work. We aren't talking about the Estate shutting down some fanartist here. These are the people who made three really wretched Hobbit movies for no other apparent motive than absolutely glaring greed. Given what I think of the Hobbit movies, I can only imagine (and I suppose it gives me some insight into) what Christopher Tolkien must feel about all of this. Before the Hobbit movies, Christopher Tolkien's stance made little sense to me. But now that I see where it has all led, it's another matter. As much as I would like to see a line of Silmarillion-inspired games from the likes of GW, FFG, and Cubicle 7, I'm not sure whether it would be worth it.

Oh, I absolutely believe it would be worth it. But only if Alessio Cavatore was courted back to write The Silmarillion Rulebook and the Perry Brothers were hired back to be in charge of the miniature line


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BeAfraid wrote:

I would just like to see GW do some things that fit in with the current aesthetic that would also sell.... Given the success of the companies making "Not-40K" stuff, though, I should probably just go ahead and produce the few "Jackson aesthetic things I designed a few years ago (Easterling and larger Khandirim Chariots, Shields for the Haradrim, other far-Haradrim, and some Umbarrim soldiers).

But... Doing so could complicate things with the Doc I am helping with.

I'd buy 'em. Just like I'm buying Shadow & Flame and Unreleased Miniatures releases, because they're great and they fit the aesthetic and I want them. haha

 Manchu wrote:
These are the people who made three really wretched Hobbit movies for no other apparent motive than absolutely glaring greed.

How about their reason being to make films that people enjoyed? Which a lot of people did, but they're just not as vocal as the (I'd say lower amount of) people who dislike them. No, they weren't as perfect as LotR, but they were still decent, enjoyable, good looking and exciting films, which from a source material as one-dimensional and bland as The Hobbit is about the best that could be hoped for. The writing was great, the acting was exceptional (I'd say that Armitage and Freeman played their roles better than most of the LotR cast) and I know I'm not alone in really liking them. I'm not going to say that you're wrong to dislike them, you are of course entitled to your views and I won't try and change them, but stating that the movies were made for nothing but greed is a bit hyperbolic, really.

 Paradigm wrote:
How about their reason being to make films that people enjoyed? Which a lot of people did, but they're just not as vocal as the (I'd say lower amount of) people who dislike them.

Well... "I was making it up as I went along" http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/nov/19/peter-jackson-battle-of-the-five-armies-i-didnt-know-what-the-hell-i-was-doing-when-i-made-the-hobbit

I just bought the Hobbit blu ray extended edition trilogy, because, while I thought the films were mediocre, I am hungry for more Middle Earth on screen and am looking forward to viewing the footage (though not so much more of The Hobbit films)

 Paradigm wrote:
a source material as one-dimensional and bland as The Hobbit

Sounds like you are a big fan of JRR Tolkien.

@Judgedoug: That's talking about the process, not why they made the film. Yes, they were made to sell tickets and make money, so was every film ever, but shortened timescale, issues with Del Toro had done/not done and all that aside, I don't think it's fair to say that Jackson was just phoning it in on these, I think he put as much passion and effort into it as LotR, just with a deliberately different style.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:

 Paradigm wrote:
a source material as one-dimensional and bland as The Hobbit

Sounds like you are a big fan of JRR Tolkien.

As a writer, I must say I'm not. I love the setting he created, and greatly admire the depth and breadth of it, that's remarkable, but as a work of fiction, LotR is middle of the road in terms of quality of writing and the actual narrative and characters, and the Hobbit is a fine children's bedtime story but no more than that (which is fine, that's what it was originally meant to be). Had the Hobbit film just been a page-to-page translation of the book, I can't see how it would have been any better no matter how much you dislike what we got instead. An underdeveloped, completely linear and basic story with plenty of plot holes, missing information and that builds to a big finale that lasts all of a paragraph.

The Hobbit films have as much artistic merit as candy floss has nutritional value, which is not to say they utterly fail to entertain. They can be entertaining, in fact they absolutely had to be, given that the only point of making them, of stretching a simple if rather enduring and endearing tale into a soulless three-movie marketing extravaganza was to rack up at least significantly more dollars than spent manufacturing them. The stark commercialism of the films is all the more apparent given we know what a picture made by this director can be like when he actually cares. But why argue, I mean on the internet there are people who think the Transformers films are masterpieces and there's no reasoning with them. It takes all kinds. My only real motive to bring up the issue was to point out that incongruity of standing up for the supposed moral rights of Hollywood over and above the son of the creator, who happens to have devoted a good portion of his life in the very serious and scholarly effort to open more of his father's authentic vision up to those of us who actually care about the works as more than another IP to be wrung out in the grasping fists of industry.

 Manchu wrote:
The Hobbit films have as much artistic merit as candy floss has nutritional value, which is not to say they utterly fail to entertain. They can be entertaining, in fact they absolutely had to be, given that the only point of making them, of stretching a simple if rather enduring and endearing tale into a soulless three-movie marketing extravaganza was to rack up at least significantly more dollars than spent manufacturing them. The stark commercialism of the films is all the more apparent given we know what a picture made by this director can be like when he actually cares. But why argue, I mean on the internet there are people who think the Transformers films are masterpieces and there's no reasoning with them. It takes all kinds. My only real motive to bring up the issue was to point out that incongruity of standing up for the supposed moral rights of Hollywood over and above the son of the creator, who happens to have devoted a good portion of his life in the very serious and scholarly effort to open more of his father's authentic vision up to those of us who actually care about the works as more than another IP to be wrung out in the grasping fists of industry.

And.... Like there are no Plot-holes in The Hobbit movies...

I prefer the original plot-holes to the egregious and contrived, Hollywood plot-holes.

MB