7 ms·
Amazon to Adapt J.R.R. Tolkien’s Globally Renowned Fantasy Novels
- macintux 9y agoI have successfully avoided Prime up to now. This might be the tipping point. OTOH, despite creative quibbles it's hard to imagine surpassing the film versions, so maybe I can just watch those a few more times.
- thefalcon 9y agoHopefully they're incentivized to pour a huge budget into these given the "competition" of the movies (and GoT) and they make it worth the Prime subscription. (Personally Prime has so much value add these days for me I can't imagine not being subscribed anyway.)
- macintux 9y agoWhen practical, I prefer to buy from specialized retailers (or manufacturers) for stuff I care about, so Amazon is a last resort for me. The convenience, though, means I buy a lot of stuff I don't care about (or otherwise can't readily find) from them.
- untog 9y agoIn case anyone was curious: > television adaptation will explore new storylines preceding J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Fellowship of the Ring So it's not going to tell the main story itself, which is probably wise given the film adaptations aren't even that old. Maybe it's just me I'm not super-excited by this news. I wish there were more original universes being created with the insane amount of TV money swirling around these days. This just feels like a very safe "me too Game of Thrones" play.
- cholantesh 9y agoI recently started watching Fargo and I'm, for the most part, enjoying what was done there. Captures the source material well while telling a new story in the same universe.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- macintux 9y agoSo young Aragorn and young Boromir killing orcs? Gimli killing elves?
- projectramo 9y agoI hope its not the same characters. Its hard to drum up tension for a battle when you know the hero/ine will survive.
- schtitt 9y agoHm, I disagree. Usually when you read a book/watch a movie, you do have a pretty good idea who will survive. I mean, even in the original trilogy, most people knew how things would go down since the books were well known. I would say more interesting is how it goes down, and you can still have tension even if you know the final outcome. Same thing with folk tales: you know the hero is going to win, but it is still enjoyable to hear the tale told.
- projectramo 9y agoI guess you have a point. But let me try another counter: how much more enjoyable were the big scenes in Game of Thrones? I think you know the ones I am talking about. I still enjoy rewatching Breaking Bad but the shock and recognition of watching these shows the first time is superior.
- schtitt 9y agoYup, you're right. It does add something for sure. I guess the further away a show/movie strays from common tropes the more important is the value of not knowing what will happen.
- sizzzzlerz 9y agoHow about the origin stories of the Ents and of Beorn
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- ehllo 9y agoI think tolkien is a good option for "new" stuff, since there are many written stories in this universe about other characters and the created world by him is massive. There is also a possibility to start with his oldest book "silmarillion".
- username223 9y agoMaybe they could do the "Tale of the Children of Hurin," but the Silmarillion covers thousands of years and hundreds of characters. It would be like a multi-season adaptation of the Old Testament, i.e. a disaster.
- megaman22 9y agoThat, or Beren and Luthien, or the fall of Gondolin, which are the most fleshed-out episodes, as far as I remember. The exile of the Noldor could be interesting, but iirc, it's really in the form of a Germanic saga, so it would really need a lot of filling out of details and characterization.
- mmanfrin 9y agoDo you mean original as in first-as-a-series, or original as in something that hasn't been made for tv/movies yet? If the latter, there are tons: - The Expanse - American Gods, Good Omens - Kingkiller Chronicles (being produced by Lin-Manuel Miranda) - Wheel of Time However, if you mean the former, then I agree, although there are new shows, they just don't have high budgets like those with followings already.
- santaclaus 9y ago> Kingkiller Chronicles Sweet, maybe we'll get book 3 on TV before in print like Game of Thrones!
- tudelo 9y agoYou have no idea how you just made me feel...
- mmanfrin 9y agoI hope so. I worry Rothfuss has gone full-GRRM; got too successful before the series concluded and now it's up in air if it will conclude. The only real hope I have is that it feels like Rothfuss wouldn't let his series be finished by TV in the way GoT has for ASOIF. Also Rothfuss claimed to have a 'finished manuscript' in 2014, so there is hope.
- enervate 9y agoSyfy has an Expanse show. It's pretty good, imo.
- cavanasm 9y agoParent was listing smaller original fiction literature universes that HAVE recently gotten TV shows.
- vlunkr 9y agoIf this means they will be adapting some of the Silmarillion stories then I might be on board. There are some great sketches of stories there that unfortunately were not completed in Tolkien's lifetime. I would love to see them fleshed out. When publishing these, they try not to modify the original writings, which is nice, but also frustrating, because they aren't written in a way that Tolkien deemed them ready for publishing. What I would really love is for them to publish the originals, but also give them to other fantasy authors and let them adapt it into a complete novel. A TV show is less exciting (for me), but could be interesting.
- cannonedhamster 9y agoIf they took a (less horrifying) Black Mirror approach where it was stories in the same universe that could be interesting, but I don't think it would play. There's a lot of story fruit still in LOTR universe that hasn't been plucked yet, so I think that they could do something really good that was episodic as well, but I suspect it will end up closer to "Legend of the Seeker" than something with a good, lasting story.
- krapp 9y agoWe'd just end up with Sexy Shelob, though.
- notacoward 9y ago> This just feels like a very safe "me too Game of Thrones" play. No more than Game of Thrones was a "me too Lord of the Rings" play. I mean, seriously, Tolkien's work was first in both book and movie/TV form.
- BerislavLopac 9y ago> So it's not going to tell the main story itself, which is probably wise given the film adaptations aren't even that old. As far as my understanding of the very complex and sad story of LotR rights goes, they can't/. In a nutshell, JRRT has sold all non-printing rights for LotrR and Hobbit a long time ago, and they are currently held by the entity (currently) called Middle-earth Enterprises [1], a division of The Saul Zaentz Company. This basically boils down to them having the final world on any derivative work that includes the characters, locations and some other elements from the novels. The rest of the rights belong to the Tolkien Estate [2], which is a legal entity controlled primarily by Tolkien's son Christopher. The Estate have for long been opposed to any derivative works, but they have apparently changed their stance, considering they are the ones Amazon made the deal with. So I expect we won't see any of the Fellowship, nor places like Rivendell, Moria or Minas-Tirith; but there are plenty of areas in Middle-earth with enough stories to explore -- early days of Arnor and Gondor, Dol Amroth etc. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle-earth_Enterprises https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle-earth_Enterprises [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolkien_Estate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolkien_Estate
- ellius 9y agoThe worst part is that you probably couldn’t pick a worse franchise to adapt into a Game of Thrones-style show. LotR is all about a Manichean struggle between good and evil, and about dreaming and wanderlust and journies. GoT is about cold, brutal, gritty realpolitik and the realities of power, war, and violence. Shoving GoT themes into a world that was basically built for precisely opposite ideas is lazy and will probably produce jarring, unnatural stories.
- legohead 9y agoThere are so many amazing fantasy novels that need movies or TV shows. Tolkien was good, and for his time, amazing. But compared to what we have available today, I wouldn't even put him in the top 10. sigh
- acdanger 9y agoCare to offer any recommendations? I'm in the market for new sci-fi / fantasy lit.
- sigstoat 9y agor scott bakker; brandon sanderson; steven brust; alastair reynolds; max gladstone; neal asher; harry connolly; joel shepherd.
- meritt 9y agoWheel of Time (Robert Jordan) Stormlight Archive; Mistborn (Brandon Sanderson) Belgariad and Malloreon (David Eddings) Discworld (Terry Pratchett) Sword of Shannara (Terry Brooks)
- thefalcon 9y agoI found the Runelords series by David Farland really enjoyable and cinematic. Great exploration of a fascinating magic system, with some very memorable characters to boot. For Sci Fi, Netflix is currently making a series based on Altered Carbon which I'm very excited for - I love that series to death (Richard K Morgan, author).
- shmerl 9y agoTry Sapkowski if you didn't read The Witcher yet.
- BerislavLopac 9y agoThe Liveship Traders trilogy (Robin Hobb) The Earthsea tri(penta)logy (Ursula LeGuin) Tigana (Guy Gavriel Kay) Gentlemen Bastards (aka Locke Lamora) series (Scott Lynch) Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell (Susanna Clarke) If you're in the mood for something more modern, I'm highly recommending the Rivers of London series by Ben Aaronovitch.
- sgt101 9y agoIt's good to know that Amazon are right behind creative, contemporary ideas and not simply cynically retreading ground that has been covered already.
- pvg 9y agoDupe of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15643856 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15643856
- thefalcon 9y agoNo it isn't. The deal was announced today, the linked article is from six days ago. Speculation and rumors are not the same thing as a done deal.
- pvg 9y agoSure and you could have another thread when the schedule is announced but that doesn't make for interesting conversation or an interesting front page. There's nothing in this thread that wasn't in last week's thread and chances are there won't be.
- colemannugent 9y agoIf there is any author who has fleshed out their world enough to have an entire TV series focus on minor characters it's Tolkien. Personally, if they include Tom Bombadil in the show it will be entirely worth it for me.
- peatmoss 9y agoI like to imagine that the Tom Bombadil Chronicles would look a whole lot like PBS's "The Woodwright's Shop."
- analog31 9y agoNow I get to go back to my friends and say: "Remember when I told you that they would create a film adaptation of the Sylmarillion and Appendices, in 8 installments, and you all rolled your eyes at me?"
- martythemaniak 9y agoThis could be both quite good and original. LotR takes place at the end of the Third Age and Tolkien expanded that into the three novels, but he also wrote (and his son co-wrote, edited and published) The Silmarillion, which covered everything until the end of the Third Age. I always thought The Silmarillion contained enough source material to make a dozen "LotR"s and keep everything consistent within the same universe. I hope that do that instead of a "Young Aragorn" type of deal.
- koolba 9y agoThe Silmarillion is by far my favorite book in that set. The story of Beren and Luthien alone would make a fantastic series. I hope that's the route they go as well.
- notacoward 9y agoSilmarillion is mostly First Age, with scant coverage given to the Second and none to the Third. Personally, even as a serious Tolkien fan in my younger days, I'd find a Silmarillion-based series totally uninteresting and would prefer just about any other part of the canon.
- cocacola1 9y agoA lot of people seem to be down on it, but I'm pretty excited. He's still the standard to which any fantasy book is held to, as well as the standard for worldbuilding. Nothing else really comes close.
- jpm_sd 9y agoI wish someone would do a proper job on the Earthsea novels. Netflix, are you listening? LOTR is a bit played out, the Hobbitrilogy kinda beat it to death.
- notacoward 9y agoI really hope when they say "preceding The Fellowship of the Ring" they still mean Third Age. The Silmarillion stuff is just too big and too unfamiliar IMO. There's plenty to cover with Dol Guldur, Gollum's capture and escape, Moria, Gandalf and Saruman, Wormtongue, Denethor, Aragorn as a younger man, etc. Going further back but still Third Age you have the breakup of Arnor and the rise of Angmar, the founding of the Shire and Rohan, dwarves and dragons, and so on. There's just no need to go all the way back to the beginning, and it would seem too much like a whole different world that I think it would be a mistake.
- BerislavLopac 9y agoPersonally I would prefer them to go even further into the early Third Age. The Fall of Arnor, the Kin-Strife -- there is a lot of epic events, with a much darker tone.
- notacoward 9y agoThey might have to. I saw your other post, about who owns the rights, and I've also seen some of that as a LotROnline player. There might be other issues because of the movies, if MEE/SZC gave the studios exclusive (or time-exclusive) rights to the characters and settings. That still leaves a lot, though. Angmar and Dol Guldur are only alluded to in the books, not visited, which makes them Tolkien Estate territory. Gondor's a bit trickier. The kin-strife involved characters not in LotR, but the settings might be contentious. A lot depends on the specific details or the contracts among the various parties, which we don't know.
- acheron 9y agoSo hold on, this is literally working with the Tolkien Estate? Is the Estate licensing further works? I assumed before now that the articles referencing the "Tolkien Estate" mostly didn't know what they were talking about, and that the deal was being worked out with the usual suspects (i.e. Saul Zaentz Company) with the Estate keeping up their same position. This makes it more interesting, I guess.