9 ms·

I'm not sure who it was, the director, producer, somebody, who gave an interview fairly recently in which they stated one of the central themes was "how far int

I'm not sure who it was, the director, producer, somebody, who gave an interview fairly recently in which they stated one of the central themes was "how far into evil will you go to do good?" Given that that is diametrically opposed to the central theme of Tolkien's work, which is that it is worth not using/doing evil in order to fight evil even though it is much harder and requires greater sacrifice, I elected not to view this show. Perhaps after it is done someone will say to me "oh it wasn't like that at all" and I will enjoy it then.

bbstats 4y ago
Bro this is literally the entire plot of the original trilogy. Boromir, Faramir etc all want to use evil for good. Nonsense.
- fknorangesite 4y ago
  > Faramir In the movies, yes, but not in the books.
  - Groxx 4y ago
    In the books, the dichotomy between them is pretty significant. Boromir gave in to temptation to use it to defeat his enemies and was killed because of it. Faramir did not, suffered a bit for not having that weapon, but survived and was rewarded in the end. They were extremely clearly intended as a moral lesson. The movies completely reversed Faramir.
    - godmode2019 4y ago
      Also the book has a extra chapter at the end where the shire turns into a police state, Fordo leads a horse back revolution to kick out the corrupt hobbits who inslaved their own people with the new tools from the people with the machines. I was surprised as an adult when I first watched the movie that it didn't have this ending to the character arch, missing the final stage of the hero's journey.
      - boomboomsubban 4y ago
        I'm surprised they haven't turned it into a movie over the past twenty years. I suppose they'd have wanted Elijah Wood back and I get the feeling he wouldn't be keen to reprise the role.
thebooktocome 4y ago
It’s possible to tell two stories in the same fictional world with opposing themes.
- leereeves 4y ago
  Tolkien once wrote: > You can make the Ring into an allegory of our own time, if you like: an allegory of the inevitable fate that waits for all attempts to defeat evil power by power. If these writers are using Tolkien's name without respecting his beliefs, even Tolkien might have given the show a bad review. Of course that's just speculation, but only a rare storyteller can tell an epic tale that isn't ultimately resolved by superior force. If this show can remain faithful to Tolkien's vision, I'll be very impressed.
  - Tagbert 4y ago
    What do you see as not respecting Tolkien’s name? The quote was "how far into evil will you go to do good?". that is a question, not an admonition. It sounds like they may explore that. If so, it would not be unreasonable to end up with the same “do no evil” answer as Tolkien. Why should we give a bad review based on insufficient evidence?
    - jay_kyburz 4y ago
      A also think they are not directly related. I would think Tolkien is talking about Authoritarian Power of governments. i.e. don't vote Fascists into power. When I hear how far into evil will somebody go, I think of an individuals choices to do evil for a perceived the greater good. Kind of related, but not quite the same.
      - leereeves 4y ago
        I don't agree, I think Tolkien was also talking about individual choices. Remember this bit? > “What a pity Bilbo did not stab the vile creature, when he had a chance! > Pity? It was Pity that stayed his hand. Pity, and Mercy: not to strike without need. > I do not feel any pity for Gollum. He deserves death. > Deserves death! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give that to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends.” And it was that small individual mercy that ultimately saved the world.
Tagbert 4y ago
So far, the closest we have seen something like that is Galadriel’s obsession with finding Sauron in a very Captain Ahab way. It may become a test for her to see if she is willing to do evil in this quest and whether she can pull herself out of that. I doubt that they are actively promoting doing evil as justified. That quote did contain a question.
JulianHC 4y ago
That reminds me of the scene where Denethor told Faramir he should have taken the ring back so it can be used for good. Had Faramir done that Sauron would probably win.
- hinkley 4y ago
  9 Kings of Men fell to the power of the Dark Lord. What is a steward who can’t even love his children equally going to do that they couldn’t?
  - inglor_cz 4y ago
    Well, compared to that time, Sauron didn't have his Ring and his Ring contained a lot of his former power. If Aragorn took the Ring, he would be able to challenge Sauron. Denethor was somewhat of a lesser rank, but still an almost pure Numenorean. The Ring would have turned both of them to Evil, for sure, but not necessarily into servants of Sauron himself. They might just become the new Evil overlords of the world after defeating Sauron. The main character flaw of Denethor is that he sacrificed his life to the cause of Gondor and Gondor only. Existence and might of Gondor were his main motivations, not preservation of Freedom or Good in the world in general. He was based on a stereotype of a proud medieval or Roman noble, though (untypically) a highly educated one.
justin66 4y ago
> "how far into evil will you go to do good?" Given that that is diametrically opposed to the central theme of Tolkien's work But this theme is pretty much in keeping with the darker subject matter of The Silmarillion.
- galangalalgol 4y ago
  The subject matter of the Simarillion is that we are all flawed and those flaws lead to suffering and ultimately the repeated triumph of evil over good. And that every once in a while flawed beings shine with such a brilliance that it redeems all the rest of it.
  - lumost 4y ago
    Honest question... I recall attempting to read the Simarillion and finding that it was a simple recitation of facts about middle earth. I abandoned this after some 150 pages. This was many years ago, is my recollection flawed?
    - astrange 4y ago
      No. You're not actually supposed to read it, or he would've published it while he was alive.
      - jsdreim 4y ago
        He tried to get it published, for decades, starting in 1937. The publishers would never take it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion#Development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion#Development
    - teraflop 4y ago
      I mean, you could view any story as a "recitation of facts" if you're really determined to take that point of view, but I don't think it's at all fair to dismiss the Silmarillion that way. It's true that the first 50 pages or so are pretty much just worldbuilding, mainly focusing on the mythology behind the creation of the world (Arda) by Iluvatar and the various demigods. After that, you start getting into the details of what the elves did upon waking up as the first quasi-"mortal" inhabitants of Arda, and the subsequent eras of history. Some of it is painted in broad strokes, but there are plenty of chapters that zoom in on specific characters and their heroic and evil deeds, personal conflicts, betrayals, hubris and other tragic flaws, etc. Sure, the style of the prose is a bit dry, but there's plenty of drama to be had in the story. Wikipedia has a pretty good summary of the overall plot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion#Synopsis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion#Synopsis
goldenchrome 4y ago
gsatic 4y ago
I stopped watching after they butchered a snow troll for no reason. According to the books, a gentle creature, that gets easily scared. The right way to calm it down involves tickling. But Galadriel chopped up every single part of its body. Twirling around unnecessarily while doing so, after having shot it up with 6 arrow. For this reason I have elected to cancel my prime membership.
- sarchertech 4y ago
  For those who aren’t aware this is either satire or confusion on the OP’s part. There are no “gentle snow trolls” in the source material. And there was nothing unnecessary about the fight scene. It’s unrealistic in the way that Legolas is unrealistic in Peter Jackson’s movies, but no worse.
  - ekianjo 4y ago
    And there is no gratuitous killing of trolls in the source material either.
    - sarchertech 4y ago
      It wasn’t gratuitous in the context of the show. They were attacked by said troll. The troll attack advanced the plot by serving as a catalyst for Galadriel’s troops deserting. Unless you’re saying that just having a fight scene with a troll was gratuitous? But the books have plenty of battle scenes with trolls as well.
    - coffee_beqn 4y ago
      I mean it’s a fantasy show. They wanted to show that Galadriel was a elite fighter and they succeeded
      - Retric 4y ago
        They showed plot armor not an elite fighter.
tshaddox 4y ago
I guess I understand that if one is a big Tolkien fan and takes the source material very seriously. But it sounds like a viewpoint that is almost certainly of little importance to the showrunners and the vast majority of potential viewers. Personally I couldn’t care less about Tolkien’s legacy or anything like that, and it seems like a cool show with lots of very expensive spectacle on screen and I think that should be enough. I guess I’m just not big into the whole proprietorial fandom thing.
sarchertech 4y ago
That was certainly a theme of much of Tolkien’s writing. Many characters fell out a desire to do good, and many others were confronted with the choice to do evil in the service of good. Nothing about what the person being interviewed said implies that the moral of the story is “you should go really really far into evil to do good.” I’d say the implication of that question is the opposite.
- MrPatan 4y ago
  Here's a prediction: This show is all about current events and the answer is going to be "Yeah, a lot of evil, and we're still the good guys"
tschwimmer 4y ago
This type of development is unfortunately par for the course with modern Hollywood remakes of older media and probably will only get worse over time. I am not familiar at all with the LoTR stuff that's going on, but it seems somewhat similar to what they've done with Star Trek. Discovery and (especially) Picard make a mockery of Old Trek in terms of vision and values. I saw a recent parody video that described the TNG Federation as "Vegetarian Space Socialists" that everyone finds annoying but it seems like the writers of Picard have taken it literally. I won't argue that Old Trek is the epitome of subtlety, but the basic premise was that the Federation represents a utopian society that has mostly put aside material concerns in order to promote peace and prosperity in the galaxy. Star Trek was a series of stories about what would happen when you take people from this utopian society and put them in uncomfortable and challenging situations. This worked amazingly well. Picard and Discovery throws this out the window. It seems like the rough outline of the show was to shoehorn as much heavy handed modern political controversy in between the big budget space battles. The characters seem to be raring to fight at every juncture which is pretty much the opposite of the Federation's MO. This has also happened with Star Wars but I feel less bad. I think Star Wars was always a bit less "high brow" than some of the other media being discussed here, but Disney seems to have scoured the entire script of the original trilogy for any lines they could stretch out into scenes for a spinoff film ("Kessel Run" for Solo, "Many Bothans Died" for Rogue One). To me this stuff is straight up cringe - at the same level as bad fan fiction. Ultimately I have started to regard most of these films as products in the same sense as breakfast cereal at the grocery store. When they put out a new neon green version of lucky charms I don't get mad - I don't pay attention at all. Luckily, it seems like there are some filmmakers who are making interesting films even post-COVID (Robert Eggers, David Kwan and Daniel Scheinert) so I have some hope for the future. But these mega-budget reboots? I do my best to ignore their existence at this point.
- cloutchaser 4y ago
  The people who write these believe that the old hero myths stories are based on the wrong values, and they are on a mission to correct it. Responsibility, sacrifice, being torn between good and bad, these are not what modern stories should be made of. But for some masochistic reason these same people can’t write their own stories, they actually want to destroy existing stories, kill off the previous characters and storylines, and insert their own philosophy into the old worlds. It’s ridiculous, and narcissistic, and I sincerely hope something that makes these companies go bust. I sincerely hope in the long run there isn’t a market for this behaviour. Star Wars certainly seems to have collapsed.
nkozyra 4y ago
Well I'd posit that this question is absolutely interesting enough to explore without the specter of "authenticity" hanging over it.
- Retric 4y ago
  It’s a question poorly suited for artistic exploration when the artist defines the outcomes.
  - Godel_unicode 4y ago
    The conversation isn’t over when the credits roll, rather that is the end of the beginning.
    - Retric 4y ago
      The issues is narrative isn’t bound by causality making such conversation hollow.
      - Godel_unicode 4y ago
        Hardly, talking about how some narrative is hollow and what would have actually happened is a fruitful source of lit papers. The source material is merely the beginning of that conversation, as you and I are literally demonstrating in this thread.
        Retric 4y ago
        I don’t see how the actual story applies to this discussion as I haven’t seen it. I actually came here to see if it was worth watching.
cm2012 4y ago
You would actually like the show, the main moral is exactly the tolkien one you mention. The interview person is not saying it's good to do evil to do good, just that it is a theme in the show as it is in lord of the rings.
- scintill76 4y ago
  After just 2 episodes it seems too early to state what the theme is, unless you’ve seen more than the public has.
simonh 4y ago
Tolkien several said he wanted see what other people with their own creative vision “with other minds and hands” could do set in Middle Earth. It doesn’t seem like he expected them to slavishly follow his own style.
- WalterSear 4y ago
  > "I would draw some of the great tales in fullness, and leave many only placed in the scheme, and sketched. The cycles should be linked to a majestic whole, and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama.”
- pvaldes 4y ago
  > Tolkien several said he wanted see what other people with their own creative vision could do set in Middle Earth. That would explain why the Tolkien state sued "Dungeons and Dragons", and Warner Bross, and anybody trying to clone middle earth in their own shows... This explains also why the Witcher would need to find a way to have elves depicted as much different as possible from Tolkien's elves. Tolkien's elves are extremely advanced technologically and the "de facto" standard now for the term, Witcher's elves are a tribe of poor forest people, closer to the (copyright free) traditional goblins, but that went extinct with Tolkien's work.
  - simonh 4y ago
    Why are you even trying to make an argument like that? The point, as I'm sure you very well know, is Tolkien wanted other people to contribute original material to Middle Earth on their own terms. He was all for it. The opinion of his estate since his death is different of course, but that's got nothing to do with his own opinion.
    - pvaldes 4y ago
      You are right, is not really relevant here. Fair point
tomjen3 4y ago
It’s also a completely overdone trope by now
Supermancho 4y ago
https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2022/08/31/lord-rings-power-questions-answered-amazon-prequel/7925525001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2022/08/31/l... co-creator J.D. Payne teases. "The question the first season asks is, 'How far into the darkness would you go to protect the things that matter the most?'"
cmckn 4y ago

bbstats 4y ago

Bro this is literally the entire plot of the original trilogy. Boromir, Faramir etc all want to use evil for good. Nonsense.

fknorangesite 4y ago
> Faramir In the movies, yes, but not in the books.
- Groxx 4y ago
  In the books, the dichotomy between them is pretty significant. Boromir gave in to temptation to use it to defeat his enemies and was killed because of it. Faramir did not, suffered a bit for not having that weapon, but survived and was rewarded in the end. They were extremely clearly intended as a moral lesson. The movies completely reversed Faramir.
  - godmode2019 4y ago
    Also the book has a extra chapter at the end where the shire turns into a police state, Fordo leads a horse back revolution to kick out the corrupt hobbits who inslaved their own people with the new tools from the people with the machines. I was surprised as an adult when I first watched the movie that it didn't have this ending to the character arch, missing the final stage of the hero's journey.
    - boomboomsubban 4y ago
      I'm surprised they haven't turned it into a movie over the past twenty years. I suppose they'd have wanted Elijah Wood back and I get the feeling he wouldn't be keen to reprise the role.

thebooktocome 4y ago

It’s possible to tell two stories in the same fictional world with opposing themes.

leereeves 4y ago
Tolkien once wrote: > You can make the Ring into an allegory of our own time, if you like: an allegory of the inevitable fate that waits for all attempts to defeat evil power by power. If these writers are using Tolkien's name without respecting his beliefs, even Tolkien might have given the show a bad review. Of course that's just speculation, but only a rare storyteller can tell an epic tale that isn't ultimately resolved by superior force. If this show can remain faithful to Tolkien's vision, I'll be very impressed.
- Tagbert 4y ago
  What do you see as not respecting Tolkien’s name? The quote was "how far into evil will you go to do good?". that is a question, not an admonition. It sounds like they may explore that. If so, it would not be unreasonable to end up with the same “do no evil” answer as Tolkien. Why should we give a bad review based on insufficient evidence?
  - jay_kyburz 4y ago
    A also think they are not directly related. I would think Tolkien is talking about Authoritarian Power of governments. i.e. don't vote Fascists into power. When I hear how far into evil will somebody go, I think of an individuals choices to do evil for a perceived the greater good. Kind of related, but not quite the same.
    - leereeves 4y ago
      I don't agree, I think Tolkien was also talking about individual choices. Remember this bit? > “What a pity Bilbo did not stab the vile creature, when he had a chance! > Pity? It was Pity that stayed his hand. Pity, and Mercy: not to strike without need. > I do not feel any pity for Gollum. He deserves death. > Deserves death! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give that to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends.” And it was that small individual mercy that ultimately saved the world.

Tagbert 4y ago

So far, the closest we have seen something like that is Galadriel’s obsession with finding Sauron in a very Captain Ahab way. It may become a test for her to see if she is willing to do evil in this quest and whether she can pull herself out of that. I doubt that they are actively promoting doing evil as justified. That quote did contain a question.

JulianHC 4y ago

That reminds me of the scene where Denethor told Faramir he should have taken the ring back so it can be used for good. Had Faramir done that Sauron would probably win.

hinkley 4y ago
9 Kings of Men fell to the power of the Dark Lord. What is a steward who can’t even love his children equally going to do that they couldn’t?
- inglor_cz 4y ago
  Well, compared to that time, Sauron didn't have his Ring and his Ring contained a lot of his former power. If Aragorn took the Ring, he would be able to challenge Sauron. Denethor was somewhat of a lesser rank, but still an almost pure Numenorean. The Ring would have turned both of them to Evil, for sure, but not necessarily into servants of Sauron himself. They might just become the new Evil overlords of the world after defeating Sauron. The main character flaw of Denethor is that he sacrificed his life to the cause of Gondor and Gondor only. Existence and might of Gondor were his main motivations, not preservation of Freedom or Good in the world in general. He was based on a stereotype of a proud medieval or Roman noble, though (untypically) a highly educated one.

justin66 4y ago

> "how far into evil will you go to do good?" Given that that is diametrically opposed to the central theme of Tolkien's work But this theme is pretty much in keeping with the darker subject matter of The Silmarillion.

galangalalgol 4y ago
The subject matter of the Simarillion is that we are all flawed and those flaws lead to suffering and ultimately the repeated triumph of evil over good. And that every once in a while flawed beings shine with such a brilliance that it redeems all the rest of it.
- lumost 4y ago
  Honest question... I recall attempting to read the Simarillion and finding that it was a simple recitation of facts about middle earth. I abandoned this after some 150 pages. This was many years ago, is my recollection flawed?
  - astrange 4y ago
    No. You're not actually supposed to read it, or he would've published it while he was alive.
    - jsdreim 4y ago
      He tried to get it published, for decades, starting in 1937. The publishers would never take it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion#Development https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion#Development
  - teraflop 4y ago
    I mean, you could view any story as a "recitation of facts" if you're really determined to take that point of view, but I don't think it's at all fair to dismiss the Silmarillion that way. It's true that the first 50 pages or so are pretty much just worldbuilding, mainly focusing on the mythology behind the creation of the world (Arda) by Iluvatar and the various demigods. After that, you start getting into the details of what the elves did upon waking up as the first quasi-"mortal" inhabitants of Arda, and the subsequent eras of history. Some of it is painted in broad strokes, but there are plenty of chapters that zoom in on specific characters and their heroic and evil deeds, personal conflicts, betrayals, hubris and other tragic flaws, etc. Sure, the style of the prose is a bit dry, but there's plenty of drama to be had in the story. Wikipedia has a pretty good summary of the overall plot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion#Synopsis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion#Synopsis

goldenchrome 4y ago

gsatic 4y ago

I stopped watching after they butchered a snow troll for no reason. According to the books, a gentle creature, that gets easily scared. The right way to calm it down involves tickling. But Galadriel chopped up every single part of its body. Twirling around unnecessarily while doing so, after having shot it up with 6 arrow. For this reason I have elected to cancel my prime membership.

sarchertech 4y ago
For those who aren’t aware this is either satire or confusion on the OP’s part. There are no “gentle snow trolls” in the source material. And there was nothing unnecessary about the fight scene. It’s unrealistic in the way that Legolas is unrealistic in Peter Jackson’s movies, but no worse.
- ekianjo 4y ago
  And there is no gratuitous killing of trolls in the source material either.
  - sarchertech 4y ago
    It wasn’t gratuitous in the context of the show. They were attacked by said troll. The troll attack advanced the plot by serving as a catalyst for Galadriel’s troops deserting. Unless you’re saying that just having a fight scene with a troll was gratuitous? But the books have plenty of battle scenes with trolls as well.
  - coffee_beqn 4y ago
    I mean it’s a fantasy show. They wanted to show that Galadriel was a elite fighter and they succeeded
    - Retric 4y ago
      They showed plot armor not an elite fighter.

tshaddox 4y ago

I guess I understand that if one is a big Tolkien fan and takes the source material very seriously. But it sounds like a viewpoint that is almost certainly of little importance to the showrunners and the vast majority of potential viewers. Personally I couldn’t care less about Tolkien’s legacy or anything like that, and it seems like a cool show with lots of very expensive spectacle on screen and I think that should be enough. I guess I’m just not big into the whole proprietorial fandom thing.

sarchertech 4y ago

That was certainly a theme of much of Tolkien’s writing. Many characters fell out a desire to do good, and many others were confronted with the choice to do evil in the service of good. Nothing about what the person being interviewed said implies that the moral of the story is “you should go really really far into evil to do good.” I’d say the implication of that question is the opposite.

MrPatan 4y ago
Here's a prediction: This show is all about current events and the answer is going to be "Yeah, a lot of evil, and we're still the good guys"

tschwimmer 4y ago

This type of development is unfortunately par for the course with modern Hollywood remakes of older media and probably will only get worse over time. I am not familiar at all with the LoTR stuff that's going on, but it seems somewhat similar to what they've done with Star Trek. Discovery and (especially) Picard make a mockery of Old Trek in terms of vision and values. I saw a recent parody video that described the TNG Federation as "Vegetarian Space Socialists" that everyone finds annoying but it seems like the writers of Picard have taken it literally. I won't argue that Old Trek is the epitome of subtlety, but the basic premise was that the Federation represents a utopian society that has mostly put aside material concerns in order to promote peace and prosperity in the galaxy. Star Trek was a series of stories about what would happen when you take people from this utopian society and put them in uncomfortable and challenging situations. This worked amazingly well. Picard and Discovery throws this out the window. It seems like the rough outline of the show was to shoehorn as much heavy handed modern political controversy in between the big budget space battles. The characters seem to be raring to fight at every juncture which is pretty much the opposite of the Federation's MO. This has also happened with Star Wars but I feel less bad. I think Star Wars was always a bit less "high brow" than some of the other media being discussed here, but Disney seems to have scoured the entire script of the original trilogy for any lines they could stretch out into scenes for a spinoff film ("Kessel Run" for Solo, "Many Bothans Died" for Rogue One). To me this stuff is straight up cringe - at the same level as bad fan fiction. Ultimately I have started to regard most of these films as products in the same sense as breakfast cereal at the grocery store. When they put out a new neon green version of lucky charms I don't get mad - I don't pay attention at all. Luckily, it seems like there are some filmmakers who are making interesting films even post-COVID (Robert Eggers, David Kwan and Daniel Scheinert) so I have some hope for the future. But these mega-budget reboots? I do my best to ignore their existence at this point.

cloutchaser 4y ago
The people who write these believe that the old hero myths stories are based on the wrong values, and they are on a mission to correct it. Responsibility, sacrifice, being torn between good and bad, these are not what modern stories should be made of. But for some masochistic reason these same people can’t write their own stories, they actually want to destroy existing stories, kill off the previous characters and storylines, and insert their own philosophy into the old worlds. It’s ridiculous, and narcissistic, and I sincerely hope something that makes these companies go bust. I sincerely hope in the long run there isn’t a market for this behaviour. Star Wars certainly seems to have collapsed.

nkozyra 4y ago

Well I'd posit that this question is absolutely interesting enough to explore without the specter of "authenticity" hanging over it.

Retric 4y ago
It’s a question poorly suited for artistic exploration when the artist defines the outcomes.
- Godel_unicode 4y ago
  The conversation isn’t over when the credits roll, rather that is the end of the beginning.
  - Retric 4y ago
    The issues is narrative isn’t bound by causality making such conversation hollow.
    - Godel_unicode 4y ago
      Hardly, talking about how some narrative is hollow and what would have actually happened is a fruitful source of lit papers. The source material is merely the beginning of that conversation, as you and I are literally demonstrating in this thread.
      - Retric 4y ago
        I don’t see how the actual story applies to this discussion as I haven’t seen it. I actually came here to see if it was worth watching.

cm2012 4y ago

You would actually like the show, the main moral is exactly the tolkien one you mention. The interview person is not saying it's good to do evil to do good, just that it is a theme in the show as it is in lord of the rings.

scintill76 4y ago
After just 2 episodes it seems too early to state what the theme is, unless you’ve seen more than the public has.

simonh 4y ago

Tolkien several said he wanted see what other people with their own creative vision “with other minds and hands” could do set in Middle Earth. It doesn’t seem like he expected them to slavishly follow his own style.

WalterSear 4y ago
> "I would draw some of the great tales in fullness, and leave many only placed in the scheme, and sketched. The cycles should be linked to a majestic whole, and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama.”
pvaldes 4y ago
> Tolkien several said he wanted see what other people with their own creative vision could do set in Middle Earth. That would explain why the Tolkien state sued "Dungeons and Dragons", and Warner Bross, and anybody trying to clone middle earth in their own shows... This explains also why the Witcher would need to find a way to have elves depicted as much different as possible from Tolkien's elves. Tolkien's elves are extremely advanced technologically and the "de facto" standard now for the term, Witcher's elves are a tribe of poor forest people, closer to the (copyright free) traditional goblins, but that went extinct with Tolkien's work.
- simonh 4y ago
  Why are you even trying to make an argument like that? The point, as I'm sure you very well know, is Tolkien wanted other people to contribute original material to Middle Earth on their own terms. He was all for it. The opinion of his estate since his death is different of course, but that's got nothing to do with his own opinion.
  - pvaldes 4y ago
    You are right, is not really relevant here. Fair point

tomjen3 4y ago

It’s also a completely overdone trope by now

Supermancho 4y ago

https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2022/08/31/lord-rings-power-questions-answered-amazon-prequel/7925525001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2022/08/31/l... co-creator J.D. Payne teases. "The question the first season asks is, 'How far into the darkness would you go to protect the things that matter the most?'"

cmckn 4y ago