Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: Filming Posibilities

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Silmarillion > Filming Posibilities   [1] [2] >>
While on the subject of Silmarillion movies, letís pretend the lawsuit was over. A very ambitious director was given a green light and a boatload of money to film as much or as little of Silmarillion that they could.
Just how do you envision a film portrayal of the Music of Auir?
Good topic starter.
Knee jerk answer to the music of the Ainur question is that they would do it like the first section of Disney's [i:3822g62e]Fantasia[/i:3822g62e], using music and undergirding it with moving color and having a fabulous narrator reading it. They could start with some kind of totally generic splitting of the light. Maybe "white" and "silence" are parallel, so that Illuvatar's first contribution would look like a blank page with no sound. Start with basic colors and computer tones for music. Then split and show increasing variation and Ainur experimenting and playing using more colors and blends of colors, and textures, and depict sound that way by adding sounds made by different instruments and voices. Anyway, I would try to emphasize the movement from general to particular and do it in stages, trying to make the general as inclusive-seeming as possible so that maybe "violin sound" comes only after trees and varnish and horse hairs have been created. Maybe. "flute sound" comes only after metal has been made and smithed. Hmmm...Maybe not. Maybe all of those sounds are implicit in the beginning of time.

The challenge would be to make it clear that "white" is superior or more inclusive or more the "source" than colors. Otherwise it will look like there is "nothing" and that "stuff" isn't created until the more detailed things are made. Maybe that can be made clear by using images we already kind of know, like splitting "stuff" into basics like "earth," "air," "fire," and "water." Those have associated colors, I'm sure.
Good idea, Otto's World, but if one went for that route, they'd have to keep it as an intro like in FOTR. It just seems like an audience couldn't watch more than 10 min of that without getting bored.

On the other hand, one could film it like it is represented in the books and in pictures. The only problem with that is how cheesy it would look. It just seems like a bunch of what the audience will call "angels" singing, then "God" showing them the earth would look very cheesy. One would have to portray it so it looks more adult and epic. You'd have to have a good imagination and a good visual effects/CG team.

But I'm also debating whether it should be filmed at all. On the one hand, I want to see every story in movie form, but on the other hand, it just seems something that is better in your mind (or in pictures) than it is on screen.
I think (hope) it would represent an ultimate achievement for some composer. Between the different musical themes representing elves and humans, all in contrast to Melkor's introduction of his own themes that clash. Tolkien laid out a nice general ideal for these themes, but visually how they would be represented is hard.
I guess the only thing close that I can think of is the opening for 2001 A space odyssey. And while it has reached an amazing level of status, when I saw it, I dunno, just didn't fully do it for me. The music and related imagery has grown so much that while my wife can laugh every time another TV show or movie lampoons it, she has never seen (or wants to see) 2001.
A voice over narration may make the scenes clearer, but at what cost to the music itself? A narrator, no matter how good, would detract the mind from imagery that the music is supposed to be invoking. Or would it?
I think, especially in America today [i:199gtb6j](it's where I come from, so it's the only place I can say with some degree of personal experience)[/i:199gtb6j] that the average viewing audience just couldn't grasp the music and visuals by themselves. But PJ and team did show with their prologue that a quick exposition can be done very well. Another example of their ability came with Faramir. Apparently, I forget how, it was determined that the viewing audience (not those who have already read the book) would be asking why armies from Rohan and Gondor are not going to help each other during the actions of Two Towers. A quick fix was made with the scene of Faramir looking over a map while speaking with a "lieutenant". Here is A, here is B, done, move on.
I think a quick explanation right at the start would be all that is needed. Or just a good visual distinction of who is who at the start could clear up some of the difficulty.
Ok, had a thought, and here it goes.

Start with a single star, Eru. Use a narrator to identify him, and then introduce 14(?) other stars as the Valar. You don't even have to name them, just label the group. When the music stars a field of smaller stars can appear to represent the many various [i:199gtb6j](why can I not remember how to spell that, myar, miar, mi-ar)[/i:199gtb6j] spirits. Let the field of stars work as an overlay of visual/color background that represents the themes of the music. Have the Melkor star swell when he attempts to make his own theme. Then stars can drift towards and away from him. Also the visual in the back can reflect the struggle by having darker reds/blacks/purples invade a spread against the lifelike greens and yellows.
Finish it off with a return of the Narrator, or give Eru a voice, to explain that he has allowed their music to enter the void and become the world of Middle Earth.
I think a lot can be done with that.
Even though I only answer Logical and Possible Questions, I just had to join in on this one <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' /> . I think, even if a director was given the rights to film this movie, I do not see how he could possibly film thousands of years of the Making of Middle Earth, and all that happened before the Hobbit and beyond. They would have to include all of the characters mentioned in the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit alike, telling of how they came to be, and how. The Silmarillion is almost impossible to film. And even if they [b:3hhv8ohy]somehow[/b:3hhv8ohy] were able to film this, they would have to break it down into nearly 2 Parts or more. Plus, for all the money it would take to hire all the actors, Film, and Computer Animation, and many other needs, I do not think they would even get a profit, if not a deficit from this Movie. First of all, many people would not know much of what the Silmarillion is about except those very interested in Tolkien's work. Second of all, even if some did know of what it was, there is not as much action (Fighting) as there is in ROTK, and The Two Towers. Many people who do not appreciate Tolkien would not be impressed, thus creating a bad review, insulting Tolkien on one of his most Prized Book. And there is not a Law Suit on this for no reason, it is one of the Hardest Books to film. So, I would not even recommend trying to come out with a Movie based on the Silmarillion.

Best Wishes,

Durin
I think we have all agreed that it would have to be several parts. In fact, it would not be hard at all, imo, to make 10 films out of it. But I think the most practical money-maker would be just the "Big Three." Beren and Luthien, Turin, and Gondolin. Those would attract people, and would most likely make profit.
Durin poses a good point about the Silmarillion in its entirety being unfilmable. But the same was said about Lord of the Rings. Regardless of the impossibility of it, just look at "The Hunt for Gollum". Unofficial fan-films can be fantastic (and that one looks to be a great contender). Films made by those who love the stories, not box offices. This is why I titled the thread Posibilities, I hoped to hear ideas for what other fans could invision.

I think the Big Three could be set very well between two more films, making a total of five.
Film one being the following:
Prolouge of creation of Ea, introduction of the Valar & Melkor, Bringing the Elves to Valinor/Chaining of Melkor.
[i:flszrr2e]This would be one of the largest digressions from the book as this history would be greatly chopped down for time and pacing.[/i:flszrr2e]
The core of the Film focuses on the Noldor, specifically there relation with Melkor and the creation of the Silmarils.
The sons swear their oath, kill some Teleri, and a whole bunch of folks head back to Middle-Earth. From there we can see a little battle with Orcs and the beginning of the Siege of Angbad (sp?).
Wrap the whole thing up with Men showing up on the scene.

That a big one, not sure if they could pull it off in one, Maybe make the introduction of Men into a second film, but with a great story teller at the helm, I think it's doable.

Then the Big Three, as discussed on the How Many films for Silmarillion thread.

Finish with Earendil taking the Silmaril gained by Beren and sailing to Valinor. The Wrath of the Valar and the final overthrow of Melkor. Finish up with a wonderful ending. Contrast the founding of Numenor with the hiding of Sauron. Setting up the possibility of filming the Akellebeth as well.
I agree that the Oath should be in a movie somewhere. But one must be careful devoting an entire move to "setup." I could see the movie focusing much more on the killing at Swanhaven, the Flight of the Noldor, and the burning of the ships. Then, perhaps, once the elves are getting settled in Middle-Earth, they could find Men.
Effectivley making one film the initial fall of the elves and a second the rise of Men? I like it. I was trying to see a way to make a single film that would adequetly entertain and set up the big three.
The story of Beren and Luthien really needs (in my opinion) a good explanation of the Silmarils. The story is strongly influenced by who has them (Melkor), who wants them (Feanor's sons, and just about everyone else who sees them), and all the desire and doom focused on those three jewels. Not to mention that recovering one of these from Melkor allows for the eventuality of Earendil being able to make the voyage to Valinor.
I agree with those who have said that one movie cant do justice to the richness and detail of The Silmarillion.Having said that, I dont think we need to really devote so much attention to the Ainulindale and the initial parts of the Valaquenta although,admittedly they are the most fundamental tapestry on which the world Ea, its histories and Doom are woven. Maybe it would suffice to show it as a 10-minute prologue much like one in the LOTR-1 with some of the key elements like a few frames of the angelic Ainur visualized as entities of pure energy and light, creating and yet being part of a cosmic explosion of sentience including the discordant Melkor.Like Galadriel in the earlier movies maybe Varda could be the voice-over for this prologue. It could go on to show the realization of Ea and Arda as proto-worlds much like the creation of the Solar system. It could then move on to the Lamps,Almaren and their destruction. Or,well,maybe the Lamps could be ignored and the prologue could go straight to Valinor and a few frames of the most important among the Aratar like Manwe,Varda,Tulkas,Orome,Ulmo and Aule in their element. It could finish with a scene of the young world in starlit semidarkness,awaiting the Awakening Of The Firstborn .

I guess how it should proceed from here depends on which part of the epic the movie focusses on. For example one movie could recount the Journey from Cuivienen to Valinor , the creation of the Silmarils by the Flame-like Feanor,It could then show scenes of Melkor destroying the Trees of light ,leading to Feanor's Oath and the subsequent Doom of Mandos.This could cover the first half of the movie.

The second could describe the doomed Journey back to Middle-Earth,the First Battle of Beleriand which would lead to the climax battle of the movie,the Dagor-nuin-Giliath in which Melkor unleashes the demonic Balrogs,despite which the Noldor win a glorious victory but at the cost of Feanor's life. It would seem a fitting depiction of the sad irony of the Fate of the Noldor.
The silmarillion in its entirety cant be done in one movie. Period. I dont think we have to debate that. I personally think the Silmarillion would make an epic animated film.

I do NOT mean animated like the old hobbit cartoon, or disney animation. If you want to see great graphics, look to video games or Japan. Anyone see Paprika. Watch Speed Racer (yes, I kow its a kids movie but Im in love with it) Half the time I cant tell whether things have been filmed or created. That technique applied to a fantasy world would be superb. Think of what happens in the book. Think of the worlds and the sights. Think of the Two Trees and the wars between the valar and Melkor. They skew, destroy, and recreate the geography of the WORLD at least twice. How about the first dawn of the sun? "Than Anar arose in glory, and the first dawn of the Sun was like a great fire upon the great towers of the Pelori; and the coulds of Middle Earth were kindled, and there was heard the sound of many waterfalls." (silmarillion, Of the Sun and Moon) I found this picture and thought it would be perfect for that scene: [url:b7udlzp7]http://airage.deviantart.com/art/Foreign-skies-39355081[/url:b7udlzp7]

Not even to get into the denziens that inhabit populate the story. Who would play Luthien? How about Manwe?

Maybe Its just because Im an artist, but Ive seen the incredible pictures and scenes that can be created digitally and have full faith in animators to create an utterly stunning film of the SIlmarillion. For the beginning, the music of Iluvatar, I think a close up on fenorian letters ( not the tengwar, the older versions of script) would work well. For images, I think something like a simulation of the Big Bang (obviously, slowed down) and the unfurling of the music and the ainur might suffice. Ive always found pictures of galaxies and nebulas a calling to the imagination. Okay, Ive kinda ran on a bit but Im being chased off the internet. Peace~
I think that, with today's technology, they could do a much better job just using CGI along with live action, like they did with LOTR. An entirely animated version just doesn't appeal to me. The more live-action, the more real it is. I realize that the CGI (although the best of the time) in LOTR is starting to look dated. So think of how much better the technology is now, and think about what they could do. But, like Jackson, I am for as much live-action as possible. Instead of building CGI versions, Jackson filmed miniatures of Helms Deep, Isenguard, Minas Tirith, Osgiliath, etc. I think that the more film you actually use, the better. There is no substitute for real-life, no matter how real CGI looks.
And if you watch the extras with the movies, there was a lot of good and fun with the miniatures. Or bigatures as they came to be known.
I liked Jackson's approach. He didn't go with just one choice, he used whatever would work better for the shot. So the Watcher's tentacles were CGI. Animatronics or mini's just couldn't get the dynamics he wanted. But adding the water and splashing took a real extra umpf of work.
Then look at things like the water horses in FotR when they crossed the ford by Rivendell. I can not fathom how that could be done in a practical sense with mini's.

What about using a strictly motion capture system like they did for Beowulf? Motion capture really worked well for Gollum. If memory serves Gollum was redesigned to bring in all the facial contortions and physicality that Andy Serkis was doing when he would perform his lines. So not only did he provide the voice, but he really did provide the physical performance for the character as well.

In truth, animated may be (in my mind) the safest road for Silmarillion. Especially for continuity purposes. Many of the elves are left unchanged from beginning to end. And yet many men characters have to age a lot throughout the entire story. I personally think it would work better than using makeup to achieve all the age changes. But maybe I'm wrong. Also it will take time and funding to convince any studio to create films for the entirety of the story. Digital animation would allow character to remain visually intact, even if voice actors do not. There is also a potential for cost effectiveness for later films to avoid returning actor cost. (This may be a jaded comment, but it could easily happen)

[quote:b9xuxtbt]There is no substitute for real-life, no matter how real CGI looks.[/quote:b9xuxtbt]

This may be true, but then perhaps adding CGI into the middle of a real shot would look worse than a pure CGI shot without any real elements? Just a thought.
Well, take your example of the water horses in FOTR. Of course, that cannot be done with a miniature. But it's a great example of how you can meld CGI with live-action. Another example with water would be the river-god in Prince Caspian. The river and surrounding elements were from real footage, but they used CGI water to create the river god rising out of the river. I'm not sure if the CGI was the best (you could tell at points which water droplets were real and which were CGI), but it's an example of how it's done. I just feel like using just animation limits the depth of the story, and it takes away from the realism. If the movie-makers have every option open to them (live-action, bigatures, CGI, motion capture, everything), then they will be most able to bring it to life.

I know I'm being kind of intolerant to the animated option, but this is something that I feel strongly about.

I agree that, if they want to do the WHOLE Silmarillion, then it would be difficult using the same actor over and over again, especially for the Elves. But, personally, I think it would work best all around if they didn't try to do the whole book, but only did the big three. If they filmed these like they filmed LOTR (simultaniously), then people who are in all three (Thingol, for example) would not age all that much.
Ok, OK! I got it!

You make the big three:
Beren and Luthien
Turin Turimbar
Fall of Gondolin
You do these three in live action with all the trimmings, LotR style with the actors and the whole shebang.

Then you have smaller (re:2-2 1/2 hours) animated films that fill the rest of the novel!

Similar to the use of Chronicles of Riddick: Dark Fury and the Animatrix films.

You just need the some of the same people running the show to maintain a visual continuity.
@ hObBiTzWiLlEaTyOu: Fantastic picture.. would absolutely suit the scene u described..
Ok here's my honest POV.

The first portions of the Silmarillion which essentially deal with Elves and Valar are not really good screen material. They are just too beautiful and complex for cinema. The other problem is CONTINUITY. Not everyone who goes to see these movies will be die hard TOLKIEN fans, many will just have liked the LOTR films and expect much the same. For a wide commerical spread these films need continuity of characters which means that some slight liberty may have to be taken with dates of events and some more minor characters may have to be cut out or combined.

Everything from the Music of the Ainur to the start of the Siege of Angband should be covered and condensed into a 15 minure intro to the first movie, leaving many details out to draw the viewers interests and be discovered as the films progress eg Finrod and Amarie love story.

The first movie proper after the intro should begin with the Battle of Sudden flame and the death of Fingolfin in his fight with Morgoth. This can then lead perfectly on too the Beren and Luthien. We have Movie 1. In this film the relationship between Beren and Hurin and his brother can be made more significant, as if they actually are friends. This is because a movie cannot have whole random lists of characters with no relationship to one another. The first film will end with Luthien defeating Sauron and Hurin and Hour leaving for the Battle of Unnumbered Tears. The timeframe between these two events can be condensed and Turin and Tuor can be made a little older than in the book (instead of being just born older children eg 11 or 13) and be visible characters so that the end of this film can lead onto the second with continuity of main characters.

Movie two should begin with Beren and Luthien stealing the Silmaril from Morgoth and the remainder of that tale. It will deal with the tragedy of Unnumbered Tears and will follow the story of the two sets of cousins Turin and Tuor, continually shifting back to Hurin sitting on Morgoth's seat having to watch his family being torn apart. It will end with Tuor reaching Gondolin and Turin Nargothrond where he meets Finduilas.

Movie will begin again with a vision of Hurin still sitting on Morgoth's seat and will complete the tales of the Children of Hurin, the Fall of Gondolin and Beren and Luthien. It will involve Beren and Luthien giving birth to their child Dior and the Sack of Menegroth, Fall of Gondolin etc. It will end with Beren and Dior routing the Dwarves, Gondolin falling and Tuor and his family safely escaping. Dior will be crowned King of Doriath. It will show his death and the fall of Doriath but the survival of Elwing who will meet her future husband Earendil. The film can end with Earendil leaving on his ship and finding Valinor and petinioning to the Valar on behalf of Beren and Luthien, thus completeing the quest set up by his forefathers and Elwing's (Beren and Luthien, Tuor, Dior). In the final sequences of the movie there can be images of the final battle and the sinking of Beleriand.

A perfect trilogy in my POV but I know "puritans" won't like it, but we have to be realistic.
It would probably take a series of movies to convey the story properly...

I like Otto's idea of how to portray the Music of Auir.
[quote="zard0z":3ibkd4v6]It would probably take a series of movies to convey the story properly...[/quote:3ibkd4v6]

I agree of course. :geek:
[quote="Odo Banks":q4gkl8jl][quote="zard0z":q4gkl8jl]It would probably take a series of movies to convey the story properly...[/quote:q4gkl8jl]

I agree of course. :geek:[/quote:q4gkl8jl]

A series is not nearly enough unless it's at least 6+ movies, largely unrelated and with mostly different characters....

Knee jerk answer to the music of the Ainur question is that they would do it like the first section of Disney's [i:3822g62e]Fantasia[/i:3822g62e], using music and undergirding it with moving color and having a fabulous narrator reading it. They could start with some kind of totally generic splitting of the light. Maybe "white" and "silence" are parallel, so that Illuvatar's first contribution would look like a blank page with no sound. Start with basic colors and computer tones for music. Then split and show increasing variation and Ainur experimenting and playing using more colors and blends of colors, and textures, and depict sound that way by adding sounds made by different instruments and voices.

I totally agree with that. I've thought of this part of Fantasy as well. It's the best way to start the film and explain the creating of the world as an introduction. Not more than 10 minutes for the song, the arriving of the elves, Morgoth corrupting then and being caught by the rest of the Vala. And then start with the great voyage to Aman, with Thingol meeting Melian, etc.
The ending of this first part (thinking of an unlikely trilogy) could be after the second great battle, when Maedhros is rescued and, after all the evil arranged by Morgoth and the oath of Feanor that included his sons, he renounces to be the king of the Noldor for Fingolfin. Like a shine of hope, regret and friendship between the Noldor after all the problems with Feanor, now dead.
The last shot can be of the land of Valinor, where the Vala created the enchanted islands in front of it, to protect them, as to say: "you are alone in Middle Earth now, my friends".

Oh, goodie! I hope this thread is still active.

Filming possibilities... sorry if anyone's already had this idea, but I think for something as rich in depth and detail as the beloved Silm., a mini-series is the way to go. HBO maybe, they seem to be good at doing fantasy, and budget's not really a problem. Ten episodes per series, with maybe five series (1: life in Valinor, ending with the stealing of the Telerin ships; 2: moving into Beleriand, going to Doriath, etc. ending with the Dagor Aglareb; 3: the story of Beren and Luthien, with the Dagor Bragollach, ending with the planning of the Nirnaeth Arnoediad; 4: the story of Turin Turambar, ending with his death; 5: the Fall of Gondolin, ending with the War of Wrath). With the right crew and actors, this could be a hit. Maybe throw in a few well-known names for a greater audience appeal (maybe Lena Headey as Melian or Jeremy Irons as Mandos?) Michele Clapton for costumes (her designs for Game of Thrones were sensational!)

Hello spodbod, first of all, welcome to this wonderful place. I hope you will like it here.

This thread is still active, although maybe not this thread, but there are many more threads here about The Silmarillion.

Feel free to start a discussion. And talk about things. Take a look at the forum and I'm sure you can find a lot of threads you are intrested in.

Namarie,

Arwen

Thanks!

Hey, it is only 30 years left until all of JRRT works go to the public domain. There are people here young enough to see this film done Smile Smilie

Hmm, but Christopher Tolkien published the 1977 Silmarillion, and if he is considered its author from a copyright perspective, under the current (British) copyright law the book will not enter the public domain until 70 years after CJRT's passing.

I don't know who is legally considered its author. In 2007 William Cloud Hicklin wrote:

The idea will also have to wait in 2043, when JRRT's copyright expires; or, conceivably 70 years after Christopher dies, since h[e] is quite arguably a co-author of the Silmarillion.

And if anyone is wondering why I would quote WCH about this matter, in 2009 he also revealed (I find number three interesting as well):

1) The Simarillion rights have not been sold. That's simple fact.

2) Christopher Tolkien has declared that he will never sell them so long as he is alive.

3) Adam Tolkien shares his father's position

Since I'm in personal contact with both Tolkiens, I think I am in a rather better position to know than your cousin with her little rumor she heard from her production team boyfriend.

Galin. Are you sure that you aren't actually C.T. Im starting to wonder..... Honestly who really knows? Anything can happen these days. Sad but true. Just let people dream and ponder..

since h[e] is quite arguably a co-author of the Silmarillion

There are works of JRRT dated 1916-1930th, pre-Hobbit period. Does Chris claim co-authorship to? For the Lay of Leithian, for example?

And there is the other matter. Professor  have based his stories strongly on ancient plots and archetypes. The plot of mentioned Lay of Leithian, for example, is an archetypal scheme of fairy tale. It cannot be copyrighted. So, filmmaker just takes the plot, puts Aren instead of Beren and Eimiel instead of Luthien and so on, and Tolkien's heirs go whistle. I bet this option will be taken by some smartass, sooner or later, it was already done in Spain, where Kirill Eskov had published his LOTR sequel.

Unless Christopher changes his position and sells rights, of course.

May be, it is just the matter of  "How much"?

Crazy. I get what your saying but the world would never accept such a terrible "version" of The Sil. Could never work as characters in the Sil are also in TLOTR. Example Sauron, Galadriel, Celeborn and on and on. There could be no connection between a name edited and altered Sil with The Hobbit and TLOTR movies. Wouldnt make sense and Id not be interested.

Brego, it depends on the screenwriter and the director.

I know what I say, because I've red this book:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Fanfic/BeyondTheDawn

and because I am a screenwriter myself. I can tell the THING when I see one. I bet I could write the script in the way to make you keep your breathing for 2-3 hours and you will curse not me for changing names, but  Tolkien Jr for not selling rights.

A good story is a good story, no matter how names change.

Honestly who really knows? Anything can happen these days. Sad but true. Just let people dream and ponder..

And in no way am I not letting people dream and ponder Brego.

But anyone who posts that the Silmarillion (by implication) will be in the public domain in only 30 years (a very different issue than simply dreaming about what a Silmarillion film might be like, incidentally), and anyone who reads this and thinks it is certainly true, can also ponder that it might not be so.

There are works of JRRT dated 1916-1930th, pre-Hobbit period. Does Chris claim co-authorship to? For the Lay of Leithian, for example?

I have no idea what CJRT claims with respect to authorship; nor did I post that Christopher Tolkien claimed authorship of anything. Incidentally, the example The Lay of Leithian is not a finished work in any case.

And there is the other matter. Professor have based his stories strongly on ancient plots and archetypes. The plot of mentioned Lay of Leithian, for example, is an archetypal scheme of fairy tale. It cannot be copyrighted. So, filmmaker just takes the plot, puts Aren instead of Beren and Eimiel instead of Luthien and so on, and Tolkien's heirs go whistle. I bet this option will be taken by some smartass, sooner or later, it was already done in Spain, where Kirill Eskov had published his LOTR sequel.

As far as I am aware, simply changing names does not necessarily get around copyright concerns.

Unless Christopher changes his position and sells rights, of course.

Possibilities are possible. That said, given CJRT's reaction to Peter Jackson's films, and given the statements from Mr Hicklin, and also considering the current position of the Estate concerning the Children of Hurin, this seems quite doubtful in my opinion.

But as I say, feel free, of course, to also ponder what a Silmarillion film might be like.

That's why I praise God for the fact that TLOTR and Hobbit's rights were sold earlier.

I do not want to speak of Christopher personally, but his attitude seems to me kinda... Gollum-like. "My precious-s-s!"

Crazy cossack wrote: I do not want to speak of Christopher personally, but his attitude seems to me kinda... Gollum-like. "My precious-s-s!"

And shall we list the various books and other projects that Christopher Tolkien has not only allowed to go forward, but has himself helped in some measure?

Or shall we note that no one, not a single person, was entitled to see a word of what Tolkien himself had not published?

Including the Silmarillion itself of course.

And shall we list the various books and other projects that Christopher Tolkien has not only allowed to go forward, but has himself helped in some measure?

Or shall we note that no one, not a single person, was entitled to see a word of what Tolkien himself had not published?

Including the Silmarillion itself of course.

I'll try to explain my point and do please excuse me if my lack of experience in English make me unclear.

Since I have read TLOTR - and I was about 15 - I was madly in love with Beren&Luthien story. I composed music to Aragorn's ballad and translated the ballad to Ukrainian - from Russian, mind you, because I could not get access to the original book (late Soviet Union, screw you with your Iron Curtain!)  and it remained 7 years until Internet came to my life. This story tormented me so much, I was ready to restore it from the ballad and write myself to read it.  The only thing that kept me from doing this was that I've already known that somewhere far away there exists  the mysterious sacred book, The Silmarillion, that contains the complete story. And lo, 1992, the Yesli magazine  (If in English) announces that The Silm will be published in Noth-West Publishing, and publishes a fragment from it, story of Beren&Luthien.

I would get drunk that day if I wasn't underage.

And I've bought The Silm as soon as it was released. And then I've learnt that there is more: Lay of Leithian, Grey Annals, Unfinished tales and so on. And some people had translated something, for free, call them pirates or volunteers, as you wish. And the first thing I've bought in Sweden, my first time abroad, was second-hand paperback TLOTR, and the second thing I did after was to translate the ballad of Beren&Luthien to Ukrainian again, from the original.

I want to see the story filmed. Badly. I mean it.

And there are some guys and gals in former SU that feel the same way as me. Talented artists, poets, actors, you name it - we got it.

And there are some rich guys between Russian Tolkien fans. I mean, RICH. That can pay the proper price for the Silm rights. I mean PAY. To put the story on screen. Seriously.

Because it is the best love story, ever. 'Romeo and Juliet' sucks Smile Smilie.

And now you write that

Or shall we note that no one, not a single person, was entitled to see a word of what Tolkien himself had not published?

Including the Silmarillion itself of course.

See, on the one hand, I know that you are true, thanks to Mr Tolkien Jr for the joy of reading The Silm in whole and Beren&Luthien story in particular. I would kneel to him if I ever see hin in person. I would kiss his boots. Again, I mean it.

But on the other hand - I cannot understand WHY he wants to keep The Silm from screen. What he gains from it. If the film happens to be good - he will enjoy fame, glory and solid income of money. If the film fails - he loses nothing, all the shame will be to the filmmakers. So why, for the TLOTR's sake? Can you explain?

But on the other hand - I cannot understand WHY he wants to keep The Silm from screen. What he gains from it. If the film happens to be good - he will enjoy fame, glory and solid income of money. If the film fails - he loses nothing, all the shame will be to the filmmakers. So why, for the TLOTR's sake? Can you explain?

In my opinion this approach is similar to the Jackson fans who post that the book is still on bookshelves no matter what, which ignores media colonization for one thing.

In any case, from the Tolkien Estate FAQ:

The Estate exists to defend the integrity of J.R.R. Tolkien’s writings. Christopher Tolkien's work as his father’s literary executor has always been to publish as faithfully and honestly as possible his father's completed and uncompleted works, without adaptation or embellishment.

Ok what does it mean to ‘defend the integrity’ of Tolkien’s writings?

Well, that’s up to Christopher Tolkien and the Estate to interpret for themselves, but maybe consider this: plenty of people who love Tolkien just as much as you do would love Christopher Tolkien to publish more of the long prose versions of the Great Tales, as he did with The Children of Hurin.

But note that Christopher Tolkien will not indulge in this. What do you think that says about how he interprets the above duty of the Tolkien Estate?

Keeping in mind that this is a project that would not only be literary, but would be at the total discretion of Christopher Tolkien himself, and no one could easily argue that Tolkien never intended to finish at least three of the long prose Great Tales (Beren and Luthien and The Fall of Gondolin along with The Children of Hurin).

But given that the only complete versions contain out of date notions and are in a very early archaic style, Christopher Tolkien won't indulge in this, even though the books would arguably be gobbled up by Tolkien fans all over the world.

Anyway, obviously I can’t speak for the Estate in any detail about what they feel it means to defend the integrity of Tolkien’s works, but I think the recent interview with Christopher Tolkien, in a French newspaper, at least includes part of an answer to your question. Here's just a segment of that interview in Le Monde:

The divorce is systematically reactivated by the movies. "Tolkien has become a monster, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed by the absurdity of our time," Christopher Tolkien observes sadly. "The chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, has gone too far for me. Such commercialisation has reduced the esthetic and philosophical impact of this creation to nothing. There is only one solution for me: turning my head away."

 

If you would like to read a bit more about media colonization please see David Bratman’s essay published in the book Tolkien On Film.

"Tolkien has become a monster, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed by the absurdity of our time"

Piracy will save this world.

And what does that mean exactly?

That means that people who love something really desperately, sooner or later will obtain it at any cost.  One day there will be the person who wants to film the Silm. Badly. This person turns to mr. Tolkien and says: 'Here is the huge pile of money, please be sooooo kind and sell me the rights'. And Mr. Tolkien says something like you have quoted. Usual person says "OK, sorry for disturbing you" and bites the dust.

But desperate person says: 'To hell with you then, mr. Tolkien. The world is much greater than the Great Britain, and this guy had proved that the good piece of work can be filmed with less money than Peter Jackson's crew spent in an hour, and still gain the worldwide popularity'. And that person just makes the film somewhere in Russia or Kazakhstan, that's all.

What could mr. Tolkien do with that person afterwards? Sue him/her? Thank him very much, a good scandal is the best publicity. Get the money penalty from that pirate?  In Russia such a penalty for the violation of rights is about 1 000 000 rubles, which gives us, let me count, 25 558,9 еuros. Good luck in collecting such a tremendous sum.

See, all those measures - money penalty, bad publicity and so on - work with people who are eager to get the commercial profit. They are afraid of penalties, bad publicity etc. Desperate fans are afraid of nothing.

Think of the mere fact: computer effects in the 'Terminator-2' now can be produced on my home PC. And it passed less than 10 years since Jackson's TLOTR - meet  Game of Thrones, ten times longer and ten times cheaper. When the cost of computer filming meet the cost of one corporative party - how long you think that desperate guys will wait for Mr. Tolkien's generous permission?

The answer is 'not a single minute'.

So you meant someone will steal someone else's property because he or she really really loves it.

Just like someone Beren, who rudely violated Feanor's sons' rights, and someone Bilbo, who sneaked the Stone from dwarves, it's lawful owners Smile Smilie.

For me, it's just the matter of Heart, not the Law. To bring people joy - is good, to deprive them from joy is bad. The Law is on Mr Christopher Tolkien's side, but the spirit of late Professor is on my side.

The saddest part of this friggin' laws issue is that they can do nothing to protect the work from the real plagiarism - which is The Sword of Shannara,  for example. What I want to be done is not stealth, on the contrary - it is the tribute. If I were an intellectual property thief, I would take Terry Brooks' path and my screenplay on Leithian would already lay on producer's table with names  and slight plot details changed. And Tolkien Estate could only excrete bricks on my account, nothing more to do with me and other filmmakers. I would be invulnerable. And the only thing that keeps me from doing it is the loyalty to JRRT. 

But I owe nothing of that kind of loyalty to Mr Christopher Tolkien. To him I owe only money, and my money he got when I bought the licensed copies of JRRT's books and tickets to PJ's films, and DVDs and games and he will get more on Christmas from Hobbit's income. My money he will have if God softens his heart and he sells the rights on The Silm. Money and 'Thank you' I owe him. Kneeling, as I said. But not the respect of his dog-in-the-manger attitude.

Hey, Cossack, you are surely the most intense planetarian on this site!

Welcome, I haven't greeted you properly and in fact haven't been around for some days... awfully busy...

I agree with you about the tale of Beren and Luthien, without which the Silmarillion, and even the Lord of the Rings, wouldn't be what they are.  No wonder the Professor engraved the name Luthien below his wife Edith's name on their gravestone, and had Beren engraved below his own name.

What do you think about the way he kept the line alive all the way down to Arwen and Aragorn?  Do you find them to be a sort of revival of Luthien and Beren?  Arwen, after all, was said by some to have been the likeness of Luthien returned to Middle Earth; also, the parallel between their chosen destinies.  And do you see a resemblance between Beren and Aragorn?

I would love to read your opinion on this.  Also, of course, any opinions from all you dear Planet Tolkien brothers and sisters.

Namarië always to each and every one!

What do you think about the way he kept the line alive all the way down to Arwen and Aragorn?  Do you find them to be a sort of revival of Luthien and Beren?  Arwen, after all, was said by some to have been the likeness of Luthien returned to Middle Earth; also, the parallel between their chosen destinies.  And do you see a resemblance between Beren and Aragorn?

Of course!

But let me be clear: Beren is the one I like much more. And the story of Beren and Luthien pierces me edgier.

First, Beren was, er, first. Not only the first Man ever to love the Elven women, but the First from the dead. He is a precursor of Christ for the Middle-Earth peoples. He first had proved that power of Morgoth can be vanquished, that no Elven king could do.

When Aragorn had begun his great quest and conquer, he was already aware that Sauron can be defeated. His ancestors did it thrice before him. So he knew it is possible. Still very difficult, yes, but possible anyway. Unlike Beren, who was sent by Tingol to the certain death. To know your target is di

fficult is one thing, to know it is totally impossible but still proceed - is another.

Second, Aragorn was a descendant of Dunedain, which means in his eighties he was still a man of strength and handsomeness. He first met Arwen when he was slightly more than a boy and had a half of century before him to gain the kingdom and her hand. And let us not forget that he was a descendant of Elrond's father himself, being equal to Arwen at least in his genesis. He received an elven and high-numenorian education. A boy of a good breed, so to say.

Beren met Luthien when he was in his thirties, and the last ten years of his life he spent in the hell of guerilla war. He could hardly expect to outlive his kinsmen much. For Thingol he was nobody out of nowhere, just some lesser offspring of some 'barbaric' lord, vassal to half-hostile Noldor  dispossessed of his land. It was 'now or never' for Beren to win Luthien's heart, and he had no fine education, no high lineage, no land - nothing but true and vigorous heart and will and spirit. I highly respect Aragorn, but Beren is the one I am about to worship Smile Smilie.

And third, I share the same belief that Professor, I am a Roman Catholic. Which means: I believe in original sin and in the fact that only two people were free from it: Christ Himself and His Holy Mother. But Elves are different: they all are free from the original sin, and thus, to fall in love with Elven woman is much like to fall in love with Holy Mary. This gap is not just great - it is irreducible. The only power which could narrow that gap was the will of God Himself, who turned Luthien to a Mortal woman on her request and gave her descendants the right to choose between being Mortals or Elves. Arwen only used that right, but it was Luthien who gained it.

Of course, similarity between this stories is great. But difference is greater, and this difference is highlighted with this similarity.

Crazy cossack wrote: Just like someone Beren, who rudely violated Feanor's sons' rights,...

And where in the Silmarillion is Beren noted as violating the 'rights' of the Sons of Feanor (aside from the Feanoreans themselves obviously, as far as potentially withholding a Silmaril from them)?

What I recall is that he retrieves one of the gems that Morgoth stole --  in part because Melkor really really loved the Silmarilli -- and gives the jewel to Thingol. And when the sons of Feanor desire the jewel back:

'Melian counseled him [Thingol] to surrender it; but the words of the sons of Feanor were proud and threatening, and Thingol was filled with anger...'

This being one of those same jewels that Eonwe proclaims that the sons of Feanor no longer have the right to in any case 'because of their many and merciless deeds, being blinded by their oath...'

Crazy cossack wrote: ... and someone Bilbo, who sneaked the Stone from dwarves, it's lawful owners.

Do you mean the stone that Tolkien has Bilbo admit wasn't his to give exactly? and the one that he [Bilbo] does not steal to ultimately covet for himself but gives away to try and stop the possibility of lives being lost? and that same jewel which ends up on Thorin's breast?

Crazy cossack wrote: For me, it's just the matter of Heart, not the Law. To bring people joy - is good, to deprive them from joy is bad. The Law is on Mr Christopher Tolkien's side, but the spirit of late Professor is on my side.

In 1964 Tolkien wrote that he wished copyright could protect names, and was annoyed when someone named a monstrous 'hydrofoil' Shadowfax without so much as a 'by your leave'

In 1965 Tolkien noted a letter from someone who wanted to make bronze figures of characters from (presumably) The Lord of the Rings. JRRT noted the writer's: 'feeling of moral obligation rightly prompted him to seek my permission, but he appears to ask also for my blessing (unrecompensed).'

Donald Wollheim declared that Tolkien's books were in the public domain in the United States, and that Ace Books was doing nothing illegal or illicit. Do I really have to quote Tolkien's reaction regarding the moral obligation involved, even if this was legally true (turns out a judge ruled it wasn't legal)?

Tolkien compared the actions of Ace Books to Saruman in his decline.

And with respect to the person who wrote, or wanted to write, a sequel to The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien responded:

'I send you the enclosed impertinent contributions to my troubles. I do not know what the legal position is, I suppose that since one cannot claim property in inventing proper names, that there is no legal obstacle to this young a[..] publishing his sequel, if he could find any publisher, either respectable or disreputable, who would accept such tripe.'

JRRT, letter 292

Tolkien would go on to note that he responded in the negative to a woman who had proposed the same thing, and then received back 'a most vituperative letter'.

Couldn't these people claim that they were trying to bring 'joy' to the public? and that copyright was hindering this noble goal, just as someone who outright steals Tolkien's property to do what they like with it on film, instead of creating something themselves.

In any case, I can't agree that JRR Tolkien is on your side.

Good grief, you are so serious, I cannot help taunting you more  and more Big Smile Smilie

And where in the Silmarillion is Beren noted as violating the 'rights' of the Sons of Feanor? What I recall is that he retrieves one of the gems that Morgoth stole

Retrieve to whom? To Silmarils' lawful and rightful owners?

Naaaah, to Thingol, who had completely nothing to with Silmarils. There is a Russian proverb for such a deed: a thief had his cudgel stolen by other thief. But at least Beren had risked his head for the Jewel, suffered imprisonment, torment and hand loss. And what Thingol did to claim the ownership for Silmaril? He'd just expressed an extremely foolish and cruel desire to make Beren commit suicide by Morgoth.  But he, not Beren, owned a Jewel. And Feanorians are to be blamed for an attempt to return what is really theirs. What an irony.

This being one of those same jewels that Eonwe proclaims that the sons of Feanor no longer have the right to in any case 'because of their many and merciless deeds, being blinded by their oath...'

Very, very lame excuse which won't be taken by any court nowadays. A theft from the murderer is still a theft.

The only reason why Eonwe IS right, is that Silmarils' main value is an immortal Light contained in them. And Eonwe,  a lesser angel of God Creator, knew for sure that this Light CANNOT BE OWNED, only kept, and Feanorians cannot keep it anymore, which was proved  right on the spot: when Maglor and Maedhros had taken the Jewels they were burnt so badly that Maedhros killed himself and Maglor had gone mad.

Let us proceed with this metaphor. Like Feanor, JRRT had taken an inspiration from the Creator and put it in words, in some exellent works. He had sold this works to publishers and it was his noble right. But he was completely aware that 'inspiration cannot be sold, however a manuscript can be' (Pushkin, our greatest poet). 

JRRT had passed away, and C. Tolkien inherited his works, which means - a right to sell the manuscripts.

But no one is claiming that right from him! He did a great work of compiling his father's works to several volumes and publishing them. No one wants to take this works from him and put some other's name on them and grab all the profit. Not a living soul.

The thing I want to be done is quite different. Because it will require from the performer such a great amount of talent, inspiration and skill that the one should be equal to JRRT himself in this merits. It will require a living hell of a work. And the one who could complete such a work, won't give a penny for what you or CT call him/|her: thief, robber, molester of Art - the one who works hard is not a thief. This person will measure him/herself with another yardstick: does my work shine on people like Silmaril? Does it give them the Immortal Light?

And if it does... sorry, pals, but I will value that work much more than your opinion on it. As high as I value Jackson's film and Blind Guardian's songs and Alan Lee's paintings. Call it theft, if you want. I hardly know you, why should I care of what you say? Why should anyone care, except your associates? The day this film will be released, I'll watch it no matter what. If it is bad, I will scold it's creators. If it is good, I'll bless them. That simple. Bakshi's film is made on the lawful ground - does it make this film any better? It is still 'O, God, it cannot be THAT bad, make me unsee it!'

If someone films something 'O, God, it cannot be THAT GOOD, make me see it over and over!' - why should I care much for the opinion of people who wanted to deprive me such a joy?Those people are certainly not my friends!

And by the way, I almost forgot - I have made a tin figure of Maedhros about to throw himself into fire, and the plastic figure of Gollum, and the doll of Gandalf and the doll of Finrod... my, my, I am a filthssssy thssief already, so I have nothing to lose. Company of other thieves suits me good, if only they are  talented and devoted thieves.

And I'm guessing that the person that wrote the sequel to The Lord of the Rings without Tolkien's permission thought that his work would be bringing people 'joy' as well.

There is only way to know it: get this work published and see if it enjoys people or not.

Personally I believe it was a lame sequel, and good riddance with it. How do I know? Because were it good, nobody could stop Tolkien fans from distributing it. Do you know how TLOTR was distributed in Soviet Union until the book was officially permitted to print? People had it translated by themselves and reprinted on the typewriters. ALL THREE BOOKS. That is the power of the masterpiece: to enchant people.

The novel of 'young donkey' simply lacked this power. And that's all.

Couldn't everyone of these people claim that they were trying to bring 'joy' to the public? and that copyright was hindering this noble goal, just as someone who outright steals Tolkien's property to do what they like with it on film, instead of creating something themselves.

See, the funniest and the most interesting thing is that we are talking above the puddle of milk that is already spilled and a jar already broken.Long ago. There are... let me count, one, two, three... nine Tolkien fics ALREADY PUBLISHED IN RUSSIA since 1993 until 2003. And some after that.

I mean - published in above 10 000 copies each, officially. I don't take into account web-published works, only paper.

And it were not you and not the Tolkien Estate who could sift out ashes from cinders. It was time and public and spirit of Tolkien.

The most successful is Nick Perumov. He made himself a name by his Elven Blade, 300 years after the War of the Ring. He is a famous fantasy-writer now, but Tolkien fandom rejected him and his work totally, and there is a rumour that he was even beaten by some roleplayers with wooden swords.

The heaviest impact on the Tolkien fandom made so-called Black Book of Arda byNadezhda Vasilieva aka Niennah and Natalya Nekrasova aka Illet. It is some kind of gnosticism Gospel that portrayed Melkor as a kind of Messiah to the Middle-Earth. Niennah claimed herself to be inspired by Melkor himself, and I do believe her, for the book has very distinct print of devil's paw on it. Despite of this and unlike Perumov's work it is very talented. It was never commercially successful, but every serious Russian Tolkien fan knows of it. It is accepted by the part of fandom that associate themselves with Black Numenoreans, Nazguls etc. In a way, 'orthodox tolkienists' accepted it too – like an expression of Morgoth’s-Sauron’s propaganda.

In late 90ths Illet had separated from Niennah, converted to Christianity, repent her participation in Black Book composing and wrote The Great Game – very thorough story of every Nazgul and his fall, all diligent in Tolkien-invented details and creative in the places where Tolkien was silent (such as Kharadrim culture, for example). But this thoroughness served the author bad: first, the book is overloaded by details, and thus somewhat boring. Second, I am a screenwriter and I know, how difficult is to keep audience’s attention when audience already knows how the story ends. You open a new chapter, meet a new guy and already know that he will become a Nazgul, period. Boring, again. The intrigue is lost, like, totally. Good language and excellent work on characters couldn’t help. Illet did her best, but she just couldn’t handle this amount of work. The Great Game never was commercially successful.

About this very time Kirill Es’kov published his ‘The Last Ringbearer’. Revisionist work, Mordorians are good, Aragorn is an arrogant mercenary, Frodo and other hobbits are his and Gandalf’s foolish tools, Arwen and Galadriel are power-loving corrupted bitches, ‘history was screwed by winners’ and so on. Personally I am sick of this book, but there happened to be enough people who thought that idea to marry JRRT and Thom Clancy was good, so the book was reissued twice or thrice. It is liked by Dawkins-admirers, rationalists, relativists and cynics – for short, by the people hostile to the very spirit of Tolkien’s work. No wonder Tolkien fandom in Russia repelled it, like Perumov’s.

And the fifth book worth mentioning is Beyomd the Dawn by Olga Bril’ova. I cannot speak much of it, I’ll just say that when it’s first part was published on the biggest Tolkien fansite, Arda-na-Kulichkah, I couldn’t describe my rage against it. Some impudent insolent chick had risen her dirty hand on the sacred Beren&Luthien story! I began to read this pathetic scribblings (what else could it be?) with clear intention to give an author the most cruel flogging with criticism. I’ve started about 10 p.m. and couldn’t stop until 7 a.m. I stopped only because the nine chapters was over. Completely enchanted and enslaved. All body aching from the night spent on a stool, eyes red, dry and goggled because of bad screen, and omly three words in the head: ‘I WANT MORE!’

I am an extremely bad judge for this book, for I admire it as much as the original story. Sorry.

Others of printed books are not worth mentioning. They were forgotten the year they were issued. But still they exist. So, have you noticed that Mr Tolkien suffered anything because of their existing? I doubt. I doubt he even noticed them existing. So let me ask bluntly: if nothing was lost by CT – than what was stolen from him?

Crazy cossack wrote: Good grief, you are so serious, I cannot help taunting you more and more Big Smile Smilie

And why do you assume I am any more 'serious' than you are? And yes, taunting people is what Planet Tolkien is all about... or is it?

Retrieve to whom? To Silmarils' lawful and rightful owners? Naaaah, to Thingol, who had completely nothing to with Silmarils. There is a Russian proverb for such a deed: a thief had his cudgel stolen by other thief.

The point is that Tolkien does not portray Beren as withholding the Silmarils from the Feanoreans.

This being one of those same jewels that Eonwe proclaims that the sons of Feanor no longer have the right to in any case 'because of their many and merciless deeds, being blinded by their oath...'

Very, very lame excuse which won't be taken by any court nowadays. A theft from the murderer is still a theft.

This addition was just to note that the 'right' to the Silmarils was ultimately lost in any case; but the main point was, again, that Beren was never put in the position of withholding the Silmaril from anyone who had 'right' claim to the jewel in the first place -- that decision fell to Thingol.

Let us proceed with this metaphor. Like Feanor, JRRT had taken an inspiration from the Creator and put it in words, in some exellent works. He had sold this works to publishers and it was his noble right. But he was completely aware that 'inspiration cannot be sold, however a manuscript can be' (Pushkin, our greatest poet).

JRRT had passed away, and C. Tolkien inherited his works, which means - a right to sell the manuscripts.

And what does -- inspiration in general cannot be sold -- have to do with anything?

But no one is claiming that right from him! He did a great work of compiling his father's works to several volumes and publishing them. No one wants to take this works from him and put some other's name on them and grab all the profit. Not a living soul.

No one wants to take away the right to sell copyright? Well, I guess that much is true...

... but you've already described the taking of someone else's creative property without permission and making a film about it. And if you're talking about a personal film for personal enjoyment, the Estate is not against such things in any case.

 

The thing I want to be done is quite different. Because it will require from the performer such a great amount of talent, inspiration and skill that the one should be equal to JRRT himself in this merits.

What you're seemingly attempting to sell here is that stealing is ok if there's talent, skill and inspiration involved -- and all according to someone's subjective opinion no less!

It will require a living hell of a work. And the one who could complete such a work, won't give a penny for what you or CT call him/|her: thief, robber, molester of Art - the one who works hard is not a thief. This person will measure him/herself with another yardstick: does my work shine on people like Silmaril? Does it give them the Immortal Light?

So steal someone's idea, but work hard at something based on that theft... and this excuses thievery according to you?

And if it does... sorry, pals, but I will value that work much more than your opinion on it. As high as I value Jackson's film and Blind Guardian's songs and Alan Lee's paintings. Call it theft, if you want.

For the record, I have not called Jackson's film or Alan Lee's paintings theft, as obviously Jackson has the legal right to make his film, and Alan Lee has permission to publish Middle-earth related material.

Bakshi's film is made on the lawful ground - does it make this film any better? It is still 'O, God, it cannot be THAT bad, make me unsee it!'

No one has ever argued that a legal film makes it better or worse. What it is is legal.

And by the way, I almost forgot - I have made a tin figure of Maedhros about to throw himself into fire, and the plastic figure of Gollum, and the doll of Gandalf and the doll of Finrod... my, my, I am a filthssssy thssief already, so I have nothing to lose. Company of other thieves suits me good, if only they are talented and devoted thieves.

The Tolkien Estate does not care if you or anyone makes a figure of anyone from the books. Let's not simplify what copyright is about, as it has nothing to do with private works made for one's own personal enjoyment.

And I'm guessing that the person that wrote the sequel to The Lord of the Rings without Tolkien's permission thought that his work would be bringing people 'joy' as well.

There is only way to know it: get this work published and see if it enjoys people or not.

Not the point of my various examples of Tolkien responding to copyright issues.

And I note that you make no comment (after suggesting that Tolkien was on your side on this issue) about JRR Tolkien himself caring about copyright and trying to stop people from essentially stealing his work.

Personally I believe it was a lame sequel, and good riddance with it. How do I know? Because were it good, nobody could stop Tolkien fans from distributing it.

Sorry but you can't pretend to 'know' any such thing.

[snip of explanations of a number of books] Others of printed books are not worth mentioning. They were forgotten the year they were issued. But still they exist. So, have you noticed that Mr Tolkien suffered anything because of their existing? I doubt. I doubt he even noticed them existing.

What's the point here by the way? That it's ok to steal from someone if he or she doesn't notice?

So let me ask bluntly: if nothing was lost by CT – than what was stolen from him?

Easy. Instead of creating something of their own which could give joy to people as well, they stole ideas and creative property. 

Copyright laws exist to protect artists, from even those who rationalize breaking such laws rather than create their own 'light' for people, as you put it.

And why do you assume I am any more 'serious' than you are? And yes, taunting people is what Planet Tolkien is all about... or is it?

You should know better, for it was you who said something like ‘Abandon hope, all ye who enter here’.

The point is that Tolkien does not portray Beren as withholding the Silmarils from the Feanoreans.

The point is that Tolkiennever mentioned any meetings between Beren and Feanoreans when he was in possession of Silmaril. (I believe they had no guts to take it from the couple that had defeated Morgoth and Sauron).

This addition was just to note that the 'right' to the Silmarils was ultimately lost in any case

Just like rights on The Silmarillion will be, in any case. So? How can something to be a plagiarism today and not a plagiarism 80 years after? It is either plagiarism or not, in saecula saeculorum, amen.

that decision fell to Thingol.

No again, for Beren could return the Jewel after Thingol’s death. Feanoreans dared not to claim it, but he could begin the negotiations first, yet he didn’t. So could his son, and he didn’t as well. Looks like they had no respect for property. Shame on them.

... but you've already described the taking of someone else's creative property without permission and making a film about it. And if you're talking about a personal film for personal enjoyment, the Estate is not against such things in any case.

 And if I distribute it through the torrent, Estate will do… what?

What you're seemingly attempting to sell here is that stealing is ok if there's talent, skill and inspiration involved -- and all according to someone's subjective opinion no less!

I am not some effin’ Rotarian to sell my thoughts, I share them for free Smile Smilie.

So steal someone's idea, but work hard at something based on that theft... and this excuses thievery according to you?

As long as you do not say you invented the bicycle, you can ride it where you like.

If one makes a disclaimer ‘this is based on That Book of That Author’, I do not call that one a thief. Otherwise I should brand as a thief Professor himself: he shamelessly robbed authors of Volsungssaga. God forbid.

For the record, I have not called Jackson's film or Alan Lee's paintings theft, as obviously Jackson has the legal right to make his film

Which he couldn’t have, be it CT’s will, could he?

No one has ever argued that a legal film makes it better or worse. What it is is legal.

Sorry, but I cannot get an aesthetic enjoy from legality. Can you?

The Tolkien Estate does not care if you or anyone makes a figure of anyone from the books. Let's not simplify what copyright is about, as it has nothing to do with private works made for one's own personal enjoyment.

So what’s the buzz about enjoyment of millions?

And I note that you make no comment (after suggesting that Tolkien was on your side on this issue) about JRR Tolkien himself caring about copyright and trying to stop people from essentially stealing his work.

I just began to write about the point that author express his true self in works, not in letters, but suddenly thought – why? Cuttler Becket will never understand Jack Sparrow, let’s spare each others time and effort.

Sorry but you can't pretend to 'know' any such thing.

I do not pretend, I just know it. I browsed English internet for about 10 years, be it something of value, I would know.

What's the point here by the way? That it's ok to steal from someone if he or she doesn't notice?

No, the point is: if nothing is lost than nothing is stolen. That simple.

Easy. Instead of creating something of their own which could give joy to people as well, they stole ideas and creative property. 

You still cannot understand. If ideas are stolen – it must mean that CT have lost them. It must mean that he cannot write and publish nothing based fathers works, that no one wants to look at his writings because everyone adores that freaky Russian pirates.

But everyone knows that this is bulls**t. CT is in possession of everything, he can finish and publish any unfinished work of father and publishers will fight for the rights on it. He lost nothing. He is not a victim of theft or robbery. All your rhetoric cannot change the fact that CT actually HAS the rights that were “stolen” and will have them to the end of his life.

The more ridiculous is your “Instead of creating something of their own”. Because hey, we here talk about the man that “Instead of creating something of his own” exploited Nordic and Celtic mythology with might and main! His recently published book is a retelling of Volsunga saga, no less. Have you heard that proverb about the house of glass and stones throwing?

Copyright laws exist to protect artists

There is one artist between us two, and it is not you, I suppose. So I just know the REAL purpose of these laws. They are not to protect artists, these laws protect PRODUCERS. And top successful artists along with them. The rest of artists are treated like rubbish.

That’s what’s it all about. All the fuzz is about the point that this decade is the last decade of literature as we know it, and no one can do anything about this. Publishers hurry to squeeze as much as they can, that’s why they are so kin about intellectual property.

Galin wrote: And why do you assume I am any more 'serious' than you are? And yes, taunting people is what Planet Tolkien is all about... or is it? Crazy cossack responded: You should know better, for it was you who said something like ‘Abandon hope, all ye who enter here’.

Rather I added that your thirty years may or may not be fact -- a consideration based on a real world possibility -- nor am I sure why stating so necessarily makes one any more 'serious' than the person posting about a possible thirty year wait. 

The thread reveals what we say, noting that you wrote: 'I want to see the story filmed. Badly. I mean it.' [and a little later, same post] 'And there are some rich guys between Russian Tolkien fans. I mean, RICH. That can pay the proper price for the Silm rights. I mean PAY. To put the story on screen. Seriously.'

 

Galin wrote: The point is that Tolkien does not portray Beren as withholding the Silmarils from the Feanoreans. Crazy cossack responded: The point is that Tolkien never mentioned any meetings between Beren and Feanoreans when he was in possession of Silmaril. (I believe they had no guts to take it from the couple that had defeated Morgoth and Sauron).

Yes no meetings. As I meant when I posted: '... but the main point was, again, that Beren was never put in the position of withholding the Silmaril from anyone who had 'right' claim to the jewel in the first place -- that decision fell to Thingol.'

Crazy cossack wrote: Just like rights on The Silmarillion will be, in any case. So? How can something to be a plagiarism today and not a plagiarism 80 years after? It is either plagiarism or not, in saecula saeculorum, amen.

In my opinion that's an oversimplification which ignores why copyright laws exist.

Galin wrote: that decision fell to Thingol. Crazy cossack responded: no again, for Beren could return the Jewel after Thingol’s death. Feanoreans dared not to claim it, but he could begin the negotiations first, yet he didn’t. So could his son, and he didn’t as well. Looks like they had no respect for property. Shame on them.

And as the sons of Feanor did not dare to demand the Silmaril at this point, thus Tolkien 'finds a way' to remove Beren from needing to answer them; or at least he does not set up a scenario in which Beren must decide to withhold the jewel when confronted by any Feanoreans, if JRRT wasn't actively trying to avoid such a scene. You brought up Beren and Bilbo here specifically. Why?

In order to somehow show that Tolkien is on your side with respect to copyright issues?

Once again -- after claiming Tolkien is on your side in this matter -- you do not respond to the actual, real world examples of Tolkien caring about copyright.

Crazy cossack wrote: As long as you do not say you invented the bicycle, you can ride it where you like.

So according to you it's ok to steal copyrighted creative property as long as you acknowledge you're stealing?

If one makes a disclaimer ‘this is based on That Book of That Author’, I do not call that one a thief. Otherwise I should brand as a thief Professor himself: he shamelessly robbed authors of Volsungssaga. God forbid.

This example has nothing to do with copyright law obviously.

Galin wrote: For the record, I have not called Jackson's film or Alan Lee's paintings theft, as obviously Jackson has the legal right to make his film

Crazy cossack responded: Which he couldn’t have, be it CT’s will, could he?

Christopher Tolkien actually wanted Alan Lee to illustrate The Children of Hurin, incidentally.

As for any films of The Lord of the Rings being made, yes I think CJRT would not have sold the rights given his public statement about this -- and he is entitled to his opinion as to why he would not have done so.

Sorry, but I cannot get an aesthetic enjoy from legality. Can you?

As I said: no one here has argued that the legality of a film makes it better or worse.

Galin wrote: And I note that you make no comment (after suggesting that Tolkien was on your side on this issue) about JRR Tolkien himself caring about copyright and trying to stop people from essentially stealing his work. Crazy Cossack responded: I just began to write about the point that author express his true self in works, not in letters, but suddenly thought – why? Cuttler Becket will never understand Jack Sparrow, let’s spare each others time and effort.

So you were going to respond to my real world examples by trying to argue that Tolkien doesn't actually mean what he says with respect to different cases that include copyright concerns.

This reminds me of one of my favorite responses here at Planet Tolkien, by 'Lord of All', when he wrote that although he would not respond to a point that I had made [about the term goblin versus orc], he added generally that my statement could be argued with.

I was left wondering what that argument was Smile Smilie 

I do not pretend, I just know it. I browsed English internet for about 10 years, be it something of value, I would know.

The work in question came up when Tolkien was alive, and you have no way of knowing how complete it was, or what happened to it well before 10 years ago. 

No, the point is: if nothing is lost than nothing is stolen. That simple.

In my opinion far too simplified concerning this matter. 

You still cannot understand. If ideas are stolen – it must mean that CT have lost them. It must mean that he cannot write and publish nothing based fathers works, that no one wants to look at his writings because everyone adores that freaky Russian pirates.

But everyone knows that this is bulls**t. CT is in possession of everything, he can finish and publish any unfinished work of father and publishers will fight for the rights on it. He lost nothing. He is not a victim of theft or robbery. All your rhetoric cannot change the fact that CT actually HAS the rights that were “stolen” and will have them to the end of his life.

Again, to me this is overly simplistic rationalization. The fact that Christopher Tolkien has not lost his right to publish his father's work doesn't give everyone and anyone the right to steal his father's protected property and do what they want with it.

And plenty of countries uphold copyright law to stop that very thing.

And I would admit that saying 'copyright exists to protect artists' is simplifying things, as obviously the matter is more complicated than that; and the issue of the duty of a literary executor complicates things even more. 

But one thing I can't agree with is tossing out law that does protect artists (again, as one of its functions) simply because artists are still free to negotiate deals without protection. That is what it seems you desire, anyway. But the artist then becomes quite vulnerable in my opinion. 

 

Crazy Cossack wrote: The more ridiculous is your “Instead of creating something of their own”. Because hey, we here talk about the man that “Instead of creating something of his own” exploited Nordic and Celtic mythology with might and main! His recently published book is a retelling of Volsunga saga, no less. Have you heard that proverb about the house of glass and stones throwing?

Which has nothing to do with copyright of course -- as well as the Volsung saga (also nothing to do with copyright).

Of course my full sentence was: 'Instead of creating something of their own which could give joy to people as well, they stole ideas and creative property.' And the obvious context was: they stole ideas and creative property still protected under copyright law.

There is one artist between us two, and it is not you, I suppose. So I just know the REAL purpose of these laws. They are not to protect artists, these laws protect PRODUCERS. And top successful artists along with them. The rest of artists are treated like rubbish.

A) you can't possibly know if I am an artist or not.

B) claiming you are an artist doesn't mean that you know the 'real' purpose of copyright law, no matter how large you write it.

Crazy cossack wrote: That’s what’s it all about. All the fuzz is about the point that this decade is the last decade of literature as we know it, and no one can do anything about this. Publishers hurry to squeeze as much as they can, that’s why they are so kin about intellectual property.

Copyright law originated in the United Kingdom from a concept of common law; the Statute of Anne 1709. It became statutory with the passing of the Copyright Act 1911.

According to a fact sheet on the matter.

  [1] [2] >>