Planet Tolkien is archived and no longer updated, but the forums remain browseable. We have established a Telegram group for old and new visitors to stay connected and discuss all things Tolkien.
Years ago when I was a lot more active, images were banned because of the bandwidth they used. I haven't heard that anything has changed from those early days, but maybe one of the newer CM's could give a more definite answer.
I think even giving links to images stored outside of the site was frowned upon, in case they were "inappropriate material", but I'm not sure whether that has changed either.
I am not aware of any rules being relaxed, but perhaps it is time for Taz to put them down in black and white once more on a separate thread, this way all those who have forgotten and those who are brand new can read and not have to think about it any longer.
Being a free lance writer(I hated being an editor, too much politics) I just wish that a work would remain in the family as it were, not abused or touched i any way by anyone outside the family from generation to generation. Just as when someone dies and the relatives remaining must pay the death taxes on whatever properties are given or left to them, so it would be good in my opinion if the same thing could apply to a family line. Only if no one was interested then would the public domain as it were be allowed to apply. i always feel sick at the idea that something you worked hard at and had a certain set of values and beliefs can be at some point trashed and muddled and,,,,,,,,,, How I wish people that are making movies would just learn to write for their own selves! i like very much that Steven Spielberg actually talked to Herge about Tin Tin series and when he died, talked to his wife and at HER invitation came to the studio of the late master and talked about things. I would not mind that so much if it were not for the fact that people that do that often worm their way into changing things and putting such pressure on the person who gave consent that control is lost anyway. The power of money.
Why I was asking if you could upload any pictures to accompany the text that we type upon the chat forum here is that I wanted to add some pictures (obviusly you would vet the post prior to it going public so you would know first what was coming) as I wanted to show a series of stills which I feel would generally represent how the idea of The Silmarillion's beginings/origins would look like. I was going to make a cross-section of imagery and cut and paste them upon here offering descriptions of the progress from one scene to another in genral places. My mind was, at this moment, focused on certain key areas that rouse my intellectual thinking more than others such as the: "in the begining" section and the Ainur descending upon the "newly formed world", Ungoliant and how she would look visually in a film-like manner as compared to Melkor-come-Morgoth whom he is thus compared to the land and then to a man and so on. It would be a real interesting project. I am working upon some imagery in Photoshop at the moment for my own personal amusement. I was on some other forums where they let you upload imagery, there is one for the Prometheus film and many others. I would like the opportunity to do the same upon here (respectfully obviously) I would sincerely not offend any one save for the purists who would possibly say: "I wouldn't see Morgoth looking like that! More like this! Or Ungoliant would look much like that too and maybe a bit more like this! Perhaps you at Administration may want to consider making that application available to us upon her to be able to use.
Most DEFINATELY! Definately YES Brego! Rachel Weize is quite an interesting looking actor, I've ALWAYS THOUGHT Huge Jackman would suit a character in Tolkien universe down to a tee! I thought he would equally have made a cool-looking Bard The Bowman as he (Hugh Jackman) has, to me, an elvish look about him at times in certain films while retaining his human qualities obviously so in that regard I think he would fit rather well into a Tolkien characters role. And I DEFINATELY think he would fit TO-A-TEE into The Silmarillion universe if it were ever conceived of to fill. He would be a very good choice of actor and I would be VERY happy if he were considered for such a role! He and many others I can think of too! I will post a "dream List" of what I believe would be quality actors and quality directors to specifically capture certain broken-up sections that would be specifically catered for and suitable for those specifc directors in mind for those crucial parts of the story telling process and directing integrity.
I am not in favour of any of those actors though I admire Rachel, she has proven herself a serious actress and comedic as well.
For the most part i cannot as hard as i try bear Hollywood actors. And even if I like something they have done, there is something about them as a rule that precludes my ever wanting to see them again. i cannot explain it. Perhaps it is that we hear too much about the frivolous lives most lead and too much publicity somehow makes them to familiar which in turn destroys any mistique that was there to mezmerize.
I always love it when a complete unknown comes along and absolutely wows them, or at least someone who keeps a very very low profile and is more classically trained. So I have virtually no one in mind. I suppose whoever they might be they would be persons of high integrity to begin with, persons who actually help the poor and do all they can to better their city , province, country. Else to me it is like a thin film of yucck clinging to them that sort of interferes with noble characters they play. It's just me.
I do understand Leelee where you are coming from too! I maybe didn't mention that unknowns are just as important as well... Henry Cavell is an up-coming actor as is Michael Fastbender. Nicole Kidman is a good actor too! But if the project ever took a certain amount of time to get off the ground that could be years just for pre-production alone - who knows what new talent may appear upon the scene between now and then - if ever! As I said I have a whole list of people in mind but often, for me, that is just a starting point visually. Eventually it may not necessarily stick on that actor. I've seen Colin Farrel in a medieval film and most of his films and his acting are tiresome!! But I will give credit where credit is due and say that he was a good actor in the film Tigerland, VERY good in my opinion! I feel tiresome towards a lot of Eric Bana and many of his films, however, credit due to his acting prowess in the film Chopper and I do like The Hulk franchise and only watched him because he was in that but I would have preferred they equally cast someone else first for the Banner charcater and wished they kept it as David Banner as it sounds more of a scientists name instead of Bruce Banner which is a little too close to Bruce Wayne for me which does sound kinda cool! To me anyway... Liam Neeson is also, to me, an obvious good choice for a good role of substance!
I do agree that the casting for a hypothetical film project such as The Silmarillion would have to be of BIBLICAL description to make sure that it was done right as that is of PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE too me too!
Back to topic. Thought of a couple of great actors. Tilda Swinton as Nienna. Michael Fasbender as Thingol. Daniel Ratcliff as Maeglin. Danny Davito as Mim. Hugh Jackman as Hurin. Anne Hathaway as Nienor. Toni Collette as Haleth. Charleze Theron as Melian. Just a few. Imagine trying to cast these films, there are truly hundreds of crucial characters.
Wow, some interesting suggestions, Brego. Danny DeVito as Mim wouldn't cross my mind, but I like the idea.
Although the discussion about possible cast is very entertaining, in this particular movie I'd rather see actors and actresses I didn't know before.
These characters are so precious to me, and I wouldn't want them to be "just another role" for the actors squezed between some hollywood blockbuster and commercial ad.
It may look silly, but I would like to watch the people that in my mind won't be related with other characters from other movies.
Therefore seeing some "fresh faces" would be more fun for me.
I must say I'd have a big, big problem with casting Luthien, since Liv Tyler is one of the most beautiful actresses in my opinion (if not the most beautiful) and she already played Arwen. Her acting skill isn't spectacular, I know, but when it comes to appearance - she has this ethereal, elvish aura.
As do I. She (Liv Tyler) is so synonomous with Arwen now and The Lord of the Rings trilogy as a whole that it would be a bit like repeating the same role... perhaps. Who knows. I mean John-Rhys Davis played Gimli and provided the voice for Treebeard that many actors that featured in other films of Tolkien's and soon The Hobbit could be given voice-over work provided, I hope, that they change, the sound, mould it a little so it does not sound the same or similar to compare it to another of their former/previous performances. I feel Nicole Kidman equally has a very elvin look about her face at key moments when you view her acting performances within her other films. She to me has a very graceful way about her Grace Kelly-ish which is ironic as she is up to be playing her in a film soon (I may be thinking of the Coco Chanel as she did do an advert/commercial about her as well) and also has a Kate Blanchet playing Galadriel type-of-presence to her acting ability.
Luke Evans as Bard The Bowman however is an equally good choice as well! I fell anyway. He was very good with his performance in Thor and Zeus in the Immortals so I'm pretty confident that he will make a pretty good, if not, VERY good Bard The Bowman. With Hugh Jackman, my thinking was that he would have a kind of Gerard Butler type grit to him whilst, at-the-same-time, have an elvin quality to him even though as I remember Bard The Bowman did not have any elvin connection/s at all just that he (Hugh Jackman) would be suitable to a world full of mythical beings. He would also have retained a-sort-of Faramir-type quality as well, a man who is capable of reasoning while still managing to get the job done. But that said, I'm sure Luke Evans shall be very interesting in his portrayle.
Another thought occured to me recently, we see Peter Jackson and his producers telling the Lord of the Rings then moving progressively back to tell The Hobbit and here we are discussing the hypothetical scenario/s of moving ever-further back to such works as The Silmarillion and/or works in-between. I was thinking that perhaps this method is not such a bad thing after-all. Perhaps the best way to possibly tackle The Silmarillion is not, at first, to jump ALL the way back to the VERY beginning but more-or-less, two thirds of the way there. Tell Say the middle section of what is perhaps filmable by these-day's standards and if/when those parts of The Silmarillion's story gains popular momentum, move steadily further and further back. Capturing the very ESSENCE of what The Silmarillion is, much like what George Lucas did originally for Star Wars: A New Hope. HOWEVER!!! if a production company was to do that, to learn from past actions and not embark upon a trilogy or how many films it could take if you were to start in the middle of The Silmarillion and create a series of films that come across like the Star Wars prequels; a lot of good technology, filming techniques, special effects but fundamentally a wooden, stillted-feeling running at the heart of the story arc. That and some "questionable" acting performances and directorial "problems" as I saw and felt help it to fall-short of its overall potential.
The technology now is ready to tell a story of I would say the second half or, as I said, two-thirds of The Silmarillion with the added intention of revisiting closer and closer the beginning as the film technology advances. It also makes commercial sense as well as film-fan gratification as you get the visual "concept" of The Silmarillion out there into the public domain and that of the public conciousness. Trying to make a couple of well filmed "begining" sections that would probably play out in a rather abstracted manner would perhaps be a hard sell at first for a second generation of film goers in tandem with "seasoned" LOTR's fans and up coming The Hobbit fans-to-be. Find a good point in The Silmarillion to go in at then try and realise the earlier parts still at a gradual later stage. It may take time to do it this way but pehaps that is better than alienating fans at first with what I would welcome to see with 2001: A Space Odyssey/Abstracted film effects charting the "origins" of it ALL! Somehow realising "The Music" of Eru Illuvitar and of "The Firstbon" of his thoughts, Melkor, Manwe and all the rest of it. Then, over the course of two-or-three films, we get into what essentially looks like "Humanoid-looking" characters that come to be known as the Ainur (angels I guess), then their descendance to Ea (Earth) and the troubles/strifes that would follow with Morgoth, Ungoliant and thus all that ever-after follows suit. We lead-up to the so called "half-way" point at which the film makers came in and all the threads are nicely and neatly woven together in one GIGANTIC film tapestry that ecompasess the ENTIRE, FAR-reaching saga!!
That, perhaps, might be one of the best courses of action to take...
There are several up-and-coming young actresses that have Elven appearances. Amanda Seyfried, Anna Paquin, Natalie Portman, Scarlett Johansson would all make good elves, while someone a little older like Kate Beckinsale would make a good Melian. When it comes to Luthien, though, my choice would be Kristen Stewart. She is maybe a little too young at the moment, but by the time filming started she would be older. She has that far-away, ethereal Elven appearance, and her transition from Bella Swan in Twilight to Joan Jett in the Runaways shows her acting ability.
Who would be Beren?
Valedhelgwath wrote: When it comes to Luthien, though, my choice would be Kristen Stewart. She is maybe a little too young at the moment, but by the time filming started she would be older.
Or very much older perhaps!
Illuvitar wrote: Its not just that, I have read other sources too and heard some interview hints from Peter Jackson himself, again, I will endeavour to source them out and will post accordingly.. Bear with me and I will do so, o.k...
As I said... ok... but when are you going to get around to this? Again, as far as I'm aware there are currently no compelling or legitimate sources regarding the sale of film rights to the Silmarillion.
I currently post or ghost at a number of Tolkien message boards, so do you have special information that others do not? And the Estate has a website as well, which currently contains no information about any sale, and I would think this would be rather big news, not to mention quite unexpected given Christopher Tolkien's opinion about making a film based on The Lord of the Rings.
And without a sale (although as I say I'm no expert in copyright law), it could possibly be a considerable length of time before The Silmarillion enters the public domain.
That doesn't mean it isn't fun to speculate in any case, or that anyone shouldn't have fun chatting about a potential film. And again, it's not that it's impossible that you have found something others haven't yet... but if so, again, what is this evidence?
I'm not going to be put on the spot by the likes of you Galin. I'll present writings and text upon here when I am good and ready. Is that at all unclear... There are sources that I have seen before I just don't have them to command for upload at this present time and I don't appriciate your snippy tone towards me in trying to prove myself somehow to you of all people! I mean who are you exactly anyway Mr!?
You sit there and wait until I am ready to find and put up here what I know I read before. Because I know I read some reports upon the subject at hand. What may have happened though in the mean time is that the deal or rumored deal sometimes gets thwarted by litigation processes. So enough of the public challenges Galin and watch your tone in future when you speak to me. It would be better for both of us.
Silmarillion as a movie. I doubt would that even be good, and I also doubt 'when' it would be coming out, if it will ever even happen.
By the way, Illuvatar, Galin may speak sharply at times, but in my opinion, he's one of the most resourceful and knowledgeable people on this site, when it comes to knowledge concerning Tolkien and related things.
I haven't read everything that is included on this thread, nor do I want to, but let me say that whatever he has said, I think you shouldn't get that offended. This is a friendly and peaceful site after all. It would be a shame to ruin that harmony.
And in my opinion, this whole talk about Silmarillion the Movie is ridiculous. The book is magnificent, but I just can't picture it as a movie.
No offense meant to anyone.
- O.W.
(...) So enough of the public challenges Galin and watch your tone in future when you speak to me. It would be better for both of us.
You might be injecting some kind of tone that isn't there Illuvatar, and with respect to necessarily posting sharply in a given example, that too may be subjective in ways, or someone might perceive something is posted sharply due to the ambiguities of posting compared to conversation.
In any case I do challenge any claim that the film rights to The Silmarillion have been sold, or that the Tolkien Estate is currently in negotiations to sell the film rights -- and continue to challenge that, and don't feel it is out of line to do so...
... as I say, especially since one assumes such news would be rather notable news to Tolkien fans all over the web. The evidence that you posted already is rather over the top in places, in my opinion, so I'm guessing you simply didn't read this reference carefully enough before posting it.
And of course you can post any other references whenever you are ready. In my last post I asked 'when' as you had continued to post without adding any. And if this is your answer to my question...
... then so be it.
I don't agree that I pick on anyone, I just disagree with things I disagree with, or challenge things I think might not be necessarily so.
Illuvatar, for the record I believe that you have read certain statements or opinions on the web, I just doubt they will convince me that the Tolkien Estate has actually sold the film rights to The Silmarillion, or are currently considering doing so.
And for a different kind of example, was it not reported in the news at one point that Christopher Tolkien had 'disowned' one of his sons because of the films? Which CJRT denied as true, and Simon Tolkien himself later publicly agreed was false.
Sometimes even the news is simply new.
May I put in my two cents' worth?
I love The Silmarillion like the Bible, sorry, no offense, and like the Bible it's quite impossible to transfer to film. MAYBE a big-budget series with many seasons... otherwise how would all these thirty or fifty or whatever number you care to name, stories ever be told?
The deep and true problem, however, is that our beloved stories tend to get mangled in the process. I won't deny the wonderful work put forth by Peter Jackson's actors, that have given faces and tones of voice to our heroes (and otherwise), in general pretty good, but I still am not over the surgery practiced on The Lord of the Rings... Glorfindel, for instance, and the twins Elladan and Elrohir, Tom Bombadil, and countless other so-called minor characters. And entire chapters! I was so befuddled by the hobbits jumping on the ferry and then turning up at the gates of Bree. The Old Forest! Tom and Goldberry! The BARROW-DOWNS, for goodness' sake!
I understand dramatic economy, but let's get real: movies come and go, Tolkien is one and alone.
The fact that Silmarillion is clearly divided into chapters makes for wide storytelling, so we would be talking about Beren and Luthien, easily, to say nothing of Turin Turambar that exists in a developed version in The Children of Hurin. Now, regarding the immense backdrop of the entire creation of Arda, I defy any one film to encompass this great mythology. Without impoverishing, hardly likely.
I do love the Jackson trilogy, I won't deny it, but whenever I catch some part on tv, say, I usually end up going back to the book and indulging myself to my heart's content. And I will go see The Hobbit, most certainly, but chances are I will fuss and fume at the deviations from canon.
May I put in my two cents' worth?
Surely!
With respect to your comments about surgery and The Lord of the Rings: my opinion is that Jackson tried to include too much from the books, as well as adding too much of his own stuff, or wasting screen time with his own focus (overlong battles and fights for example).
Generally speaking (and not that you said otherwise Marghana) I much prefer simple cutting to alteration of character, story, tone, and so on; and I think JRRT did too, judging by some of his comments in his letters.
And of course cutting does not mean bad pacing for example -- and I'm still not sure Glorfindel 'needed' to be cut for instance, since we must get Frodo an elf-horse at this point in any event -- but the Glorfindel question is a bit complicated anyway, given the injection of Arwen here too.
I expected the cutting of Bombadil. I love these chapters, but for a film, even three films, I agree with any filmmakers here.
I mostly agree Marghana, well said, I too always need to go back to the haven of the books.
I have been away awhile dealing with two terrible things, so I miss things, for that i apologize. Illuvatar, it is not your place to threaten another member if what they say does not please you. That is the province of the council members only and we don't usually do that, only try to work things out.
This is disrupting things and causing tension. So from now on ALL OF YOU, i want you to say things, make your point in totally no combative form, no pointing out one another as a problem. Kindness, respect and careful wording please if you are not inclined to get along with one another.
Else in any thread i find unkindness, rudeness, condescension, or any attempt to belittle or hurt one another, two times more and the thread will be locked. I don't wish to see any of you leave here or not comment because another speaks in a way to make you feel badly.
On the other hand try to not take things personally if you can. I will try to be more diligent in reading all posts and see what i can do. It is a normal thing to have healthy debates, HOWEVER, Planet Tolkien is a place of sharing knowledge and discussion, not debate . We are here to enjoy one another , not line up in teams and take shots at one another. So please, all of you who are so precious and mean so much to us and make this place lovely and refreshing, please do your part.
Illuvatar, if you are feeling truly put upon, just talk to me or one of the others on council and we will see what we can do to help.
... Julian McMahon as Feanor.
By the way I think that's a pretty good choice for Feanor, Brego -- I looked him up and didn't realize who it was at first -- Dr. Doom!
This actor doesn't look much like I imagine Feanor actually, but then again who does? or who can? So, adding my caveat for the casting of all of Tolkien's Elves in any film by anyone, I'll put it this way...
... I think that's a good choice, if we must use mortals.
And of course mere mortals are largely still employed for such roles (in live action film) ... for now anyway. Computer imaging is getting there, but it's not quite there yet in my opinion.
Galin, this is the very reason I'm such a fan of quality animated films. Mere mortals, indeed.
And again, seasons of series over movies and trilogies of...
But as I have heard, the Tolkien estate is absolutely nix on selling rights for the beloved Silmarillion. I guess they're right, but I do wish.
Remember Farenheit 451? I would volunteer to memorize a couple of chapters, starting with "Of Eldamar and the Princes of the Eldalië".
Peace to all, namarië.
I found this excerpt from an Empire magazine about The Hobbit. It is the last section (paragraph) of the article and during it, the person has been interviewing Peter Jackson about The Hobbits progress. What Peter Jackson has to say towards the end is cryptic as it is thought provoking!
( "I'm really enjoying myself", repeats Jackson, as the next set-up is trumpeted by a distant assistant. He never claimed to to be a hardcore Tolkien obsessive, and he isn't. King Kong was the small personal one. The Lovely Bones the risky attempt to offer something new. Little wonder he's so at ease. Be it destiny, or expediency, or the thrill of making Middle-Earth again, but the pressure is somehow off. "You know, I might talk to Warners about The Silmarillion," he says with a wry smile. He might be only half -joking. )
Will he, won't he? It is a good thing to think of the possibility of it in the meantime. I am looking for other such comments I am sure I have seen and am trying to still find them it is just taking a while to dig them out.
O.k. LeeLee... :-)
someone think N. Kidman should be Galadriel????
I have to admit I thought of her before the casting for The Lord of the Rings was confirmed.
Again, in my opinion quite tough to portray Galadriel for any mortal; but she came to mind way back then.
i always think of Australia as a place of real wonder and mystery, especially the outback , well really almost everywhere there where there is space and wild life and flora of great beauty . And with her tiny bone structure and face, her already very Elven eyebrows and her ability to speak in an articulate and mannerly way Nicole might make a great Elf. And that is saying a great deal for me, for I am not in the least fond of seeing anyone who has had much to do with Hollywood take these roles. Too much exposure and it becomes jaded really.
While I post this with some hesitation -- ever wary of possible 'fake news' on the web -- the following linked article seems legitimate, and at least the French paper Le Monde appears legitimate (I edited the following slightly by creating a new paragraph for the section concerning Jackson)...
http://sedulia.blogs.com/sedulias_translations/2012/07/was-first-felt.html
'(...) The Tolkien Estate was not able to prevent an American cartoon called Lord of the Beans, but its comic-strip version was stopped. This policy, however, has not protected the family from the reality that the work now belongs to a gigantic audience, culturally far removed from the writer who conceived it.
Invited to meet Peter Jackson, the Tolkien family preferred not to. Why? "They eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people 15 to 25," Christopher says regretfully. "And it seems that The Hobbit will be the same kind of film."
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 a true account I hope the quotations are not misleading in some way, compared to the live interview. Note too that this is someone's English translation of the article -- and I just saw that Jason Fisher has also posted about the article...
'An English translation of the interview has already appeared on the Internet. Please note that I have not compared it to the original. As always, caveat lector.'
Jason Fisher
Anyway, if true...
Well it sounds far to dramatic and exaggerated to me to be real.
For goodness sakes.
Anders Stenstrom has noted (posted 6 July to the list for the Mythopoeic Society)...
In case you, like me, do not have a subscription to _Le Monde_, it is possible to buy a single issue electronically for about a dollar. This interview is apparently destined for _Le Monde Week-end_ tomorrow (7 July), which is electronically available now.
(snip of link) When you try to do anything, like printing or zooming, a window will open that asks you to subscribe, or buy the single issue. As soon as you have bought it you can print it.
The interview is on pages 4-6 in the "Culture & Idées" part of the magazine, with accompanying pieces about Tolkien on pages 1 and 6. The print function counts pages through the issue as a whole; to print the mentioned pages, ask for 117 and 120-122. (Possibly also page 1, since the feature is signalled in a head vignette on the first page of the issue.)
On p.5 (=121) there is a photo of a map. It is said to be a map of Bilbo's world made by Christopher when he was 15 years old. But it seems to actually be one of the four sheets of the Second Silmarillion Map. I assume _Le Monde_'s photographer took pictures of a number of maps, and there was some confusion as to what was what.
Galin and all. Here's a link to some interviews with CT. Last I read he refuses to see the films, or at lead did so up until 2002.
http://middle-earth.xenite.org/2011/11/11/christopher-tolkien-the-silmarillion-and-the-machine/
Can't find any other reference to his thoughts on the film. He however seems to like the Ralf Baske Animation which is strange seeings it has even more changes than PJ. He seems like a very, shall we say conservative man and perhaps like his blessed Dad a Luddite, bless him.
Last I read he refuses to see the films, or at lead did so up until 2002. (snip of web address) Can't find any other reference to his thoughts on the film. He however seems to like the Ralf Baske Animation which is strange seeings it has even more changes than PJ.
Brego where are the comments you are referring to here with respect to the films, including Ralph Bakshi's film?
I'll add that John Rateliff (author of The History of The Hobbit) has posted about the Le Monde interview on his blog, with as yet limited commentary.
So, a few days ago (July 6th/7th), an interview with Christopher Tolkien appeared in LE MONDE, France's major newspaper.
I'll echo Jason Fisher's caveat lector... 'reader beware'... but this seems to be spreading anyway, not unexpectedly, and J Rateliff refers to the source as a major newspaper.
Galin there has been discussion for years on the Barrow Downs, I cant remember where I read an account of CT's support of the Animation.
Heres a link to some discussion.
Ok but that's discussion board chat of course...
... I'm asking for basically the same thing I asked of Illuvatar earlier -- for example, something like what I've posted above (which still appears to be legitimate so far) -- quotes from Christopher Tolkien and hopefully a link, or directions to, the source.
Sorry Sheriff Galin, cant remember where I read it, and hence cant add a link.
Well memory can be tricky.
For myself I'll await an actual citation and source regarding these comments (if you remember maybe, or someone else can post something perhaps), before attributing them to Christopher Tolkien.
lol very Gandalfian Galin!
I’ve just re read the badly translated French story, parts of it sound very sad to me. I think Christopher seems very unhappy with not only the Films (which judging by what he is quoted as saying I still don't think he has actually seen) but also every modern translation of his great Fathers work, including gaming and artwork. If we think about it World of Warcraft which has been around for decades totally ripped off the character and structure of the books and is purely about Magic and War, this I would agree eviscerate his father’s stories.
His Family seem to have been drawn into a world of fame unwanted and he is very angrie about it. Having said that, it didn’t stop him releasing The Children Of Hurin, which I guess added to the pressure. I guess the subsequent lawsuits with New Line didn't help.
I really hope that he is actually happy in his country getaway in France, in the Pines.... Reminded me of something.
Brego wrote: '... with not only the Films (which judging by what he is quoted as saying I still don't think he has actually seen)...'
Why think that? Plenty of people have essentially said the same thing, or worse, about Jackson's films.
And do you think Christopher Tolkien has decided to go on public record with criticism of something he hasn't even seen?
His comment re TLOTR films are simply action films simply don't hold true in my mind. Is he saying that there are no wars or fighting in his Fathers books?
Obviously Christopher Tolkien has said no such thing as 'there are no wars or fighting' in the books Brego.
That's why I don't think he has seen the films. There is a lot more to the films than just carnage and war.
He can't have seen them if he doesn’t agree with your opinions and measures with respect to a comparison between the books and films? Here's Tolkien scholar Verlyn Flieger, for example, with a brief summation...
Verlyn Flieger: 'It was aimed at the generations who've grown up on Star Wars and hunger for more and more action and greater and greater special effects. Jackson has turned an extremely sophisticated, complex and subtle -- and very long -- story into an action movie that I think satisfies the audience for whom he made it.'
Do you also think she didn’t see any of the films?
And to me it seems you think Christopher Tolkien is being unfair here -- it's at least arguably unfair to publicly criticize something one hasn't even seen -- any response to that?
Of course if you have read otherwise, please tell us where.
The difference is -- you actually claimed to have read certain statements, essentially putting words into Christopher Tolkien's mouth if not true -- but haven't backed any of it up yet. Incidentally, the above quote from V. Flieger can be found here...
My question remains Brego: based on the wording of Verlyn Flieger's brief summation above, would you likewise arrive at the opinion that she hasn't seen any of the films (and incidentally, a response that she went into more detail after this summation would be merely evading the point)?
Whether anyone answers or not, the question is to the point I'm making: such brief characterizations as we have here, not unexpectedly found in interviews of course, in no way need mean the person making them hasn't seen the films.
So (to any readers of this thread) why not trust the natural implication that the person presenting his or her opinion has actually seen what is being criticized?
Perhaps some Jackson fans might feel they have arrived between a rock and a hard place here: either interpret that Chistopher Tolkien has not actually seen the films -- yet chose to publicly criticism them -- which I think should amount to him being at least a bit unfair, although I haven't seen anyone else yet interpret things this way in any event...
... or simply accept that he has seen the films and accept his opinion of them. I would imagine that the problem for some Jackson fans here is that this is Christopher Tolkien.
And with respect to his opinion: when given so briefly, to my mind his statement is obviously enough about measure: too much has been eviscerated leaving too much of 'The Lord of the Rings' as an action film (basically a very similar characterization given by Verlyn Flieger in the context of her interview, in my opinion).
Christopher Tolkien is entitled to his opinion of course -- and for myself I would love to see a more in depth analysis from him, but I never expected even this much (given that so far it appears to be legitimate).
And by the way, I'm not sure what the point is behind repeating the opinion that the article is 'badly translated', since I very much doubt, in any case, it is so mistranslated as to make white appear black.
I'll post as I prefer Brego, as do you
And the interview was posted here due to perhaps obvious enough reasons, considering the tangent discussion with Illuvatar earlier.
No one forced you to try and cast doubt upon the interview with your opinion, or to post that Christopher Tolkien said this or that, or forced you to post anything in this thread of course. So yet again, let's not try to paint this discussion as anything other than what it is.
If you don't want to comment about something or don't want to answer questions specifically at this point, then don't obviously.
And I would guess that your interpretation, no matter sincerely arrived at, would be challenged at other Tolkien message boards too, at least with respect to this much: considering what it arguably suggests about Christopher Tolkien's sense of fairness with respect to public criticism.
But if that interpretation makes the most sense to you, then so be it.
Jesus Galin, if your not going to get into the spirit of imagining like what others of us are trying to do then just go away. We're willing to get onto topic of chatting about the imagining of visuals of The Silmarillion but your fast in danger of becoming a severe stick-in-the-mud. We don't want to hear just the poo-pooing from people like you all the time trying to scupper the conversations that others of us are trying to instigate about imagining The Silmarillion as a film. We are sick of hearing all of your over-efficent affitionado crap! Your welcom to engage in the hypothetical conversations with us if you want to but stop trying to kill the conversation with your grey-haired old fart nonesense.
You have made your point and we understand your view point and position upon the idea and it seems clear that this particular thread about imagining The Silmarillion as a film clearly is not for you. The sheer and UTTER irony here is that Brego and I seemingly have struck up a common experience here... we have both had to put up with your fed-up attitude Galin!
Now, either get on board with the conversation at hand or just get off of the thread because we want to talk about filming The Silmarillion and clearly you don't so there you go! There is always a door open for you if you want to take off your fuddy-duddy hat and instead and get on board with us a bit more... What do you say man! Can't you at least try instead of nueturing the idea of The Silmarillion as a film all of the time! Lighten up a little bit more man! Jesus!!!
As I said Illuvatar, I'll post as I please, as do you.
And considering your earlier statements in this thread, and subsequent promise -- and now considering this interview that I've posted -- can I take it that you now agree that the Tolkien Estate has not made any deals with Peter Jackson and company, and is not currently thinking of selling the film rights to The Silmarillion?
It's a simple enough question regarding a side topic that arose in this thread (and side topics are not at all unusual on discussion boards), and one that you yourself engaged in earlier.
And of course, in any case no one is stopping you or anyone from chatting about a theoretical Silmarillion film... emphasis on theoretical film however, so far at least.
BILBO BAGGANS...This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the J. R. R. Tolkien Estate Ltd. or any of its publishers or licensees, New Line Cinema or AOL Time Warner Inc. It does not imply or claim any rights to Tolkien's characters or creations. The Lord of the Rings is a registered trademark of Saul Zaentz Company trading as Tolkien Enterprises. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law.
