Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[RH92]

I know there's plenty of Americans here, and I can't say much for you. But I can promise you that in the rest of the world, Tolkien is "popular". His books, especially Hobbit, is usually a part of reading in school.

I honestly don't know a single person my age (millenials) or older that haven't read or atleast tried to read any of his books. Younger people I can't say anything for, I know most people don't read as much and we get movies for everything now.

In Europe Tolkien is a household name.

Well, I am European too.

However Europe can be a broad term if you think about it. For a long time it was split into two very different worlds and unfortunately my country happened to be on the wrong side of the fence. Instead of the cool stuff, we were learning about and reading works of a numerous russian authors that get nowhere near the recognition now as they did when I was still going to school. I hated that, after interwar period everything was a fucking chore.

I actually don't know many people who read the books before the movies came out, plenty did though when the buzz surrounding it began. Until then it was mostly known by fantasy nerds. At least that's how I remember it and I spent my childhood in a puppet theater (my father and aunt work there) and I've seen a wide variety of stories being told there.

The point is the movies helped Tolkien to reach new audiences and revitalized the fantasy genre going forward, making it actually cool.

[Dhrizzle]

As much as I love the books, this has always been true. The Tom Bombadil section of Fellowship nearly peeled me off the books completely and there's a reason no adaptation has included it, it's incredibly dull.

Tolkien was never a master at writing a gripping tale that kept readers enthralled in each chapter. He was a master mythologist who was creating a world that he had imagined. The actual storytelling is actually quite dry and tedious, often diverging into tangents (like the aforementioned Bombadil scene) that really only interested the author, himself ... and those who were most interested in the building of a world more than the story set in that world.

Bombadil is someone who is distinct from both the good and the evil sides of the conflict, a person who is satisfied to accept the world as he sees it with no desire to dominate and therefore tools of domination (the Ring) have no power over him. In some ways he represents the pacifist movement, certainly (to Tolkien's mind) a righteous and enviable world view but one that can not protect the things it values and must rely on others to do the things it can not.

[InfiniteCharger]

Which has nothing to with making money and the Tolkien estate wanting to make money. It is hilarious that you put work in to prove how off point you were. While actually thinking you got one up on me. Lmao. You started yelling at the wind about things never said.

Actually I wasn't paying attention.

Since you like wasting peoples time not listening I will do the same.

So whatever.

[Khaza-R]

Man, this is a weird state of the world rly, people trying to say how good and amazing this series is, and trying to say "tolkien isn't as good" or "his work was not even that good", i can only imagine those people are baiting.

Like, every bit piece of fantasy after him, has his influence, motherfucker shaped the genre, the elves being like they are in every piece of media out there is because of how he did his own.

I notice this behavior a lot lately whenever people feel the need to defend some half-assed reboot. When all their other arguments have failed they fall back to gaslighting people and arguing that the original was not that good.

[Rageonit]

I notice this behavior a lot lately whenever people feel the need to defend some half-assed reboot. When all their other arguments have failed they fall back to gaslighting people and arguing that the original was not that good.

Also, you can dislike the adaptation and understand why the source material is not the best to adapt.
You people really are the Facebook generation. There are only thumbs up and thumbs down, black and white, nothing in between. You can only be a hater or a fanboy. And god forbid you're neither, confuses people so much!

[bledgor]

Also, you can dislike the adaptation and understand why the source material is not the best to adapt.
You people really are the Facebook generation. There are only thumbs up and thumbs down, black and white, nothing in between. You can only be a hater or a fanboy. And god forbid you're neither, confuses people so much!

Mate you are one of the guys coming in talking shit on Tolkien like he is your average fantasy author dude. You don't get to call one of the most renown authors, among the goats of fantasy who literally has inspired most of modern fantasy and say naw not the best material mate. This is the exact gaslighting he is talking about, you are proving his point.

[s_bushido]

PJ's adaptations are full of action and excitement. The slow and boring seems to be part of this particular adaptation.

Honestly it feels like we haven't even gotten to rivendale yet.

The irony, of course, is that most of the "action and excitement" of the movies was stuff that was added by the filmmakers and doesn't actually appear in the books... Stuff that would have been roasted by the "purists" around here looking for any excuse to shit on something.

The epic prologue battle, the wizard's duel, the chase of the Black Riders, Arwen's heroic rescue... All of these major action set-pieces in the first half of the first movie that were either embellished or invented by the filmmakers because otherwise Tolkien's work would have probably been boring as fuck.

[Rageonit]

Mate you are one of the guys coming in talking shit on Tolkien like he is your average fantasy author dude. You don't get to call one of the most renown authors, among the goats of fantasy who literally has inspired most of modern fantasy and say naw not the best material mate.

You're having hard time understanding again (which is not a surprise after the first time). Nowhere did I comment on Tolkien as a reader myself - all I was saying since the very beginning is that Tolkien's writing is difficult and often boring to the modern reader, which is simply a fact of the matter. If you believe his writing is somehow timeless and the current generation will enjoy it as much as mine did, you will die on his altar for nothing (and rightfully so).

- - - Updated - - -

The irony, of course, is that most of the "action and excitement" of the movies was stuff that was added by the filmmakers and doesn't actually appear in the books... Stuff that would have been roasted by the "purists" around here looking for any excuse to shit on something.

The epic prologue battle, the wizard's duel, the chase of the Black Riders, Arwen's heroic rescue... All of these major action set-pieces in the first half of the first movie that were either embellished or invented by the filmmakers because otherwise Tolkien's work would have probably been boring as fuck.

There's no irony in it, that's simply how you make an adaptation of a source material that's not suited for the modern viewer. It should be done exactly like that, and the "purists" should be disregarded.

[bledgor]

You're having hard time understanding again (which is not a surprise after the first time). Nowhere did I comment on Tolkien as a reader myself - all I was saying since the very beginning is that Tolkien's writing is difficult and often boring to the modern reader, which is simply a fact of the matter. If you believe his writing is somehow timeless and the current genration will enjoy it as much as mine did, you will die on his altar for nothing (and rightfully so).

Mate the movies, the dozens of games, board games, toys, etc all prove you are wrong. The source material has been a gold mine for just about every facet it has entered. This all goes back to the world/books produced by Tolkien, so guess it isn't that bad of a source material. You want to continue to ignore reality, have at it, but for the rest of us we will continue to acknowledge facts.

[Rageonit]

Mate the movies, the dozens of games, board games, toys, etc all prove you are wrong. The source material has been a gold mine for just about every facet it has entered. This all goes back to the world/books produced by Tolkien. You want to continue to ignore reality, have at it, but for the rest of us we will continue to acknowledge facts.

And how many of those are truly faithful to the source material...? Right.
You're one of those people I'm talking about. Only black or white. You can't fathom that I can love something while still understanding why it won't work for people who aren't me. And so I'm "talking shit" about Tolkien because I understand why the books are boring for the modern reader. Get a grip.

[rhorle]

Mate the movies, the dozens of games, board games, toys, etc all prove you are wrong.

The games, board games, toys, etc all owe their current relevance to the Jackson films and not Tolkien's original work. Before the Jackson movies there wasn't much happening because it wasn't as prominent for the general populace.

[tikcol]

And how many of those are truly faithful to the source material...? Right.
You're one of those people I'm talking about. Only black or white. You can't fathom that I can love something while still understanding why it won't work for people who aren't me. And so I'm "talking shit" about Tolkien because I understand why the books are boring for the modern reader. Get a grip.

What is modern? What's a modern reader? Is the "modern reader" so much different than the "modern reader" from 15 years ago? How did they change? Why?

I felt pretty modern around 15 years ago when I read all the books. Are you sure you're not referring to a fantasy reader?

How did fantasy genre change in these last 15 years that if I was a teenager today, and I was into fantasy(this is the important part) I wouldn't like to read Tolkien and I would find it a bore?

I'm sure you understand even if a lot of people read, those people read different things. How did the fantasy genre change so much since the Jackson movies that makes the Tolkien books so boring for a child/teenager/young adult into fantasy today?

Do you actually think a sport enthusiast that never picked up a book in his life was reading Tolkien 30 years ago? Why would someone like that today be interested in Tolkien?

You're not making much sense with your "modern" reader/audience bullshit.

[bledgor]

And how many of those are truly faithful to the source material...? Right.
You're one of those people I'm talking about. Only black or white. You can't fathom that I can love something while still understanding why it won't work for people who aren't me. And so I'm "talking shit" about Tolkien because I understand why the books are boring for the modern reader. Get a grip.

They vary degrees but yes they do. They still function in the world he created. Do they have to be 100% Tolkien now to give him credit? What fucking straw man bullshit we pulling now? Black and white? Mate you are making goal posts, moving them, changing them into hoops, then complaining about us calling you on it.

I am not saying everyone has to love Tolkien (never said that) I am saying he has enough people that love him and his work to have a large built in audience to his work (yes in part due to the movies). Any venture/work/movie/game/whatever that is done well will make money off of his works because he wrote such a masterful world to base it all from.

You do know the movies are based on his books yes? And the games, nothing/nobody has been said that adaptations have to be 100% (in fact while talking about Rings of Power I have mentioned adaptations don't have to be and shouldn't be 100% 1 to 1, I do think you should aim to be close, like 80%, but not 1 to 1).

I never said you are talking shit because you think the books would be boring for modern readers (which in and of itself is an ass pull, if you wanted to say people are less likely to read sure, but readers of fantasy in general enjoy Tolkien), I said you are full of shit by saying Tolkien isn't a great source material WHICH ALL EVIDENCE PROVES (as dozens of games the trilogy, toys, etc) have all done very well.

Stop straw manning and get a grip that you are in this instance provably wrong.

Also if the source material is so shit for a modern audience, why would Amazon spend 250 MILLION DOLLARS JUST for the rights?

What is modern? What's a modern reader? Is the "modern reader" so much different than the "modern reader" from 15 years ago? How did they change? Why?

I felt pretty modern around 15 years ago when I read all the books. Are you sure you're not referring to a fantasy reader?

How did fantasy genre change in these last 15 years that if I was a teenager today, and I was into fantasy(this is the important part) I wouldn't like to read Tolkien and I would find it a bore?

I'm sure you understand even if a lot of people read, those people read different things. How did the fantasy genre change so much since the Jackson movies that makes the Tolkien books so boring for a child/teenager/young adult into fantasy today?

OBVIOUSLY you are an anomaly then, cause modern readers don't like Tolkien apparently.

[Khaza-R]

Also, you can dislike the adaptation and understand why the source material is not the best to adapt.
You people really are the Facebook generation. There are only thumbs up and thumbs down, black and white, nothing in between. You can only be a hater or a fanboy. And god forbid you're neither, confuses people so much!

No clue how you pulled all of that out of my comment.

I also don't really agree that its source material that difficult to adapt. Perhaps the "hardest" thing to adapt about Tolkien's work is the strong Christian undertones to post-modern audience. Otherwise, Amazon literally was given a fairly blank slate to work with. They really just had to keep the few characters who were fleshed out in second era true to character. Yet they couldn't even manage that.

With more capable writers, I have no doubt they could of easily pulled off this series very well. And likely at a fraction of the cost.

[Xath]

The games, board games, toys, etc all owe their current relevance to the Jackson films and not Tolkien's original work. Before the Jackson movies there wasn't much happening because it wasn't as prominent for the general populace.

Do you ever get tired of lying? I'm honestly curious because something like 80% of your posts are straight up lies.

[s_bushido]

There's no irony in it, that's simply how you make an adaptation of a source material that's not suited for the modern viewer. It should be done exactly like that, and the "purists" should be disregarded.

Well yeah...but you can't tell them that.

[rhorle]

Do you ever get tired of lying? I'm honestly curious because something like 80% of your posts are straight up lies.

Do you have evidence to back that up? It isn't a lie to say that the films being created skyrocketed the relevance of Tolkien. The last video game prior to the movies was 1992. The Jackson Fellowship came out in 2001 and a whole bunch of games were made. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...th_video_games

The only one straight up lying here is yourself. You'd rather insult and demean then put up a solid argument. There is no denying that the films being made increased the relevance of Tolkien.

[Triceron]

Do you have evidence to back that up? It isn't a lie to say that the films being created skyrocketed the relevance of Tolkien. The last video game prior to the movies was 1992. The Jackson Fellowship came out in 2001 and a whole bunch of games were made. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...th_video_games

The only one straight up lying here is yourself. You'd rather insult and demean then put up a solid argument. There is no denying that the films being made increased the relevance of Tolkien.

The Tolkien Estate was protective of their IP and wasn't lending out liscences as freely as they do now. PJ's movies certainly had an affect on having more liscenced products out, but mostly because it paved the way for the Tolkien Estate to have more confidence in liscencing the material more than anything. The entire lack of LOTR products prior to the movies is directly relative to them being much more conservative with liscencing deals.


There weren't more Tolkien videogames prior to the movies because the games that did exist were mediocre at best, and not worth pursuing further. Just look at the LOTR SNES game. Yeah, I bet you probably didn't even know that existed, that's how great it was.

[bledgor]

The Tolkien Estate was protective of their IP and wasn't lending out liscences as freely as they do now. PJ's movies certainly had an affect on having more liscenced products out, but mostly because it paved the way for the Tolkien Estate to have more confidence in liscencing the material more than anything. The entire lack of LOTR products prior to the movies is directly relative to them being much more conservative with liscencing deals.

That + the death of J.R.R. and now Christopher Tolkien, I would imagine that number will only grow. They were the real conservators of the works.

[rhorle]

The Tolkien Estate was protective of their IP and wasn't lending out liscences as freely as they do now. PJ's movies certainly had an affect on having more liscenced products out, but mostly because it paved the way for the Tolkien Estate to have more confidence in liscencing the material more than anything. The entire lack of LOTR products prior to the movies is directly relative to them being much more conservative with liscencing deals.

The rights from the Jackson film originated from the SZC and not the tolkien estate. The estate got rolayties but they did not have a say in what could be done. Because you know Tolkien sold those. That is what Amazon buying rights was such a big deal because there was a "loophole" in the worldwide exclusive rights originally sold to the SZC (now owned by Embracer).

There were also two different rights to video games at the time of the Jackson films. That is because EA obtained rights to produce games based on the movies while SZC sold the video game rights for non-film tolkien to Vivendi.