SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the Bilbo-and-Frodo-and-Gandalf,-oh-my! dept.
From Deadline.com:
In its quest to launch a hit fantasy series of the caliber of Game of Thrones, Amazon has closed a massive deal, said to be close to $250 million, to acquire the global TV rights to The Lord of the Rings, based on the fantasy novels by J.R.R. Tolkien. The streaming service has given a multi-season commitment to a LOTR series in the pact, which also includes a potential spin-off series.
The LOTR original series, a prequel to Tolkien's The Fellowship of the Ring, will be produced by Amazon Studios in cooperation with the Tolkien Estate and Trust, HarperCollins and New Line Cinema, a division of Warner Bros. Entertainment, which produced the hugely successful LOTR movie franchise.
No details about the deal were disclosed but it believed to be dwarfing any TV series pact to date with a whopping price tag attached.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Wednesday November 15 2017, @01:56AM (4 children)
"Nailing it" can never be done. The books are an individual experience in your mind. You will never be satisfied accepting someone else's version of it.
Ask 500 people who saw these films and they will tell you they were awesome, and probably can't be improved upon, and should probably just be left alone.
I consider that "Nailed". I consider Jackson's career successfully completed. There's not much he can or need do to improve on this.
There is this unfortunate tendency in Hollywood to never leave well finished alone. Always want to screw it up, cheapen it, trying to wring more money out of it rather than pick up a new book (there is no shortage of them) and start over. There are literally thousands of random sifi and fantasy series that could serve as a vehicle for a new franchise. I see no reason to drive this Bently over the cliff of repetition.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Informative) by edIII on Wednesday November 15 2017, @03:19AM (2 children)
No, I can accept somebody else's version of of what my brain fills in with my imagination. What I meant by nailing it, was just keeping to the damn book. Extremely large departures from the book, like adding a character and plot dynamic that didn't exist before, or entirely missing important events that happens in the book is hard to accept. Adaptation is part of the term film adaption, but you can take it to far and lose the essence of the book. LOTR and the Hobbit came close with some expendable elements, but still lost quite a bit of substance. It left me feeling parts of the story were missing. Plus, adding a new character rarely works, and in this case it didn't work.
LOTR you need to keep to the damn books, or stick to the facts as they say.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday November 15 2017, @03:35AM (1 child)
The books are inferior! They didn't even have cell phones and neither did the author! What savages!
More hot nympho elves!!!
TV adaptation in theory should allow for a more faithful retelling since a TV season is typically somewhere around 12-25 hours and the Jackson trilogy was around 9 (maybe a bit more after director's cuts).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Wednesday November 15 2017, @05:03AM
so.. just *how many* of the battle scenes do you need to watch?
LOTR was a boy's own adventure, with no girl-germs to mess it up. 12-15 hours of tv with boys camping, not washing and occasionally being slightly sensible, with a battle every one or two episodes would mean no one would even notice if it were played out of order!
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by Arik on Wednesday November 15 2017, @04:24AM
Yeah no, that's a tiny kernel of truth exaggerated far beyond reality, as an excuse for shitty craft.
It's certainly not easy to adapt a good book to the screen, but it's been done. Hollywood, today, never even tries.
"Ask 500 people who saw these films and they will tell you they were awesome, and probably can't be improved upon, and should probably just be left alone."
500 people who have never and would never read so much as a chapter of Tolkiens prose? Probably.
My reaction was a bit different. I gave them points for exceeding my extremely low expectations, but not many points, because it really wasn't good. It just wasn't quite as awful as I expected.
"There is this unfortunate tendency in Hollywood to never leave well finished alone. Always want to screw it up, cheapen it, trying to wring more money out of it rather than pick up a new book (there is no shortage of them) and start over. There are literally thousands of random sifi and fantasy series that could serve as a vehicle for a new franchise. I see no reason to drive this Bently over the cliff of repetition."
The reason is simple incompetence. Hollywood has no craft left. There may be competent writers in the town but they certainly aren't working in the business. You might check the homeless shelters.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?