Amazon spends 250mil for the rights to make a "Lord of the Rings" televison series

Why? It's way too established as a movie franchise. Why not go for relatively unchartered territory like The Wheel of Time?

That established LOTR fanbase can be a hinderance when they diss everything about the TV show for being inferior to the superior movies.

Yeah I question is as well R1

The LOTR's movies are beloved and already told the story well. I really hope they instead write a project set in this universe that is completely different from the story told in LOTR.

[quote]...I hear Amazon landed the rights by paying close to $250 million. That is just for the rights, before any costs for development, talent and production, in proposition whose finances industry observers called “insane.” It is a payment that is made sight unseen as there is no concept, and there are no creative auspices attached to the possible series. On top of that, the budget for a fantasy series of that magnitude is likely to be $100-$150 million a season.

This really is insane, psychotic even.

Then again, so was paying $80 million for the Woody Allen TV series.

As long as they sign up The Mouth Of Sauron I'll be happy, my favorite character in the movies, asshole Aragorn killed him.

What your Prime subscription jump and the free shipping minimum increase.

Why don't they dramatize another famous sci-fi writer like Jack Vance instead. How can anything compete with the huge budget LOTR that has already been a huge hit in the movies? There's plenty of stuff that hasn't been done yet. These executives are too stupid and lazy to read and research possible projects. Much easier to just remake a movie they just had to sit through. Many of them probably didn't even read the Tolkien books once.

Yeah, there are so many great fantasy novels out there begging for an adaptation. Sadly, they want the safe assurance of a product people already know. That is why we have so many remakes and sequels rather than new content.

That's the same price they paid to buy the Washington Post.

I can't wait for the cinema adaptation of "Game of Thrones" in 10 years, right around the time of the 4th Spider-Man reboot.

Amazon didn't buy the Post; Bezos did.

I'm with the majority here that I just don't see this paying off. With all of the other properties available, why pick this well-mined one? And for such a price?

Well, LOTR and The Hobbit will enter the public domain in 2044 (late 2030s for stories leading up to that) and Bezos is too impatient to wait for that to happen. But that's a ridiculous amount of money, especially when it's being announced the same day Bill Gates donated $100 million for research into Alzheimer's disease. What a waste of money. I'll still watch it, though.

R4 I agree. He was such a DLer.

I think it's a great idea, of course their is plenty of room to fuck this up. You all do realize this is a TV version of the LOTR trilogy? It isn't a TV remake of the movies. The concept is an original TV series that is a prequel to The Fellowship of the RIng. From the article linked by OP:

[quote] 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.

John Rhys-Davies, who played Gimli in LOTR, has some choice words for Amazon. Says Tolkien must be spinning in his grave.

[quote][bold]And talking of spending millions on effects, I don’t know if you’d spotted that Amazon is making a Lord Of The Rings TV series?[/bold]

[quote][He sighs] Well, you know they have the money to do it. Why we quite need Lord Of The Rings as a TV series baffles me slightly, but I'm sure that [in all honesty I can’t make out the word here and don’t think it’s wise to make an educated guess] are so utterly un-principled and greedy for money for anything – I mean the extraordinary money they're getting from online gambling and stuff like this, it's just a disgrace. I mean, poor Tolkien must be spinning in his grave.

[quote][bold]For me it seems like a slightly futile endeavor, as the films you were in are perfect and incredibly important to me and still so current – it’s fantasy, so it’s not something that needs modernizing or anything adding to it.[/bold]

[quote]Yes, but this is the point you see - it’s not about doing it better, it’s about making more money that’s all. If they think they can make more money, then they will. Actually I've got a better idea for them, or for any company – Lord Of The Rings spun-off an awful lot of imitations about elves and dwarves and things like that and I would simply buy those up and put them together and make a wonderful elvish… there was a trilogy of books that were given to me the other day by a lady author, who’d written an account of the adventures of a dwarvish lady.

[quote]That would make a far more interesting account of Tolkien's words, in a world like that. And you know there are hundreds and hundreds of young writers, who have made their contributions and if was a well-heeled film producer, that’s where I'd be looking, because that gives more actors more chances and it’s still a great tribute to Tolkien. It costs less to make and it would be original and fresh, but then what the hell do I know!?

[quote]What a waste of money. I'll still watch it, though.

This is why the negative criticisms do not matter. People will watch it, regardless.

To be accurate, there is no actual concept on the page yet r12. They bought the rights but have no idea what they are going to do yet and who is going to run it. They are saying right now they envision some sort of prequel, we will see.

I love how Rhys-Davies thinks the movie adaptation is brilliant but any other adaptation is going to be shit. And then he talks as if he knows what this Amazon series is going to be, when basically no one does yet.

What does he mean about Amazon and gambling?

R16 I've no idea what he means by gambling but I've heard people complaining that they don't want to get LOTR at the same place they get their wet wipes.

I'm a huge Tolkien fanboy. Like, really big. I've read all his Middle Earth works multiple times, and even have even read dorky volumes like Christopher Tolkien's "History of Middle Earth" and the (incredible) Reader's Companion by Hammond and Scull. I love everything about Tolkien's books and the world he created.

I also loved the first LotR trilogy of films. I'm not one of those purists who gets their panties in a twist because they don't understand that adaptation has to actually occur when you're adapting from one medium (book) to another (film).

With that out of the way, I was shocked (shocked, I tell you!) to see this announcement. Why?

While I, personally, wouldn't mind seeing more well-done Middle Earth on the big (home) screen, I couldn't believe the Tolkien Estate agreed to this. Christopher Tolkien notoriously hated the LotR movies, commenting in 2012 for the French magazine Le Mond:

"I could write a book on the idiotic requests I have received. [...] Tolkien has become a monster, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed by the absurdity of our time. 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."

Also from the article:

[Christopher Tolkien] is trying to protect the literary work from the three-ring circus that has developed around it. In general, the Tolkien Estate refuses almost all requests. "Normally," explains Adam Tolkien, "the executors of the estate want to promote a work as much as they can. But we are just the opposite. We want to put the spotlight on what is not Lord of the Rings."

If they hated the LotR film trilogy, I can only imagine how disgusted they were with the Hobbit trilogy, something even I, a die-hard Tolkien fan, couldn't make it through a single time.

The only thing I can think of is that $250 million is a lot of money. Maybe it's way more money than Tolkien's estate ever thought it could get for the rights. Plus, they didn't give up the rights to The Silmarillion. Perhaps they were willing to turn the other direction as they finally cashed out.

In the end, I really don't know what Amazon will do for a new eries. If they can't take material from The Silmarillion, is this series just gonna be like the endless Star Wars spin-off movies? Is Amazon just gonna make a ton of spin-off shows with original material set in Middle Earth?

Finally, as much as I love Tolkien, I am actually disappointed to see Amazon invest such a ridiculous amount of money in this when they could've hired dozens of the best writers out there to create original fantasy material for them, or when they could've secured the rights to several well-loved fantasy series, each full of potential for adaptation.

What can they do? The wisest choice would be to be faithful (and I mean FAITHFUL) to the books. Put back the things they cut from the films, and excise the things they added.

Get ready for a whole episode with Tom Bombadil!

Speaking of purists, the 93-year-old Christopher Tolkien resigned from his position as the Tolkien Estate director on September 4th, with the resignation process starting on August 29th. You can bet this deal was only possible with him out of the way.

They don't have the rights to the Silmarillion?! That is a huge blow in limiting what types of stories they can tell.

That's a dumb complaint, r17. Streaming will soon be the way to watch virtually everything. In fact I own the three directors cut versions of LotR on Amazon streaming.

I suspect the complaints are due to the fact that Amazon is an American company. They don't make sense for any other reason.

For 250M I should hope they bought the entirety of the property.

Nope r24

[quote]The Amazon deal does not cover “The Silmarillion,” the third major work taking place in Tolkein’s Middle Earth and adjacent worlds, published after the author’s death.

Nope, nothing to do with being an American company. The complaints regarding wet wipes and gambling are symptomatic of the fact that Amazon has been firmly establishing as a retailer and is not (yet) associated with quality streaming content. Bezos knows they need to work on their branding or even spin this off into a separate business.

If they're not taking the rights to the Silmarillion, what in the world are they going to adapt?

Well, R20 certainly cleared up the biggest reason for my surprise at this! I didn't see that that had happened!

This will suck balls, and not in a good way.

[quote]Nope, nothing to do with being an American company.

Updated to reflect current themes

The Wheel of Time and Stephen King fans will be happy with this news.

[quote]As part of the effort, Amazon made a mega deal for a Lord Of the Rings TV series and is developing a slew of high-profile titles, including The Dark Tower, Wheel of Time, Ringworld, Lazarus and Snow Crash.

Anyone familiar with any of those other properties listed?

sell your Amazon stock. They are headed for a meltdown.

I won't watch this just as I never bothered with the movies. On a summer job trapped in a rural small town I read the books, followed by the Lampoon's "Bored of the Rings". That was sufficient for one lifetime.

I wonder what Netflix or Amazon's endless bank vaults could do with Asimov's "Foundation" novels or Doc Smith's Lensman stories..

Robert Jordan's "Wheel of Time" series is among the highest-regarded fantasy series since LotR. I haven't read them yet, as it's a massive series and I've been busy with Brandon Sanderson's books.

Also in the deal is Iain M. Banks' first novel from The Culture Series, "Consider Phlebas." I've read every Culture book Banks wrote and think they are some of the best sci-fi I've ever read. "Consider Phlebas" wasn't my favorite, but it was the first and it makes sense that they would start there.

Personally, I'm surprised it's taken this long for someone to acquire the rights to these properties. Both authors are deceased, so perhaps that had something to do with it.

You guys are carping about what YOU want. 250 million isn't ALL that much. They surely had some show biz experts and number crunchers who presented a revenue plan that showed a good chance of making big bucks.

Are you kidding me? Amazon hires people all the time based on faked resumes and imaginary qualifications.

Sounds like the White House.

Finally, some quality roles for tranny actors.

r4, is that Queen Margrethe II of Denmark behind that visor?

[quote] You guys are carping about what YOU want.

actually I was carping about what I 𝒅𝒐𝒏'𝒕 want. In the particular, a "Lord of the Rings" televison series.

[italic]Electric Dreams[/italic] didn't exactly pan out as expected, did it? And it definitely should have worked on paper. All these other fantasy and sci-fi shows look great on paper as well.

Although that had a lot to do with Amazon being shit at advertising that particular project.

Prime goes up to $149 per year!

[bold]Exclusive: Amazon's internal numbers on Prime Video, revealed[/bold]

[quote]In November, Amazon announced it will make a prequel to the fantasy hit “The Lord of the Rings.” The company had offered $250 million for the rights alone; [bold]production and marketing could raise costs to $500 million or more for two seasons[/bold], one of the people said.

[quote]At half a billion dollars, the prequel would cost triple what Amazon paid for “The Man in the High Castle” seasons one and two, the documents show. That means it would need to draw three times the number of Prime members as “The Man in the High Castle” for an equal payoff.

Dizzying numbers.

Let the demands for "diverse" casting being.

*begin

I wouldn't be surprised if they will intend to milk it like Disney does with Star Wars where they buy the source material and do whatever they want by doing all sorts of spin offs. Like Prancing Ponies, the Cheers of Middle Earth!

Didn't read the thread. But no. I don't want this series to happen. I enjoyed the movies, and want them to be the stand alone adaptations of the books.

Meh, I am more interested in their other acquisitions like Ringworld and Lazarus. Ringworld in particular is a fascinating concept and would love to see it into a series. Does Amazon sell their titles in DVD format as well? Amazon can make additional sources of income with DVD and merchandise. .

Peter Jackson's movies were not the original adaptations of these novels.

That's awful, R43.

[bold]Amazon might spend $1 billion to adapt sci-fi trilogy, 'The Three-Body Problem'[/bold]

[quote]Last week, reports emerged that Amazon would probably spend closer to half a billion dollars (if not more) to get its Lord Of The Rings prequel series onto our screens, making the adaptation the most expensive show to date. But it looks like the e-commerce giant, which posted a $1.9 billion profit in the last quarter of 2017 alone, is already gearing up to outdo itself. The Financial Times reports the Jeff Bezos-led online retailer is considering paying $1 billion for the rights and production of a series based on the Hugo Award-winning The Three-Body Problem.

[quote][Amazon] is the only entity considering spending a billion dollars on Cixin Liu’s sci-fi trilogy, which was nominated for a 2014 Nebula Award and impressed former president Barack Obama upon its Tor release. The Three-Body Problem is the title of the first book, the most popular in the series, as well as the name of the overall trilogy. The plan is to make three seasons based on the three books. This could be a substantial hit for Amazon, which has been looking to generate its own Game Of Thrones-like ratings success. Lin Qi, the chairman of online game developer Youzu Interactive, currently holds the rights to Liu’s trilogy.

Anyone familiar with this?

So they bought "Wheel of Time", huh?

I was wondering who was going to do that, I actually thought that HBO might give it a go now that "Game if Thrones" is wrapping up. I think it could make an excellent TV show or extended miniseries, once it's edited as ruthlessly as "GoT" has been. And frankly, better that than a LOTR prequel that doesn't include Silmarillion material.

r32, Snow Crash was a terrific Sci-fi technopunk novel with a cheeky sense of humor. I can't imagine making a series out of it though.

r53, I tried reading "The Three Body Problem", and it was a total snoozefest for me, because it's hard science coupled with metaphysical ideas. It does not make for great tv.

They really should make a series from Roger Zelazny's House of Amber stories- good fantasy fun which actors don't have to commit more than 2 seasons to (as characters go missing a lot).

I hated the "Amber" books. Dull and generic.

What they're trying to cash-in on is the vacuum that will come right after GoT ends. There will be a small window between the end and whatever sequel they develop.

Consider Phlebas and all of Banks' Culture books are considered classics and very highly regarded. Many people would regard it much more highly than The Expanse books - though in some ways, books with simpler premises are easier to adapt to movies and TV.

Wheel of Time has a rabid following - though not as big as GoT or LotR although who knows how big GoT would have been had they not made the TV show. A series of WoT could easily go either way in terms of quality. While I liked the books, I think it would be better if it went slightly darker relative to the original books, otherwise you could easily end up with silly fluff like the Shannara show or countless silly sword & sorcery adaptions, Eragon anyone? Earthsea? On a dark and gritty scale, if the original BSG were a 1 and the reboot were a 10, they should go for an 8 version with WoT.

As for LotR, even without the Silmarillion, there are a world of stories they can do, such as the recent Beren and Luthien story - although it was published in the Silmarillion, the separate publication may be a loophole they can exploit. Also, the entire Second Age with the Fall of Numenor could provide exciting GoT like intrigue as various factions struggle for power and Sauron pulls the puppet string to get them to attack Valinor. Also, the events leading up to the Last Alliance of Men and Elves with King Elendil and his sons or the fall of Gondor could provide some interesting backdrops.

Yeah, of all the Tolkien stories, the tale of Elendil and the Last Alliance would make the best TV show. Largely because it's one of the few Middle Earth stories with a human protagonist who can be made relateable.

But since it's in the Silmarillion, it may not be available to Anazin, unless they threw in a few million extra to make sure those rights were secure. Hell, if I were a Tolkien descendant, I'd agree just because I wanted to see the Last Alliance show!

[bold]Inside Amazon's $250M 'Lord of the Rings' Deal: "It's Very Much a Creature of the Times"[/bold]

Interesting article about how the deal got made. Make it rain, Gollum!

[quote]"This is the most complicated deal I've ever seen," Galsor says, "but it was handled relatively quickly, in a way that brought the parties together in a close relationship. It was tough, but everybody liked each other and felt like a team more as the deal closed."

[quote]Dan Scharf, Amazon's head of television business affairs, ran point for the streaming giant. New Line and parent Warner Bros. never had TV rights to Rings, but Amazon may use material from the films, so New Line co-president Carolyn Blackwood and Warner Bros. Picture Group chairman Toby Emmerich were brought into the talks.

[quote][bold]As for whether Jackson is involved in the TV series[/bold] as an executive producer remains to be seen and would be up to him. His attorney Peter Nelson was not a part of the 2017 rights negotiations but recently helped start a dialogue between Jackson and Amazon."It's very much a creature of the times," Nelson says of the Amazon deal. "We are in an era where streamers are bidding up the price of programming. I think Amazon is taking a page out of the studios' emphasis on franchises. They also are realizing that with the overproduction of television, you need to get the eyeballs to the screen, and you can do that with franchise titles."

[quote]So far, there's no sign of Bob Weinstein or his estranged brother Harvey trying to elbow their way into the deal. The estranged brothers — the latter embroiled in an epic sex harassment and abuse scandal that was unfolding as the Amazon deal-making was in high gear — could have made noise. After all, they inked an agreement with New Line in 1998 while they controlled the Tolkien film rights at Miramax.

[quote]The Weinsteins were profit participants in the Rings trilogy, and they used their 1998 agreement as the basis to sue for a piece of the Hobbit films. Ultimately, they collected $12.5 million from the first Hobbit film, but nothing from the next two releases. "We won," says a studio source, "and they didn't get a dime for two or three."

They have a five season committment. They are all in even if this bombs.

r59 Thanks, I can't believe I missed that crucial bit of info.

[quote][BREAKING] We have confirmed from multiple sources that @AmazonStudios new billion-dollar #LOTR series will open its first season centered on a young Aragorn.

Yes? No? Maybe?

If I remember correctly, they only have the rights to The Lord of the Rings from which to draw any inspiration. Aside from the main events of the story, there is very little additional material about Aragorn before or after the events of LotR.

The main source they can pull from is a short, five-page section of Appendix A, part 5. There is very little detail in this section, only broad outlines of his life:

There are four paragraphs about Aragorn's mother (Gilraen) father (Arathorn) and his grandfather (Arador). When Aragorn is two years old, his father "went riding against the orcs with the sons of Elrond, and he was slain by an orc-arrow that pierced his eye."

1Oneparagraph telling us that Aragorn's other takes him "to dwell in the house of Elrond; and Elrond took the place of his father and came to love him as a son of his own." Elrond keeps Aragorn's true lineage a secret for fear of his safety from the Enemy (Sauron).

There is a throwaway sentence about how Aragorn goes adventuring with Elrond's sons and returns to Rivendell when he is 20. Elrond tells Aragorn of his true lineage. This takes two paragraphs.

Then there is 3/4ths of a page (with dialogue) of Aragorn (still 20 years old or so) meeting Arwen for the first time. There is a page of conversation between Aragorn and his mother, and between him and Elrond, who foretells that "the days darken, and much evil is to come."

There are then two paragraphs that tell of how Aragorn "took leave lovingy of Elrond; and the next day he said farewell to his mother [...] and went out into the wild. For nearly thirty years he laboured in the cause against Sauron." He meets Gandalf, rides with the Rohirrim (the horse army of Rohan, featured prominently in LotR), fights for the Lord of Gondor (who also plays a part in LotR), visits Mordor, goes to Lorien and meets Galadriel. He also sees Arwen again, ad there are five paragraphs here that include some dialogue.

Aragorn and Arwen make a commitment to one another; Elrond is not pleased and tells Aragorn that Arwen "shall not be the bride of any Man less than the King," meaning Aragorn must fulfill his bloodline's responsibilities.

There are a couple paragraphs of Aragorn's final interactions with his mother, and of her death. Then there is a page and a half that more or less ties us into LotR ("Thus the years drew on to the War of the Ring; of which more is told elsewhere" and tells of Aragorn's death (with dialogue).

It seems to me that there is PLENTY in here for Amazon to draw upon, although they will have only the barest of outlines. There are also the possibilities of including great cameos, as Elrond (Hugo Weaving), Gandalf (Ian McKellen), and Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), and Arwen (Liv Tyler) are all characters who don't "age." The big challenge, of course, is finding an actor strong enough to take on the main role.

Sorry for all the typos.

There is material enough for Aragorn, though personally I don't find the character very compelling except when he's Strider. I suppose the idea of expanding on the lore of LotR, such as Balin and Moria, the hunt for Sméagol, Saruman's descent into evil, Galadriel and Lothlórien, etc., is quite intriguing. I hope they go in that direction and it's not all further adventures of the Fellowship.

Young Aragorn?! I really was hoping this series would be further removed from Lord of the Rings than this, we are just going to retread familiar territory.

Young Darth Vadar, young Captain Kirk, young Jack Ryan, young Han Solo, young Hannibal Lector, young Norman Bates, young Aragorn...

I'm sensing a disturbing pattern, R65.

**desperate**

As long as we have a young Gollum all will be well.

Baby Muppet Aragorn!

Actually, I've been saying for years that if they wanted to make a LOTR-related TV show, they should go with Young Aragorn. He travelled all over Middle Earth and dealt with everyone, he spent time around the Shire, Gondor, Rohan, Rivendell, Mirkwood, Lothlorien, Bree, etc., and dealt with all the major players of the age, from Gandalf to Gollum. It'd be perfect for a neverending episodic TV show, where he's romancing Arwen one week and plotting with Gandalf the next, and it could go on forever because Aragorn wandered around for sixty-odd years before making his move for the throne of Gondor.

However, his story is not suitable for the kind of "Game of Thrones" show that is one long cohesive story ending in a spectacular finale, because the climax of Aragorn's story doesn't come until you leave the story of Young Aragorn behind, and go into the actual "Lord of the Rings". So... if the show runs long enough, do the play to turn it into an actual LOTR remake?

I could see mapping out the material in the appendices as a couple multi-season arcs:

Season One, Episode One: Opens with a LotR-style 10-minute prologue showing Arathorn and the sons of Elrond fighting the orcs. Arathorn is killed and Gilraen takes baby Aragorn to Rivendell, where we're introduced to Elrond. They can even have a Cate Blanchett-style voiceover to narrate the prologue. The rest of the pilot episode jumps to a late-teens Aragorn, off adventuring with Elrond's sons. Establish Aragorn and the Elves as the three primary characters.

The rest of Season One is vrious Middle Earth adventures that the writers can create entirely on their own, and incorporate Tolkien's lore whenever they want. In the last three episodes, Aragorn returns to Rivendell, meets Arwen and we see the start of a love story, and the season closes on the cliffhanger of Elrond telling Aragorn about his lineage. The season closes on Elrond's line "the days darken, and much evil is to come" directly from the book.

Season Two: Aragorn "laboured in the cause against Sauron." He meets Gandalf. The writers have free reign to do whatever they want here.

Season Three: Adventures with the Rohirrim, ends with a cliffhanger of Aragorn joining up with Gondor. Lots of LotR references in this season, and foreshadowing of events to come. Gandalf only shows up once, maybe twice as a cameo.

Season Four: The horrors of Mordor, reprieve in Lorien (Galadriel cameo!), Aragorn and Arwen fall in love, cliffhangar with Gilraen's death and Elrond telling Aragorn he must become the King and defeat Mordor.

Season Five: Climactic season that builds to all the events that lead into LotR (including tracking Gollum with Gandalf). Much battle and woe, and foreshadowing darkness. The season ends quiet and contemplative, with Aragorn checking into The Prancing Pony, sitting down in the corner, and lighting his pipe.

I want a Vicious-style sitcom starring the two gay blue wizards in the east. Make it happen!

Jackson confirmed what most had been suspecting already.

[quote]"Je ne suis pas impliqué du tout sur la série du Seigneur des Anneaux. Je comprends que mon nom puisse être cité, mais il n'y a rien qui se passe avec moi sur ce projet", nous a déclaré le Néo-Zélandais lorsqu'on lui a fait part de la rumeur.

I won't translate for you, says cunt at R73.

It's basic French, Jesus.

All it is is Peter Jackson saying he isn't involved in this series, not that anybody was really expecting he would be.

The door was open for him, as the article at r58 clearly states.

"I'm not involved at all with the Lord of the Rings series. I understand that my name can be quoted, but there is nothing happening with me on this project."

[quote]"I think you can know that we’re not remaking the movies, but we’re also not starting from scratch. So, it’ll be characters you love."

[quote]"The Peter Jackson conversations, right now we’re right in the middle of them. It’s like, how much do you want to be involved, how little? I know there’s been some discussion, and he’s even said some things, but as far as I’m aware, the latest is that we’re just in a conversation with him about how much or how little he would be involved."

Keep Jackson the fuck away from it. He's well and truly lost his magic touch.

[bold]‘The Lord Of the Rings’: Writers JD Payne & Patrick McKay To Develop Amazon Series[/bold]

[quote]After an extensive search, feature writers JD Payne and Patrick McKay have been tapped by Amazon Studios to develop the company’s high-profile The Lord of the Rings series.

[quote]JD Payne and Patrick McKay have been working together since meeting on the high school debate team more than two decades ago. Their most recent projects include writing Star Trek 4 for Paramount and producer J.J. Abrams, adapting Jungle Cruise for Disney and stars Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt, and setting up their original, 2017 Blacklist drama script Escape with producer Mike DeLuca.

Since the MCU has limited continuity, it's possible these guys feel viewers can accept recasts and deviations of gender, race, etc, to spice up their reboot. Maybe we'll end up with The Wiz version of LOTR....or the alphabet-soup LGBTQIAAA-etc version.

[quote]Maybe we'll end up with The Wiz version of LOTR....or the alphabet-soup LGBTQIAAA-etc version.

r82 I sure hope so. I definitely won't be watching if it just ends up being straight white people porn. Sorry, but that would come off as alt-right propaganda to me in this day and age. A bit like that Don't Breathe movie.

They really should have negotiated for the rights to The Silmarillion - it would have been a much more exciting story with the kinslaying, politicking, and lore.

If not that, the show have been The Lord of the Rings: The Fall of Numenor.

Won't happen as long as Christopher Tolkien is alive, R84, but he's 93.

I do hope to see a Numenor-based show in my lifetime, because damn that would be spectacular! And it'd be so fucking easy to draw parallels with the modern world...

So are shows like Blackish "black people porn"R83? It's a specific realm based on Europe in the Middle Ages, and only white people have a natural place there. No one is going to do a similar movie set in an African environment and stick a bunch of white people in there, are they?

r85 - Yeah, I've never quite understood why Christopher Tolkien has an issue with adapting it. I mean post-LotR and pre-Hobbit movie, he should have been more amenable, given the relative success of the former's adaptation.

Amazon is supposedly also looking into doing a Dark Tower series and Wheel of Time.

As R82, I wanted to mention that future incarnations of LOTR may not be bound to canon lore like the historical basis of the novels. After Jackson felt comfortable cowriting with JRR the Hobbit trilogies (utter blasphemy, but apparently profitable blasphemy), any respect for historical basis is fair play, in my opinion.

I'll just rewatch the original made-for-TV cartoons back from the 70s(?). "Frodoooooooh, of the nine finnnngers...."

Ooh, the "Wheel of Time", R87?

Great! It's a good story starring likeable leads, and hopefully Amazon will do what the HBO did for GRRM, and give the story the ruthless fucking editing it always needed.

[quote]give the story the ruthless fucking editing it always needed.

We can only hope - the series should never have gone to 14 books. It could easily have been done well in 10 or at most 12.

Yeah, not watching another adaptation. Infuriating idea. The Hobbot was infuriating enough.

They should adapt The Children Of Hurin or Beren and Luthien. Give GOT a run for its money in the sex and violence department. What with the rape and incest and dragons and naked elf women knocking the devil out etc.

[quote]They should adapt The Children Of Hurin or Beren and Luthien.

That's the overall strategy they should take with The Simarillion.

Adapt the individual stories into season long arcs with the main story of the recovery of the Silmarils in the background. Each of the big stories are linked together by a handful of recurring characters, but the central focus is on different characters each season.

Other tragedies worth doing would be the Fall of Gondolin and Earendil the Mariner.

I just don't want The Adventures of Young Aragorn, which you know is exactly what they'll end up doing.

Sadly, I think "The Adventures of Young Aragorn" is exactly what will play well for the vast majority of audiences. "The Hobbit" films demonstrated that they aen't particularly interested in remaining faithful to the source material, so I would guess Amazon will just inset barely enough of a hint of material from the Appendices to keel die hard Tolkien fans interested. Otherwise, they'll just do whatever they want.

I would give the series a shot, but it's gonna have to have really great original material in order for me to keep watching. Just setting a story in the world of Middle Earth isn't enough to keep me interested.

Once again, they don't have the rights to the Silmarillion. So quit wishing for stories from there, because it isn't going happen.

They do have the rights to the stories covered in the appendices of Lord of the Rings, which is what gives them this wiggle room.

Confirmed today that it's set during the Second Age.

Excited, disappointed?

[quote]Confirmed today that it's set during the Second Age.

So, Elendil, Isildur, and the Dúnedain. Arnor and Gondor leading to the Last Alliance of Men and Elves.

I wonder if they would recast Galadriel and Elrond since they would have been extremely important figures during the era. Sauron and Celebrimbor and the forging of the Rings of Power would figure heavily. I always imagined Sauron to be gorgeous during this period while he could still seem fair to behold.

Second age? WAY cool! There's a hell of a story to be found at the end of the age, with Sauron talking an evil and stupid king into destroying his own empire, and Elendil's "Faithful" surviving persecution and the ruin of Numenor and going on to found new nations on the mainland of Middle-Earth. It's story that has sympathetic heroes and vivid personalities to bring life to the drama, and gee, you think the fall of an empire led by an easily led idiot might have some resonance for our times?

I might sign up for Amazon Prime just to get this!

I'm happy to hear they are doing the Second Age, and that the rumor that it was about a young Aragorn is apparently untrue.

R71, I love those ideas. Too bad you're not a show runner for this!

So glad it's not a Young Aragorn series.

Cautiously optimistic...

[bold]‘Game of Thrones’ Alum Bryan Cogman Boards ‘Lord of the Rings’ Series at Amazon[/bold]

[quote]Cogman, who most recently worked as a writer and co-executive producer on “Game of Thrones,” [bold]has signed on to consult[/bold] on the upcoming “Lord of the Rings” series at Amazon, Variety has learned from sources. He will work alongside the writing team of JD Payne and Patrick McKay, who were announced to be developing the series for Amazon back in July.

So not a showrunner as was speculated earlier today.

Juan Antonio Bayona will direct

[quote]Bayona most recently directed Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, which grossed more than $1.3 billion worldwide. He also directed the features The Impossible, starring Naomi Watts and Ewan McGregor, and A Monster Calls, starring Sigourney Weaver, Liam Neeson, and Felicity Jones, as well as the first two episodes of Showtime’s hit series Penny Dreadful.

Okay, I wasn't on board until the Penny Dreadful part.

In other news, a large chunk of filming will be done in New Zealand. It was stated previously that it would be shot in Scotland, though I don't know if that's still the case.

[quote]Bayona’s first feature film, the critically acclaimed thriller The Orphanage, executive produced by Guillermo del Toro, premiered to a ten-minute standing ovation at the Cannes Film Festival and later won seven Goya Awards in Spain, including best new director.

Oops, I missed this part. Yeah, he's okay.

One of the leads has been cast. And he's one of those who are on my irrational hate list, so that's great. 😑

I hope it has hot nude Hobbit scenes.

r108 There will be no hobbits in this.

Have they said there won't be hobbits,. R109? While hobbits don't get to the Shire until the Third Age, they were presumably knocking around somewhere . They lived up north, where the Rohirrim came from, at one point, as I remember. .

R106, why is a food company handing out film awards?

r110 They haven't said it explicitly, I was going by this quote from Engadget.

[quote]The First Age and the Third Age of Middle-earth (in which the books are set) are both "off-limits" to the TV show, so don't expect to see hobbits, Gondorians or many familiar faces in the new adaptation.

I knew Scotland as a filming location would never work out.

[quote]Auckland beats Scotland to NZ$1.3bn contract for what is expected to be the most expensive TV series ever made

[quote]Filming for the NZ$1.3bn (£660m) series is slated to begin in the coming months at three sites across Auckland in the North Island. The capital Wellington had been considered but was ruled out due to all available studio space being taken up by Hollywood director James Cameron, who is filming his four Avatar sequels there.

[quote]The deal is seen as a win for the New Zealand film industry and a coup for the government, which had been involved in months of negotiations with Amazon while it weighed up location options.

I'd be surprised if they don't introduce hobbits, or proto-hobbits, as they existed in the Second Age. They are always the audience-identification characters for Middle-earth.

Hobbish.

Season 2 is already a go and being broken down in the writers room.

r116 Unsurprising but still, good news.

Do not let Peter Jackson anywhere near this.

LOL!

r119 Wow. You think he got too big for this show since the announcement?

So Poulter ghosted them.

Shit r119. That's not a good sign when your lead actor decides to walk away from the project.

Do you think Bezos will take revenge on him in some way?

Well when you pay zero in taxes that gives you lots of cash to spread around.

He's never going to work on an Amazon project again, that much is certain. No WaPo coverage either.

I’m sure Bezos isn’t losing much sleep over this. There are a million actors who can replaced fug Will Poulter, and cheaper, too.

Young Galadriel cast!

[quote]As for Clark, the rising star has had a huge year and expects to have an even busier 2020, starting with the A24 horror film “Saint Maud,” which premiered to rave reviews at Toronto. She is currently starring in HBO’s “His Dark Materials,” opposite James McAvoy, Ruth Wilson and Lin-Manuel Miranda.

[quote]In 2020, she also has the BBC retelling of “Dracula” premiering on Jan. 1 as well as Fox Searchlight’s “The Personal History of David Copperfield,” opposite Dev Patel, which debuted at the London Film Festival and opens domestically on May 8.

Starting with the Hobbit and ending with Bored of the Rings I read the books. That is sufficient. I had no interest in the movies and even loss with some Game of Thrones clone.

Galadriel's already about 5,000 years old by this point, so hardly young.

So young

"Young" from the viewpoint of other filmed productions, which are LOTR and The Hobbit. You'd think that much would be obvious to people. 🙄

Tolkien's elves are immortal. They stop aging at a certain point.

Poulter's replacement has been cast. Cutie.

*‘Amazon has too much goddamn money’

There’s another whole tale that could be made into a series about the literary rights. The Tolkein family sold their rights for peanuts back in the 70s, and they’re now principally owned by the heirs of a Jewish producer who appears to have been a total scumbucket — one of those types whose greed has no real point except screwing everyone down to win, and wraps their life in lawsuits, and then... and then, after making everyone’s life a total misery, they die. And then their money goes to charitable foundations, and you wonder why they couldn’t just ease back on the grasping while they were alive.

ROFL the cast has no names, they spent all the money on the rights

r136 Charlie Vickers is the only cute one in that bunch and believe me, I googled them all. Yikes. 😕

And by "cute", I mean he's a 7.

I actually don't mind that they don't have name actors in the series. I thought it was ridiculous to pay Cumberbatch to voice Smaug when you just needed a good voice actor.

Shmaug.

I don't mind no-names either but... where the hell are my hot elves?!

R139, I thought Cumberbatch signed to do the Smaug voice before "Sherlock" blew up and made him a star.

Not true r132. Elves do age as they go through their ridiculously long lives.

Cirdan is the oldest elf we meet in Tolkien's works, and he is described as looking "grey and old". Of course he was almost 11,000 years old at that point.

r32 Dark Tower project shelved.

Amazon is paying $465 million in production costs for the first season

When first announced, it was thought production costs could go as high as $150 million, which is assume in itself