Barnald

Yeah, the only real unknowns were Orlando Bloom, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, and perhaps some of the Australian/New Zealand talent, though obviously you'd have been more familiar with the likes of Miranda Otto, David Wenham and John Noble if you were from those parts.

Lol

Given the differences between the film score and the OST in the case of AUJ, they'll have to take a different approach with that at least.

At least the 5 months will give Mr Shore plenty of time to score episodes 1 and 2. As for the rest, well we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. While there's still hope, I'll cling desperately to it.

It's interesting that the scenes of Legolas hopping on the Dwarves' heads was filmed in early June 2012. Is it safe then to say that Jackson hadn't yet decided to move to 3 films? Then again, I guess it made sense to film as much as possible in any case. I recall the news coming out just before or after SDCC I think, so presumably he must have been giving it serious thought by late June.

My own belief is that Jackson was ultimately compelled to go with three films (and I'm not saying this was his only reason, just perhaps the most pressing) because he had grave concerns over the projected film one (of two) being completed on time. If you think that by around June 2012 they decided to re-do Azog entirely (I think Manu Bennett was posting about mo-capping stuff as late as July/early August), and yet probably still had to animate massive CGI sequences - Beorn, Mirkwood/Spiders, the barrel chase, Gandalf/Necromancer - I just don't see how they could have done it in time. The production hadn't exactly been smooth given the delay caused by Jackson's ulcer, and I'm not wholly convinced that they'd filmed enough in that first block to cover three films (if anything, they needed far more time here, given a good chunk of BOFA hadn't been shot, plus they were probably thinking of two three-hour films plus 45-minute or more EE's). But moving to three films probably made sense to Jackson, because it would - at least in the short term - ease the pressure on his crew, and I'm sure he thought Warner Bros would lap up the idea if he could sell it to them. And obviously, I doubt he was going to stress to them that they were behind schedule, so he probably felt it best to come up with the editorial/footage argument. I should add that I'm ultimately happy with the decision, because I love AUJ, and the climax is one of the reasons why. The climax of the two-film version always struck me as sounding a bit iffy, not least since I'm not a big fan of sudden cliffhanger endings (which we would eventually get with DoS). But then ending AUJ there, there was always going to be too much left for one sequel, and I get the idea of leaving Smaug's fate up in the air for film three, even if that's something I did change for my own edit. I think the antagonists argument is a little unfair, given that Smaug aside, the book barely has one. And if you take Azog as the book's Bolg - which he essentially is for the purposes of being the non-Smaug antagonist - well, he's an Orc, how much depth can he have? Physical menace who is hellbent on destruction, sounds about right to me. I guess they tried to give him a little depth with the direct revenge and pact with the Necromancer arc, as well as showing him to be a decent tactician of sorts, but there's only so much you can do with an Orc. That said, I grant that I'd have liked the Great Goblin to be a bit more menacing, per some of the original designs, yet for that to work you'd almost certainly have to omit the songs and not use Barry Humphries.

BB's videos were a godsend when I was doing my own edits last year, I'd have been lost without them. Thank Christ I did it then rather than now.

I still might not necessarily watch it, but at least then I could watch it blindfolded.

This will do:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-lord-of-the-rings-veterans-favorite-things-11563971720?fbclid=IwAR0sBbFBxT1QdeSBEd-pWvRKLiLQpoNVWtQWnuRlqLhGySRR4o5JnbuN8Jg Shore has a Numenorean helmet on his desk. I think we all know what this means.

With regard to the Tolkien Estate - do we even know what the current custodians are like with regard to the material? Obviously no one expects them to be as militant as Christopher, and the fact that they've softened their stance on licencing says a lot, but I wonder if this apparent power to veto is paying lip-service to their role as Christopher's successors, as guardians of Tolkien's work if you will. I guess we won't find out until the show is in full swing, but given how much Amazon have paid I'm not expecting the Estate to be all that meddlesome. And as for Shippey, I think the fact that he hasn't really met any of the writing team yet is instructive. I read something recently about the apparent Tolkien advisor on The Hobbit and Shadows of Mordor (lol), who said something about her role being to make sure that the filmmakers/developers stayed within the boundaries of the material that was available to them. And given the scope of Shippey's interview, and the area in which he seems most knowledgeable (in relation to the production I mean), I suspect that his role here is a similar one. And finally we're getting the 'sequel' we've all been waiting for. Angus MacFadyen about to show that upstart Chris Pine who the real Robert the Bruce is. He'll probably get his dick out as well just to hammer home the point.

Just a couple of many: This is going to be fun. 'Old white man' Tolkien about to get the woke treatment.

I stumbled across one of her tweets: I think the show is in good hands.

The 'writing consultant' is especially peculiar. She has no real credits aside from being an Assistant Editor on a handful of productions. Certainly nothing in terms of writing for film/TV, and no online profile. You'd think... nevermind. Anyway if turns out to be anything other than stupendously awful and a thorough defiling of Tolkien's writing and world I'll sell my arse on Amazon.