Jump to content

Amazon buys up Middle-earth, it searches the One Ring! (Rings of Power news thread)


Recommended Posts

Again, as long as it is from Tolkien's writing, lets not fuss about which of his pieces its from:

 

"The Hobbit" (1966) is Bilbo-centric.

"Durin's Folk" is Thorin-centric.

 

Jackson pulled more from the latter, you'd have pulled from the former. Since they both deal with the same story, it was very much within Jacksons' prerogative to choose the way he did, and I like it better that way. You'd have liked it the other way around - that's fair. But both are faitful adaptations, and its not fair to criticise the one by comparing it to the other or the other's source material - the ol' apples and kumquats comparison.

 

Like I said, I was glad to learn that there's a good fan-cut that reinstitutes the narrative of The Hobbit (1966) for the likes of you - to each his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

16 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Again, as long as it is from Tolkien's writing, lets not fuss about which of his pieces its from:

 

"The Hobbit" (1966) is Bilbo-centric.

"Durin's Folk" is Thorin-centric.

 

Jackson pulled more from the latter, you'd have pulled from the former. Since they both deal with the same story, it was very much within Jacksons' prerogative to choose the way he did, and I like it better that way. You'd have liked it the other way around - that's fair. But both are faitful adaptations, and its not fair to criticise the one by comparing it to the other - the ol' apples and kumquats comparison.

 

Oh crikey, the name of the took is The Hobbit.

 

And it's not me. Almost any other filmmaker would have focused on Bilbo's story.  There's a reason, Chen G. why these films are held in such low regard by most Tolkien fans, and why they aren't beloved the way the LOTR films are. You are in a decided, decided minority on this point. 

 

Yes, yes. It's Jackson's prerogative. Everyone knows that. The fact that he was given carte blanche on these films, with no one to answer to is part of the problem. Yes, they were his choices, and the films suffered for that.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

Oh crikey, the name of the book is The Hobbit.

 

Its The Hobbit only by name.

 

Its Thorin's story, and its all the better for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm genuinely glad that you find a lot to like in The Hobbit movies, Chen!  I hope that our complaining doesn't take that away from you in any way. 

 

I've liked all of the new Star Wars movies, and been continuously frustrated that the majority of real conversation around these parts was trashing, leading to debates on quality.  I'm sure everyone being down on The Hobbit could have the same affect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Hobbit "debates" have actually been very civil, in contrast to the trash in the Star Wars threads. 

 

And I actually admire Chen G's love & passion for the films, even though I mostly disagree with him. He's way off base, and wrong of course. But I respect his opinion nonetheless. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who loves AUJ, and likes parts of the other two (moreso now since I'm editing them, but I'm not a miracle worker), I too get somewhat frustrated when I read all the hate, but each to their own. While I admire Chen's attempts to defend the films (and he has every right to do so), this is precisely the kind of thing I can't be arsed with doing, since I'm never going to change anyone's minds, it's just a waste of time. And as I said, it is entirely their prerogative to dislike the films.

 

I do however object to citing the reviews of 'professional' critics and bloggers as some kind of evidence that these films are a 'travesty'. If someone feels that way, that's fine, but I fail to see the merit in efforts to develop some kind of concordance that a film is unequivocally awful, or that everyone in the world hated a film, based on the likes of RT and reviewers (they can have a view sure, but I'm not going to privilege it ahead of others). These are the same types who raved over Get Out, which I found to be a laughable piece of garbage, but there you go. I could probably trawl through the many thousands of reviews of The Hobbit films on the likes of Amazon, IMDB, Metacritic, etc and suggest to you on that basis that general audience reaction was positive, but that would be A) still based on a comparatively small sample; and B) a pointless exercise, since, of course, anyone who disliked the film would still feel the same way, knowing they're in an apparent minority or otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone here "hates" The Hobbit films. I certainly don't.  If I hated them I couldn't be bothered to discuss them.

 

I just think they're deeply flawed, and a product of a talented but unrestrained director who gave into excess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

I don't think anyone here "hates" The Hobbit films.

 

Speak for yourself. I hate them unabashedly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, there's a LOT to love in The Hobbit films on the micro level, and a lot to be enthusiastic about even, but there's also a lot I don't like including the Whole. Having seen each at least three times (twice theatrical and once extended), I probably won't make an effort to see them again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, mstrox said:

For me, there's a LOT to love in The Hobbit films on the micro level, and a lot to be enthusiastic about even, but there's also a lot I don't like including the Whole. Having seen each at least three times (twice theatrical and once extended), I probably won't make an effort to see them again.

 

This, basically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the great shame about that trilogy. There's an absolute goldmine of wonderful little character moments and minor sequences dotted out throughout the trilogy. But the overall bluster of the storytelling (too many awful decisions including completely superfluous character development) and absurd run-time of each movie conspire to undermine and dominate all of it. 

 

It's a classic case of total lack of discipline following on from big success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't like it if I didn't find something to like about the whole.

 

Again, thinking about it in terms of Bilbo as the protagonist and Thorin and co. as the supporting cast, I can see where you'd get that impression; but if you reverse that, I think it works, because it lends itself to this mould of storytelling: trilogy, long movies, grandly scaled plot, large-scale action sequences, dour tone, etcetra...

 

It also changes this story from the all-too-well trodden road of the Hero's Journey which Bilbo goes through, and turns it into a story thick with patriotic subtext. I'm not a patriotic man, but I could sympathize with the Dwarves' conviction and love for their homeland and some of the most moving moments of the trilogy for me have nothing to do with a relationship between characters and everything to do with the connection between the Dwarves and their homeland - like the way they behold it from across the misty lake.

 

Also, by choosing to infuse the story with this theme, they've given the company a much more noble cause, but a provincial one, nonetheless and - as such - one that is open to subversion. When Bard and Thorin argue, it doesn't feel an argument laden on any one side. If anything, the time spent in Laketown had made us see more of the value in Bard's point-of-view.

 

I actually find that all the issues to be had with this trilogy exist in a far greater extent in Jackson's King Kong: its much more poorly-paced than any of these three films, has many more characters that don't feel as well realized or whose stories aren't as well resolved, has poorer special effects - and I still like that movie, as well.

 

So to me, The Hobbit is a step in the right direction from Kong, not to mention The Lovely Bones. Had Jackson had more time to shape the film as he truly wanted - I believe it would have been much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Some chap on TORN who joined fairly recently is claiming to have been involved in the bids process. It's kind of interesting so I'll relate his posts here, but I'm really not sure if I believe him (the idea of a bunch of execs almost high-fiving each other at the prospect of Gandalf arriving at the end of season five or six just doesn't sound convincing to me - I find it much more realistic that they'd say 'Why can't this happen at the end of season one?'):

 

Quote

Once upon a time a mildly evil overlord called for submissions in what was to be the most expensive TV show of all time. One entrant was an established Hollywood screenwriter who took the extraordinary step of bringing his absolutely uncredentialed younger brother, a destitute roofer from Albany, NY, into the overlord's stronghold to pitch the show with him. Now the younger brother had no background in the industry, and barely any publications at all; indeed all he had to offer was one familial tie, a literature degree, and a lifelong devotion to an author. But these, for once, were the very gifts that were needed.

The brothers spent weeks knocking up a proposal, fielding radical changes from on high (chiefly the news that the overlord no longer wanted young Aragorn as originally requested, but to recount the creation of the rings of power--after two weeks spent lovingly laying out the ranger king's biography). And when the time came the rich brother sent the poor brother a plane ticket, spent a day making final adjustments with him in his palatial LA home, and bundled him into his Tesla to brace the overlord's minions in their Californian fastness. And they acquitted themselves well, in the end; the meeting went over two hours and could have gone another two, everybody seemed reluctant to leave, and when all was done they felt they stood fair to win.

That night they had a quiet celebration with some old friends, and the older brother talked a while about how things would go if they actually won: how a squad of strong writers would be hired and episodes assigned by the brothers to one or another, always keeping their favorite bits for themselves, and then the brothers would edit the drafts as it pleased them. How teams of fine artisans would swing into motion almost before the writing started, on every aspect of production. How they would have much to say about casting, about locations, about soundtrack. And he spoke a little about the money, which would start out at a ridiculous level for the poor brother, and after four or five years of success vault upward to a level that felt ridiculous even to the rich one. It was a glorious day. They had done well, undoubtedly; the TV people practically high-fived when they finally came to Gandalf's arrival by ship at the end of season five or six, and these are people who pride themselves on their poker face. The lifelong rapport of brothers who tweak storylines for fun anyway paid off; it was a stronger proposal than one writer would be. And their intensely nerdy charts, their poster-sized maps, their ability to quote the text, all bore fruit. They managed to say almost everything they'd wanted to. And somehow even the younger brother, who by rights should have been cowed all along, had come through with the easy confidence of an expert in the field. But he was, after all, that day. He knew the book well, could see the influences of Malory and Beowulf and Wilde in turn, knew the author's history. It was a fantasy come to life, in a way, as in the movie Pixels: the dream useless people have, of waking one day to find that their silly and obscure specialties, the lazy habits on which they have wasted thousands of hours, are suddenly the very skills on which the whole world turns.

The next day the brothers were told they were tied for first place with four bids left standing. But now--and this was a surprise--the process was to be handed over to the Tolkien estate. Handed over how? Would they read meeting transcripts, or be provided summaries by Amazon? There was no knowing. Perhaps two weeks went by before the brothers were told that only two contestants remained: themselves, and the writer of an award-winning recent feature in another genre. And the elder brother was to meet Tolkien's grandson Simon, alone.

After that weeks went by, during which some rumor broke about the story focusing on young Aragorn, which if true would mean the brothers had lost; but the older brother waved this off as baseless, saying rumors of this kind always arise and are usually months out of date at best. All the while the question stood at the toss of a coin. Be king of all things, or be nobody at all, for the younger brother. But after weeks more, the curious word came down that the estate had refused both bids hand the two powers were regrouping to begin again. This was followed before long by dark rumors that Peter Jackson had been wakened from his torpor and now threatened to bring the whole project under his dominion, as in olden days. But now there was no way to get at the truth of it.

There still remained a thread of foolish hope; as long as no one had been chosen, perhaps somehow the field would clear again and there would be another chance to make the case. And all the time the young brother kept taking notes, kept chewing over the now hopeless storylines, expanding them. It is a delightful sandbox to play in.

More recently, by which I mean just in the last day or so, it turns out that probably that news about the estate declining both top bids was just wrong, and most likely the other bid simply won. But it's a little hard to tell through all the telephone game. At any rate, that door is closed. The older brother moves on to other projects and the younger remains a roofer in upstate New York. Not a particularly good roofer.

If there is any moral to this story, it is that precious little of what any of us think we know about the forthcoming show is real and current. It's just too soon for any of us to be hearing anything yet.

 

Quote

No corroboration per se. The source is, on May 2, I was sitting in the room with Jennifer Salke and a few other minions, pitching the show. I'm the younger brother, the one with no business in Hollywood. I was just being goofy when I wrote that up in third person, sorry. I thought it'd be more obvious.

I had a Hollywood adventure and almost ruled the world, but didn't win. And one of the smaller lessons I learned along the way is that the rumors you hear are generally complete bunk. (Including me, really; what I'm telling you is true, but it's also months out of date and limited to the pov of one screwball bit player.)

 

Quote

I was being confusing, I realize now. So: I am allowed to do whatever, as no one ever signed any contract with me, but believe me I'm not going to name any names, and if I knew anything about what's actually going to happen, I wouldn't tell you, and anyway I don't.

I mean I named Jennifer, and in fact I'm only 99% percent sure the Jennifer I briefly met was her, since they were all about first names in there--but you already knew she was involved.

Proud, sure, I had a great time. It was of course heartbreaking to lose in the end. But it was fun.

As for improbable, that's because you're thinking of it backward. I'm not a TORn user who happened to luck into that team; I was a job applicant who took the (obvious, I think) step of getting myself quietly established on TORn the second the chase was up. I'd have been nuts not to. If the winner isn't on here, well--tell him from me that he's missing the boat. Nobody should try this thing without a direct line to the most serious Tolkien nerds the internet has to offer.

Check the threads I started. They were all fact-check missions. Access to you lot was one of my central credentials.

 

Quote

Well, do recall that at the time I had something to hide. Had I won out, it would have been important to stay anonymous here; I have worried from time to time that my fact-checking would become too obvious.

At any rate it is true that the second age is troublesome for those reasons--the rights framework was very odd, in that we apparently couldn't use anything that was stated only in the Silmarillion or the Hobbit, or any text beyond LOTR, but we were also not allowed to contradict any of that, as far as I heard. (Although of course that can't be true absolutely.) So talking about Numenor, as I said, becomes nigh impossible. And indeed, when we were working up a second age pitch, we were indeed going to make changes, as I think anyone would have to--beginning with that preposterously telescoped historical timeline, at the risk of Otaku's displeasure. For one thing it is either impossible to have any meaningful human characters (if you cover any significant number of world events) because they die off so fast, or impossible to retell the major historical developments we're given (if you don't alter the timeline) because all your humans and hobbits and even dwarves will die of old age between one significant event and the next.

I thought of ways to examine that tension, between immortal elves and fleeting humans, but really if you want that oddity of this world to be under direct examination, the story of Arwen and Aragorn is the obvious place to conduct your inquiry, since that one involves the most different angles on it.

So we were going to sink Numenor ahead of schedule, when Eregion is barely begun, and have the palantiri reveal the cataclysm to the exiles, and just strand Elendil and company pretty much from go. A massive alteration, yes. Believe me, I felt a twinge of conscience every time we proposed a change--but to change nothing leaves you with a story that's very difficult to make watchable at all. All apart from the tangled situation about the rights.

As I meant to add earlier, we also couldn't use the name Annatar, but were in questionable waters calling him anything else during that period; in the end I think we would have been saved by the knowledge that Dr. T himself used several variants on the name, so we could have invented another, equally similar, variant that he was not known to have used, and argued it was close enough--again it isn't strictly loyal to the text but the puzzles are difficult in places.

Anyway. So yes, it's perfectly true to say that the second age is an impractical headache. Also true that I was cheerfully prepared to undertake it anyway. Look, I wasn't trying to give you guys better information than you had, not then.

 

Go here for the rest: http://newboards.theonering.net/forum/gforum/perl/gforum.cgi?post=946980;sb=post_time;so=DESC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;guest=206510448

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of the second age stuff anyway.

 

Originally, Tolkien had no conception of ages, since what we now know as the events of "The First Age" were meant to be the entirety of his Legendarium. Tolkien was so enamored with his own creation that even short stories he concieved of (Tom Bombadil, Rovarandom, The Hobbit) were being linked to elements of that world, and when he wrote The Lord of the Rings he contextualized The Hobbit by placing it at in the same geography as the world of his "Great Tales" but in a different timeframe - hence The Third Age was born.

 

As a result, Tolkien had two decently fleshed-out ages, but - outside of the fall of Numenor - The Second Age functions as little more than an interstitial piece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If sincere, I didn't consider the idea that they couldn't use The Hobbit. I know they wouldn't really need to since much of the relevant information would be in LOTR, but still, interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

I'm not a fan of the second age stuff anyway.

 

Originally, Tolkien had no conception of ages, since what we now know as the events of "The First Age" were meant to be the entirety of his Legendarium. Tolkien was so enamored with his own creation that even short stories he concieved of (Tom Bombadil, Rovarandom, The Hobbit) were being linked to elements of that world, and when he wrote The Lord of the Rings he contextualized The Hobbit by placing it at in the same geography as the world of his "Great Tales" but in a different timeframe - hence The Third Age was born.

 

As a result, Tolkien had two decently fleshed-out ages, but - outside of the fall of Numenor - The Second Age functions as little more than an interstitial piece.

 

The problem is that Tolkien's legendarium is vast, magnificent, and utterly unwieldy. The whole thing exists or is hinted at in appendicces and postumous works, carefully, if not flawlessly assembled by his son.

 

And there's a certain charm in that which I don't think will remain when Hollywood, be it payed by Amazon or anyone else gets their hands on it.

 

Also, TV shows usually depends on interesting characters. And there are very very few outside The Hobbit and LOTR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, John said:

I still maintain that a TV or film adaption of the story of Beren and Luthien, if done right, has the potential to be a masterpiece.

 

Plus Viggo already wrote a main theme for the score!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

 

The problem is that Tolkien's legendarium is vast, magnificent, and utterly unwieldy. The whole thing exists or is hinted at in appendicces and postumous works, carefully, if not flawlessly assembled by his son.

 

And there's a certain charm in that which I don't think will remain when Hollywood, be it payed by Amazon or anyone else gets their hands on it.

 

Also, TV shows usually depends on interesting characters. And there are very very few outside The Hobbit and LOTR.

 

Yep. Your recent Tolkien re-read has served you well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, John said:

I still maintain that a TV or film adaption of the story of Beren and Luthien, if done right, has the potential to be a masterpiece.

 

Absolutely.

 

It was always my thinking that the Silmarillion could make a great quadrology centred around the great tales: starting with The Tale of Beren and Luthien (with a quick exploration of the theft of the Silmarils and Feanor reaching Angband as the usual "James Bond Opening"), a two-part Children of Hurin adaptation (with the Brodda bit switched up such that it happens before Bar En Danwedh is assaulted and involves the outalws, and with Turin and Gwindor going off to Nargothrond as the closing of the first film), and a film about Tuor and the Fall of Gondolin, with the essentials of "the Wandering of Hurin" and the tale of the Nauglamir as the action opening of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe a Beren and Luthien movie, a TV show chronologically covering The Children of Húrin, Of Tuor and His Coming to Gondolin, The Wanderings of Húrin, and The Nauglafring, and finally a movie of The Fall of Gondolin. Then maaaybe a ‘prequel’ movie centered on Fëanor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Adventures of Tom Bombadil would be a real treat. 

 

"And Tom fought the Barrow Wight with help from Bill Ferny and-WHOAH-Legolas comes in and jumps on top of it..."

 

Maybe not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I wonder how much bullshit they'll be allowed to get away with.

This is what we have in Shadow of Mordow/War:

-Celebrimbor helped make all the Rings, including The One, which he used for a while to brainwash orcs and lead an army against Sauron, but it betrayed him at the last second

-He survived as a wraith and has latched himself to a Ranger of the Black Gate who was killed with his family when it was taken between The Hobbit and LotR, but thus "survives" and cannot die

-They make a new One Ring together, which Shelob in a sexy human from takes from them, then gives back because they want to use it against Sauron

-Gollum also helps "The Bright Lord" because of this ring

-We learn Shelob was a lover of Sauron who tried to sacrifice her

-The main point is "dominating" and ruling orcs and Olog-Hai by means of mind-control

-Mordor has a Bombadil-like nature guardian spirit who takes the form of a female Groot or various beasts, and we mount her to fight a woken Balrog in full Kaiju style

-Minas Ithil was taken by the Nazgul between The Hobbit and LotR, even though they mention the last King of Gondor being drawn out into his fatal clash with the Witch-King

-Isildur and Helm Hammerhand are among the Nazgul

-Sauron appears in his full battle armor or as Annatar with no problems

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/8/2018 at 10:08 PM, Nick1066 said:

I don't think anyone here "hates" The Hobbit films. I certainly don't.  If I hated them I couldn't be bothered to discuss them.

 

I just think they're deeply flawed, and a product of a talented but unrestrained director who gave into excess.

 

I haven't watched the Hobbits films and they're not high on my to-watch list, but I'd argue that Jackson's "giving into access" started with TTT and got considerably worse with RotK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Holko said:

I wonder how much bullshit they'll be allowed to get away with.

This is what we have in Shadow of Mordow/War:

-Celebrimbor helped make all the Rings, including The One, which he used for a while to brainwash orcs and lead an army against Sauron, but it betrayed him at the last second

-He survived as a wraith and has latched himself to a Ranger of the Black Gate who was killed with his family when it was taken between The Hobbit and LotR, but thus "survives" and cannot die

-They make a new One Ring together, which Shelob in a sexy human from takes from them, then gives back because they want to use it against Sauron

-Gollum also helps "The Bright Lord" because of this ring

-We learn Shelob was a lover of Sauron who tried to sacrifice her

-The main point is "dominating" and ruling orcs and Olog-Hai by means of mind-control

-Mordor has a Bombadil-like nature guardian spirit who takes the form of a female Groot or various beasts, and we mount her to fight a woken Balrog in full Kaiju style

-Minas Ithil was taken by the Nazgul between The Hobbit and LotR, even though they mention the last King of Gondor being drawn out into his fatal clash with the Witch-King

-Isildur and Helm Hammerhand are among the Nazgul

-Sauron appears in his full battle armor or as Annatar with no problems

 

 

You're making this up, yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly, no. The games can still be pretty fun if you try to ignore it's supposed to be Middle-Earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TGP said:

You're making this up, yes?

 

He’s talking about a video game, FYI. But yes, it’s all true (and inexcusably un-Tolkienish even considering it’s a video game, IMO).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Holko said:

I wonder how much bullshit they'll be allowed to get away with.

This is what we have in Shadow of Mordow/War:

-Celebrimbor helped make all the Rings, including The One, which he used for a while to brainwash orcs and lead an army against Sauron, but it betrayed him at the last second

-He survived as a wraith and has latched himself to a Ranger of the Black Gate who was killed with his family when it was taken between The Hobbit and LotR, but thus "survives" and cannot die

-They make a new One Ring together, which Shelob in a sexy human from takes from them, then gives back because they want to use it against Sauron

-Gollum also helps "The Bright Lord" because of this ring

-We learn Shelob was a lover of Sauron who tried to sacrifice her

-The main point is "dominating" and ruling orcs and Olog-Hai by means of mind-control

-Mordor has a Bombadil-like nature guardian spirit who takes the form of a female Groot or various beasts, and we mount her to fight a woken Balrog in full Kaiju style

-Minas Ithil was taken by the Nazgul between The Hobbit and LotR, even though they mention the last King of Gondor being drawn out into his fatal clash with the Witch-King

-Isildur and Helm Hammerhand are among the Nazgul

-Sauron appears in his full battle armor or as Annatar with no problems

 

 

Cool!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

For me, 

 

 

a series called The Lord of the Rings set before the events of the fellowship would have to be second age and deal with the forging of the great Rings and the Last Alliance. The maps they’re sharing on social media are suggesting a pre-Rohan era too so that’d fit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty certain the series won't actually be called "The Lord of the Rings". 

 

To me, as long as the central conflict is "The Dark Lord vs. The Free People", I'm down.

 

As for Shore possibly chipping in - glorious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they will call it The Lord of the Rings. It’s the marketable name. People already know the name. It had three super successful films behind it and it’s the name they’re already using on social media. 

 

Sauron will surely be the big bad of the series. They’re going to want to be able to market pre-existing images for this series. Narsil, the one ring, the great eye. 

 

2nd age allows them to do so much of that and have it tie into the films. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2018 at 10:44 AM, Holko said:

I wonder how much bullshit they'll be allowed to get away with.

This is what we have in Shadow of Mordow/War:

-Celebrimbor helped make all the Rings, including The One, which he used for a while to brainwash orcs and lead an army against Sauron, but it betrayed him at the last second

-He survived as a wraith and has latched himself to a Ranger of the Black Gate who was killed with his family when it was taken between The Hobbit and LotR, but thus "survives" and cannot die

-They make a new One Ring together, which Shelob in a sexy human from takes from them, then gives back because they want to use it against Sauron

-Gollum also helps "The Bright Lord" because of this ring

-We learn Shelob was a lover of Sauron who tried to sacrifice her

-The main point is "dominating" and ruling orcs and Olog-Hai by means of mind-control

-Mordor has a Bombadil-like nature guardian spirit who takes the form of a female Groot or various beasts, and we mount her to fight a woken Balrog in full Kaiju style

-Minas Ithil was taken by the Nazgul between The Hobbit and LotR, even though they mention the last King of Gondor being drawn out into his fatal clash with the Witch-King

-Isildur and Helm Hammerhand are among the Nazgul

-Sauron appears in his full battle armor or as Annatar with no problems

 

Yeah that is pretty much why I couldn't stand those two games. Tolkien is rolling in his grave like a spindle because of the travesty they inflict upon his secondary world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Bilbo said:

Sauron will surely be the big bad of the series. They’re going to want to be able to market pre-existing images for this series. Narsil, the one ring, the great eye. 

 

But that's true of every story in Tolkien's work. Even if they do go with the journies of Aragorn, well than we know Aragorn "laboured in the cause against Sauron."

 

However, the Second Age does mean that some of the trappings of the series will be largely absent, namely Hobbits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mstrox said:

There's a possibility that Tauriel could be alive in the second age, yes?

 

She was too young to recall the war with Angmar, so no.

 

The films seem to imply she's about 600 years old which is presumably where (in the world of the films) the Woodland Realm dropped out of the struggle with Angmar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Second Age?!? If anything was going to get Shore to come on board, it's a different but incredibly exciting setting (that and a huge wad of cash).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.