Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, Quintus said:

@Jay

 

No doubt you'll notice I used a screenshot image to fully "quote" Nick1066 above. I'm curious how YOU would have achieved the same thing using only the forum tools, in mobile view. Because for the life of me I couldn't figure out how to quote both him and his embedded quotations. It seemed impossible.

 

I would say there's no need to quote his quotes; Just quote his post where it says "so it begins" or whatever and then add your commentary; There's no reason to have all the text he quoted copied AGAIN into your post too.  It's like when people post a picture, then people immediately reply, quoting the entire post including to the picture all over again, just to say haha or whatever.  We don't need to see the pic again there, just like we don't need to see the quotes again here.  Everyone knows what you're talking about, cause they just read his post before yours.


It certainly is possible on mobile or desktop ,though, if you really want to do it, you simply have to use the HTML view.  But again, I don't see the point of bothering with that, or a screenshot like you did, at all in this case, instead of simply clicking quote on his post, adding your reply, and moving on *shrug*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I disagree - I think context is always important for readabililty and comprehension. I'm not at all a fan of the "empty threaded" format for quotes within quotes in the more recent board software, it's nonsensical and unintuitive.

 

But thanks for the HTML tip. So how would I go about doing that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't I tell you - they can 'correct' Tolkien's work. You can almost sense the indignation in those comments. They seem to draw particular satisfaction over getting their hands on traditional franchises/works and defiling them (not to mention it gives them a large base audience, far better than starting from scratch). I said the hacks entrusted with the project would approach it accordingly and they undoubtedly will.

 

As for the worthless arseholes calling for it, well, you don't want to use a dubious term like 'virtue-signalling', but that's pretty much what it is. Anything to help them sleep better at night I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised you haven't encountered the phrase, it's been doing the rounds increasingly over the past year or so (for obvious reasons).

 

On related news, I saw this linked on TORN, wherein the author doesn't appear to grasp that they're not actually doing LOTR (yet). Some choice morsels:

 

Quote

This brings me on to casting. Whoever takes on the role is going to be under pressure, as the movie cast seems entrenched in people's minds. However, we're getting more used to reboots and regenerations, prequels and re-imaginings. I myself am Six Batmen old, my nephew is Three Spider-Men (counting live-action productions only). We get used to this sort of thing quite quickly. One issue, though, with Tolkien's unintentionally Eurocentric mythos is representation, seeing Arwen's role in the trilogy increased to counteract the lack of female roles. A faithful adaptation doesn't resolve this, nor the perpetual whiteness of the Fantasy genre on screen.

 

Una McCormack is an academic and fiction writer who's written for Star Trek and Doctor Who novel ranges, and is also a significant figure in the Lord Of The Rings fan-fiction community. I asked her about the potential TV series, and she noted that fan-fiction writers have changed characters' genders and skin colour “to brilliant effect. Why not on TV? This kind of expansion or interrogation of the original text strikes me as perhaps the only good reason for a TV adaptation, so soon after the films.” The TV format would allow viewers to “see some of the nuances of the politics of Rohan and Gondor, show the battle for Mirkwood, perhaps. Show the Haradrim and Easterlings in a sympathetic light. Create real characters with real concerns. Television is expansive: why not use the medium to bring Middle-earth to fullest life, and address seriously the lacunae and problems of the text?”

 

Incidentally, a great way to pass the time is to work out your cast for gender-flipped Lord Of The Rings (the cast of Brooklyn 99 featured heavily last time I tried it). I'm not expecting this to happen, but frankly as well as the improvement of representation on screen (and, on a purely financial level, the wider audience it would open up), I think it's fair to say that if you can cast Andre Braugher and Stephanie Beatriz then you should definitely cast Andre Braugher and Stephanie Beatriz.

 

I always love it when some talentless no-mark harps on about the 'lacunae and problems' of Tolkien's work. A few ideas for the new series:

 

- Good Orcs. How about a hard-working Orc with wife and kids. After all, they're not all bad.

- A refugee crisis in Harad, and Gondor facing a dilemma as to whether or not they should take them in. Even The Shire might be called upon to do their bit.

- I'm liking the gay Smeagal and Deagol thing, though all this obsessing over a 'ring' might be a little too on the nose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

 

Why would you even need to do that? What's next? Showing the orcs are not all bad?

 

You read my mind. See my edit.

 

In other news:

 

Sharon Tal Yguado, Head of Event Series at Amazon, has tweeted two hints:
 

 

 

 

 

Doesn't bode well if we're having to ask who Aragorn is now does it? That said, I always wanted to see An Adventures of Aragorn and Bombadil series.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Barnald said:

I'm surprised you haven't encountered the phrase, it's been doing the rounds increasingly over the past year or so (for obvious reasons).

 

On related news, I saw this linked on TORN, wherein the author doesn't appear to grasp that they're not actually doing LOTR (yet). Some choice morsels:

 

 

I always love it when some talentless no-mark harps on about the 'lacunae and problems' of Tolkien's work. A few ideas for the new series:

 

- Good Orcs. How about a hard-working Orc with wife and kids. After all, they're not all bad.

- A refugee crisis in Harad, and Gondor facing a dilemma as to whether or not they should take them in. Even The Shire might be called upon to do their bit.

- I'm liking the gay Smeagal and Deagol thing, though all this obsessing over a 'ring' might be a little too on the nose.

 

If this is the road they’re going down I’ll stick to my books!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BloodBoal said:

 

The world of Middle-Earth is not your books and maps, it's on TV!

Serialized and made contemporary and relatable to all demographics!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a HUGE amount of money !

 

http://www.premiere.fr/Series/News-Series/La-serie-Le-Seigneur-des-Anneaux-pourrait-couter-au-total-1-milliard-a-Amazon

 

 

On the project itself I don't know what to think as of right now.
For the music if we can't get Shore, I'd see McCReary with a proper orchestra, time and money !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so. Game of Thrones makes the same racist assumptions, that fantasy worlds are medieval Europe, with only whites as the main characters, and ethnicities as the outsiders from exotic lands. 

 

Except that ignores emigration, adoptions, and conquests that can spread races around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't follow - the author/franchise itself makes 'racist assumptions' (?), or the people who adapt/interpret it?

 

I stumbled across this and almost died:

 

https://www.tor.com/2017/11/15/how-would-you-cast-the-lord-of-the-rings-for-television/

 

Next we'll ask: 'Does Tolkien describe his characters in a way that they are clearly gender specific'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a participant in the Jackson films, I meant. We know enough about Tolkien's views on adapting The Lord of the Rings for the screen (especially from that big letter that he wrote on the matter) to believe that he's been spinning at least since 2001!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Glóin the Dark said:

As a participant in the Jackson films, I meant. We know enough about Tolkien's views on adapting The Lord of the Rings for the screen (especially from that big letter that he wrote on the matter) to believe that he's been spinning at least since 2001!

 

1978, more like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have it on good authority Tolkien loved Bakshi's adaptation, and indulged in no spinning on account of it. However, he was already spinning from the previous year's Rankin/Bass Hobbit, hence the confusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tolkien does describe most of his characters in gender specific ways, including using gendered pronouns in his prose and dialogue.

 

Old-timey Europe didn't have dragons, orcs, dwarves, or Tauriels, and the invention of golf was completely different!  So I'm pretty sure the color of people's skin wouldn't automatically correlate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Quintus said:

thanks for the HTML tip. So how would I go about doing that?

 

I was wrong, you don't even need to use HTML mode at all.  You just click the Quote icon and it creates a quote box, then you just copy and paste whatever text you want into the box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Jay said:

 

I was wrong, you don't even need to use HTML mode at all.  You just click the Quote icon and it creates a quote box, then you just copy and paste whatever text you want into the box.

 
Quote
16 hours ago, Quintus said:

thanks for the HTML tip. So how would I go about doing that?

 

 

Like that? Fiddlier and less elegant than it ought to be but I suppose it works.

 

I think I'll just keep using screenshots instead as it's quicker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, not like that.  You included the "16 hours ago quintus said" part for some reason, and didn't click the black bar that removes formatting after pasting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BloodBoal said:

For some reason, I thought I remembered both Rankin/Bass movies came later. Well, 1977 it is, then!

 

I think I recall there might have been another film in 1977 that may have overshadowed it. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which one? The film with a wizard wielding a sword that glows blue and sacrifices himself during a battle with an evil spectre within a cavernous enemy stronghold as his friends flee? Hmm... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Hawmy said:

 

Is this a joke? I can't actually tell.

 

At first I thought it was, but then I realized the author has put too much thought into it (not logical thought of course, hence why we end up with inexplicable, frankly laughable familial compositions).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That post was written by someone called "Stubby the Rocket."  So with that in mind, yeah, it was about what you'd expect.  The words of a moron. If only it were parody.

 

Every time I get annoyed with someone here and think their ideas are wacked I look at other genre sites and see how good we have it here.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.