Hobbit movie announcement

In message <news:47711354$0$9170$607ed4bc@cv.net>
"John W. Kennedy" <jwkenne.TakeThisOut@attglobal.net> spoke these staves:
>
> Bill O'Meally wrote:
>>
>> Glenn Holliday wrote:
>>>
>>> If Tolkien left notes about the Old Took, Brandybucks in the Old
>>> Forest, or the relationships between Hobbits and Men at Bree, I
>>> could see developing a new story. I would hate to see a new
>>> script that had no grounding in Tolkien's words.
>>
>> I can't see the Tolkien Estate allowing it.
>
> Unfortunately, the Tolkien Estate has no control.

Not over anything based on the text of LotR and TH, but anything
based on notes Tolkien may have left 'about the Old Took, Brandybucks
in the Old Forest' etc. is very much controlled by the Estate. They
couldn't, for instance, use anything from 'The Adventures of Tom
Bombadil' or 'Bombadil Goes Boating' or from the additional material
published in the HoMe series or 'The Quest of Erebor' or 'The Hunt
for the Ring' (both of which could have been beneficial for the
films).

So, with respect to the specific idea mentioned of basing a script on
notes left by Tolkien, that does seem out the question (meaning that
any script for such items would have to have 'no grounding in
Tolkien's words.').

> Tolkien sold the movie rights to "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the
> Rings" many years ago, in the belief that it would be impossible
> actually to make the film.

So far his guess has proved pretty accurate -- though that hasn't
stopped people from making the attempt . . .

I'm not sure, though, that he believed it impossible -- he had seen
and commented the Zimmerman Story-line, and thus he knew what might
be the result.

On the other hand Tolkien did sum up the issue quite well in one of
his letters -- 'Either very profitable terms indeed ; or absolute
author's veto on objectionable features or alterations.' (#202 to
Christopher Tolkien, 1957). Since he renounced all control of the
art, I just hope that he found the agreement 'very profitable
indeed'.

--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.

They both savoured the strange warm glow of being much
more ignorant than ordinary people, who were only ignorant
of ordinary things.
- Discworld scientists at work, /Equal Rites/ (Terry Pratchett)

Troels Forchhammer wrote:
> In message <news:47711354$0$9170$607ed4bc@cv.net>
> "John W. Kennedy" <jwkenne RemoveThis @attglobal.net> spoke these staves:
>> Bill O'Meally wrote:
>>> Glenn Holliday wrote:
>>>> If Tolkien left notes about the Old Took, Brandybucks in the Old
>>>> Forest, or the relationships between Hobbits and Men at Bree, I
>>>> could see developing a new story. I would hate to see a new
>>>> script that had no grounding in Tolkien's words.
>>> I can't see the Tolkien Estate allowing it.
>> Unfortunately, the Tolkien Estate has no control.
>
> Not over anything based on the text of LotR and TH, but anything
> based on notes Tolkien may have left 'about the Old Took, Brandybucks
> in the Old Forest' etc. is very much controlled by the Estate. They
> couldn't, for instance, use anything from 'The Adventures of Tom
> Bombadil' or 'Bombadil Goes Boating' or from the additional material
> published in the HoMe series or 'The Quest of Erebor' or 'The Hunt
> for the Ring' (both of which could have been beneficial for the
> films).
>
> So, with respect to the specific idea mentioned of basing a script on
> notes left by Tolkien, that does seem out the question (meaning that
> any script for such items would have to have 'no grounding in
> Tolkien's words.').

I'm wondering if one could ground an "inbetween" movie in an expansion
of the historical accounts given in the Appendices. There's certainly
some stuff there (e.g. the early days of Aragorn and Arwen) and I would
think the studio would be on pretty solid ground claiming that their
license of LotR includes the Appendices. (I'm not a lawyer, but I do
play one on YouTube!)

>> Tolkien sold the movie rights to "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the
>> Rings" many years ago, in the belief that it would be impossible
>> actually to make the film.
>
> So far his guess has proved pretty accurate -- though that hasn't
> stopped people from making the attempt . . .
>
> I'm not sure, though, that he believed it impossible -- he had seen
> and commented the Zimmerman Story-line, and thus he knew what might
> be the result.
>
> On the other hand Tolkien did sum up the issue quite well in one of
> his letters -- 'Either very profitable terms indeed ; or absolute
> author's veto on objectionable features or alterations.' (#202 to
> Christopher Tolkien, 1957). Since he renounced all control of the
> art, I just hope that he found the agreement 'very profitable
> indeed'.
>


-- FotW


Reality is for those who cannot cope with Middle-earth.