Vanity Fair article on Amazon's Lord of the Rings series

[elengil]

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/20 ... first-look

hm.

[kzer_za]

A lot to chew over in that article - I'm not sure what to think. Some of it matches the FoF leaks, but the broader context might (or might not) make it less troubling. A major timeline compression to a single generation is confirmed, which isn't what I was hoping - can you really get across the themes of aging and mortality properly like this? They won't rush through the forging at least, which is one thing I was a little worried about. Harfoot proto-Hobbits are confirmed, but they explicitly have a role on the margins in the story where they don't directly take part in major events (compared to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead).

There's an invented elf-human romance confirmed, in proto-Harad I think? I'm apprehensive but if they borrow from Mithrellas/Amroth or Andreth/Aegnor it could could work...maybe I'm being too charitable and it will be another Tauriel though.

Overall I'm conflicted - not ideal but could be worse. Keeping my expectations low but open to being surprised.

[Alatar]

Can I suggest we create a new thread for this article. Possibly even a new Subforum for the Series. I presume it will provoke a lot of discussion over the next few years.

[Alatar]

Also, don't forget the trailer on Sunday

[kzer_za]

Some take this quote as reassuring. I did at first but rereading it's actually not all that positive:

"So will there be Westerosi levels of violence and sex in Amazon’s Middle-earth? In short, no. McKay says the goal was “to make a show for everyone, for kids who are 11, 12, and 13, even though sometimes they might have to pull the blanket up over their eyes if it’s a little too scary. We talked about the tone in Tolkien’s books. This is material that is sometimes scary—and sometimes very intense, sometimes quite political, sometimes quite sophisticated—but it’s also heartwarming and life-affirming and optimistic. It’s about friendship and it’s about brotherhood and underdogs overcoming great darkness.”"

First of all it's good they aren't turning it into Game of Thrones. However I have to be the wet blanket here and point out that friendship and brotherhood and underdog victories aren't actually what the Second Age is about. These things may come up occasionally as minor themes, but the Second Age is about mortality, aging, possessiveness, restlessness, corruption, and imperialism. Perhaps more explicitly than any other age, it's about "death and the desire for deathlessness" (including the forging of the rings, not just Númenor).

So there is serious doubt whether they understand the basic themes of what they're adapting. But it is also possible they're playing up the positivity for marketing.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Can I suggest we create a new thread for this article. Possibly even a new Subforum for the Series. I presume it will provoke a lot of discussion over the next few years.

Definitely agree about the new thread. I'll split it off when I get a chance, or you can if you want to as you do have the ability. As for creating a subforum, tentatively at least I agree with that too, thought will take a little more effort.

Regarding the article, I've only skimmed through and looked at the pictures and their captions. My reaction has not been positive, but perhaps that will change.

[Alatar]

I actually don't have access to the mod tools. I created the new Sub Form, but I can't move posts or topics.

[Eldy]

Helge Fauskanger, writing in 2005 about a hypothetical Númenor film:

I shudder at the thought of some Hollywood director trying to insert them because "we gotta have Hobbits in this franchise!"

The co-showrunner of Amazon's The Rings of Power, speaking in 2022:

One of the very specific things the texts say is that hobbits never did anything historic or noteworthy before the Third Age. But really, does it feel like Middle-earth if you don’t have hobbits or something like hobbits in it?

There is a lot I could say—and have said, on Discord—about the Vanity Fair article, but I can't muster the energy to organize it into something suitable for posting on a message board. I see very little doubt left to give this series the benefit of, and thus have very little enthusiasm for it. I'll still watch it, most likely, and maybe it will defy my expectations and be great on its own merits even if it has little resemblance to Tolkien, but I kinda doubt it.

I've gotten into a lot of forum arguments about the series over the past four-plus years and I've consistently said that I'm okay with the project diverging from its source material even in radical ways, because there is so little source material for the Second Age and I think this would be a neat chance to see a picture of Middle-earth that diverges from the consensus version that has dominated adaptations and illustrations for the past several decades. As many critics of the project have pointed out, the paucity of Second Age material in the books means the series will effectively be officially licensed fanfiction. I see that as an opportunity!

The best fanfiction AUs (Alternate Universes) diverge from their source material in artistically considered, deliberate ways, introducing new ideas while remaining in dialogue with the original. They display an obsession with detail that often eclipses that of fanfiction which hews closer to the original, in many cases because the authors really like some small element that wasn't elaborated on, and they use that as their basis to build new worlds of breathtaking depth and complexity. Some such fanfic authors love the original works, some actively dislike them, but the great ones all care. They're not making changes out of laziness, or pandering to expectations, or because they don't understand the original well enough to realize they're changing things.

I do not get this vibe from The Rings of Powers' showrunners' statements. Adding Hobbits is a step away from having a fresh, new version of Middle-earth, calling back to the better-known Third Age. I don't know if they got a note from the executives saying "put some hobbits in this thing; audiences are idiots they'll be mad if there aren't hobbits" or, worse, if they came to that conclusion without studio meddling, but it doesn't really matter. The utterly laughable statement that the tone of Tolkien's Second (or First Age) stories is "heartwarming and life-affirming and optimistic" is either a deliberate lie for the purpose of selling the series to an audience that only knows TH and LOTR, or a complete misunderstanding of the source material.

I would probably be less grumpy about this if it wasn't literally the first thing I saw when I woke up and checked my phone, but not much less. I'm aware that, as people always reminded us in the purist debates of old, the books won't be going anywhere. But Jackson's LOTR films still shape people's understanding of the work, and this effect will be even stronger for The Rings of Power, which is not adapting one of the most widely-read works of fiction in the history of the English language. In this case, the books not going anywhere doesn't matter, because so few people have read them.

Call me a purist whiner, but I think it's genuinely sad that popular perception of the Second Age is going to be permanently shaped by people who think, gosh darn it, it's just not Middle-earth if you don't have Hobbits.

[RoseMorninStar]

I have yet to read the Vanity Fair article in full, but before too many of my thoughts get away from me..

I do not want to see Tauriel type characters shoved into the story 'just because' however, although Hobbits may not have done anything historical or of note that was written, that doesn't mean the series should pretend they didn't exist. I'm thinking of (real world) paleolithic, bronze age, or other peoples who did not leave a written record. We know little of them by way of written form, but that does not mean they were of no consequence in the grand scheme of things and should be left out altogether.

[Eldy]

I wouldn't object to (but also wouldn't be particularly interested in) a Second Age story specifically built around Hobbits, but I'm highly skeptical of them being shoehorned into the show's version of the Forging of the Rings / War of the Elves and Sauron / War of the Last Alliance narrative (the two wars will presumably be conflated due to timeline compression). That the showrunners' reason for doing so is that they don't think the setting would feel like Middle-earth without Hobbits defies understanding. I don't think people making adaptations need to be book fans, but if they—apparently—think their source material doesn't feel like Middle-earth, why are they adapting it? Do they feel the same way about the rest of The Silmarillion?

[elengil]

but if they—apparently—think their source material doesn't feel like Middle-earth, why are they adapting it?

They want the brand recognition vs an entirely original show, even if the show is mostly original because they don't care enough about the source material.

Yes, the above is a grossly unfair over-simplification that ignores the amount of love that a lot of the people who are involved in the production obviously feel. But I stand by my words in terms of why on a corporate level.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I wouldn't put too much stock in an off-hand comment made by the showrunners that may or may not be accurately reported by a journalist.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

From cats16 at TORN:

Per Joanna Robinson (co-author of the VF piece this morning), the one of the showrunners confirmed that they only have/had rights to the following texts:

LOTR (including the Appendices)
The Hobbit

They do *not* have rights to The Silm, Unfinished Tales, HoME or anything else. Robinson also said that the showrunners utilized as much as they could within LOTR concerning the Second Age: The Council of Elrond, things Gandalf tells Frodo, poems/songs, etc.

This is pulled from a Twitter Spaces audio interview with the VF writers, for which I'm typing up a deeper rundown in the initial thread below about the VF piece. But given the deep curiosity about this subject, it felt worthy of its own thread.

If this is true (and I have no idea whether what "one of the showrunners" said is being accurately reported), it contradicts what has been said before.

[Inanna]

Completely. What about the image with the Trees, for example?

That’s the one that…. You know.

[Eldy]

The Two Trees are fleetingly referred to in Appendix A and have a few scattered mentions in the main text, so that would be a safe inclusion even in the minimalist rights situation described above. The maps they released in 2019 were one of the centerpieces of the "they must have additional rights" argument but maybe Amazon felt they could push their luck with ephemeral promotional material. Who knows.

If this is true about them being limited to LOTR, then the name "Annatar" and the forced marriage of Pharazôn and Míriel are two of the many elements that will have to be excluded. That could actually explain some of what we've heard about Pharazôn and Míriel from the leaks, though ... if those are accurate. :V

[kzer_za]

If true (is it possible there are still narrow carveouts for very specific things?), it's disappointing...but also sort of a relief in a way. The Silmarillion is staying off screen as its own special thing at least for now, and the show has less to live up to, in my mind anyway. Maybe I can enjoy it more now for what it is now and be more accepting of invented material.

[Anduril]

Besides all that... someone has to say it. There go the hopes for a nuanced, senstive lore-friendly treatment of the Southrons and Easterlings because of the casting shortcuts. Fixing what wasn't broken.

The new names feel uninspired. Bronwyn is a real name derived from Welsh Branwen. No relation to Éowyn which is Old English and made up. What does Halbrand even mean, Halbarad is Elvish and brand is Old English for torch = sword.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

My absolute least favorite line of the article:

And a canny young elven architect and politician named Elrond (Robert Aramayo) will rise to prominence in the mystical capital of Lindon.

Say what? Maybe that won't be as bad as it sounds to me.

Maybe.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Here are the quotes from Tom Shippey when he was associated with the series.

So does Amazon have a free hand in the interpretation?
Amazon has a relatively free hand when it comes to adding something, since, as I said, very few details are known about this time span. The Tolkien Estate will insist that the main shape of the Second Age is not altered. Sauron invades Eriador, is forced back by a Númenorean expedition, is returns to Númenor. There he corrupts the Númenoreans and seduces them to break the ban of the Valar. All this, the course of history, must remain the same. But you can add new characters and ask a lot of questions, like: What has Sauron done in the meantime? Where was he after Morgoth was defeated? Theoretically, Amazon can answer these questions by inventing the answers, since Tolkien did not describe it. But it must not contradict anything which Tolkien did say. That’s what Amazon has to watch out for. It must be canonical, it is impossible to change the boundaries which Tolkien has created, it is necessary to remain “tolkienian”.

Does the Tokien Estate have a veto on changes?
Yes, the Tolkien Estate keeps a very careful eye on everything and is quite capable of saying no. They retain a veto over everything that concerns Tolkien.

My question is, if they can't contradict what Tolkien wrote, but they don't have the rights to most of what Tolkien wrote, how will that work? I guess it just more making stuff up that doesn't contradict what Tolkien said, but is just completely different.

ETA: Like portraying Elrond as a "canny young elven architect and politician named Elrond." Tolkien never said that he wasn't a canny young architect and politician.

[kzer_za]

Best-case reading of that I can think of is that they're transferring some of the intra-elf politics of the Second Age to Elrond's character. Kinda like PBJ did by giving some of Thingol to Elrond (was this conscious or not? who knows) or Glorfindel to Arwen.

Or they're just making stuff up.