Amazon orders up multiple seasons of -------------- LOTR

[edjr 5,547]

http://ew.com/tv/2017/11/13/lord-of-the-rings-tv-series/

 

 

 

Amazon has officially greenlit one show that it hopes to rule them all.

The company has made a multi-season production commitment to a television adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s fantasy epic The Lord of the Rings.

It’s a major deal securing one of the biggest brands in pop culture for what’s likely to be one of the most expensive TV shows ever made.

But there’s a catch, creatively speaking: The series will explore storylines set before the events in the first LOTR novel, The Fellowship of the Ring. In other words: The war to destroy the One Ring as chronicled in Peter Jackson’s Oscar-winning trilogy of films will not be told in the TV version. So this story is either set before The Hobbit or in between The Hobbit and LOTR.

This something we’ve seen with other recent TV series when they tackle major cinematic titles with certain rights restrictions. Like how Fox’s Gotham can tell the story of young Bruce Wayne but not Batman, how FX’s Legion has avoided using the term “X-Men” even though its an X-Men project, or how Syfy’s upcoming series based on The Purge films will be set in between actual Purges.

Amazon’s deal includes a potential addition of a spin-off series as well.

“We are delighted that Amazon, with its longstanding commitment to literature, is the home of the first-ever multi-season television series for The Lord of the Rings,” said Matt Galsor, a representative for the Tolkien Estate and Trust and HarperCollins. “Sharon and the team at Amazon Studios have exceptional ideas to bring to the screen previously unexplored stories based on J.R.R. Tolkien’s original writings.”

There’s no cast or premiere date yet, but the series will eventually stream on Amazon Prime.

The move by Amazon comes as HBO prepares to conclude its mammoth fantasy hit Game of Thrones, which will almost certainly premiere its final six episodes in 2019. HBO is developing multiple potential prequel series based on author George R.R. Martin’s Westerosi history, though none are guaranteed to air.

In a way, Amazon’s LOTR project and HBO’s GoT prequels face the exact same challenge: The great high-stakes story and beloved characters that made each tale such a classic will have already been told — and both benefited from mining a fantasy author’s years of extraordinary effort producing more than a thousand pages of intricate creative storytelling. So can a network find writers who can successfully bootstrap a relatively new-ish story set in these familiar fantasy worlds that capture at least some percentage of the original work’s worldwide appeal?

It’s a tough call as to which company has the more difficult task. For Amazon, the stakes are rather low (the company’s stock is trading at an incredible $1,138 per share). For HBO, the stakes are very high — GoT is an unprecedented massive moneymaker for the network and a creating subscription-worthy TV is its core business (while fending off the likes of Netflix and Amazon). But HBO has a distinct creative advantage in that they’re developing five potential prequels while committing to none in advance — so the network has several chances to find a story that really works before deciding on a path. This new deal struck between the Tolkien Estate and Tolkien Estate and HarperCollins, however, locks Amazon into a multi-year series commitment without so much as a writer yet hired — that’s the type of deal that keeps a traditional network up at night though, again, Amazon can afford the write-off if it all goes south.

Hollywood is all about world-building right now, so perhaps will be fantastic — and hopefully they will. This is what Marvel is already doing with its big screen heroes and Disney with its new Star Wars titles, after all. A series is in some respects more difficult than pulling off two-hour film, however. As a wise man once wrote: “You step onto the road, and if you don’t keep your feet, there’s no knowing where you might be swept off…”

 

 

 

Hope this doesn't mean I have to see the last 3 movies, I just couldn't do it.

[Mungwater 588]

I tried to watch those movies a couple of times, just can't finish them, I fall asleep every time

[fandandy 3,311]

I tried to watch those movies a couple of times, just can't finish them, I fall asleep every time

Same. I try so hard to like them because they look like they must be great but damn they're just too long. I even bought them on Blu-ray and I don't even think I opened them.

[Reality 2,710]

In.

[edjr 5,547]

Same. I try so hard to like them because they look like they must be great but damn they're just too long. I even bought them on Blu-ray and I don't even think I opened them.

 

I LOVED The Fellowship of the Ring, absolutely couldn't wait. was so excited. 10 or 10 watched it many times.

 

The Two Towers was good, decent. 6 of 10 - seen it maybe twice

 

The Return of the King was better, 8 of 10 - seen it once.

 

 

Tried watching the Hobbit (several times). couldn't even get half way. Total joke that he turned it into 3 movies? or is it 2?

[Mungwater 588]

 

I LOVED The Fellowship of the Ring, absolutely couldn't wait. was so excited. 10 or 10 watched it many times.

 

The Two Towers was good, decent. 6 of 10 - seen it maybe twice

 

The Return of the Kind was better, 8 of 10 - seen it once.

 

 

Tried watching the Hobbit (several times). couldn't even get half way. Total joke that he turned it into 3 movies? or is it 2?

Which order did they come out in?

[edjr 5,547]

Which order did they come out in?

 

FOTR came out in 2001

TT 2002

ROK 2003

 

 

 

Not sure when the hobbitses came out

[fandandy 3,311]

 

I LOVED The Fellowship of the Ring, absolutely couldn't wait. was so excited. 10 or 10 watched it many times.

 

The Two Towers was good, decent. 6 of 10 - seen it maybe twice

 

The Return of the Kind was better, 8 of 10 - seen it once.

 

 

Tried watching the Hobbit (several times). couldn't even get half way. Total joke that he turned it into 3 movies? or is it 2?

I don't own the Hobbit and I will check out LOTR one of these days. They do look good. Did you read the books growing up? Just curious. I never did. Tried reading The Hobbit but couldn't get through that either.

[edjr 5,547]

I don't own the Hobbit and I will check out LOTR one of these days. They do look good. Did you read the books growing up? Just curious. I never did. Tried reading The Hobbit but couldn't get through that either.

 

I read the hobbit when I was 20

 

(1st book i ever read the whole way through, true story)

 

I read Fellowship of the ring a few years later.

[parrot 789]

Tried watching the Hobbit (several times). couldn't even get half way. Total joke that he turned it into 3 movies? or is it 2?

 

Yep, 3 I think. And it's a pretty short book. Would have made one good movie instead of 3 unwatchable ones.

[tanatastic 2,061]

Plenty of potential, will be keeping an eye out. They won’t be anything like the LotR movies (all critically acclaimed and Oscar nominated, you guys are dipshitz) but they could be a decent GoT rip-off I guess.

 

The Hobbit movies were a step below but I still enjoyed them.

[parrot 789]

 

Yep, 3 I think. And it's a pretty short book. Would have made one good movie instead of 3 unwatchable ones.

 

If anyone remembers, The Hobbit was originally slated for 2 movies with Guillermo del Toro - Pan's Labyrinth - directing. Wish they would have followed through with that.

[kutulu 1,542]

But Gollum, and the evil one Crept up and slipped away with her

[ROCKFORD 134]

tom bombadil?

[jerryskids 5,172]

tom bombadil?

That's a character worth exploring.

[Reality 2,710]

 

If anyone remembers, The Hobbit was originally slated for 2 movies with Guillermo del Toro - Pan's Labyrinth - directing. Wish they would have followed through with that.

This.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

I don't own the Hobbit and I will check out LOTR one of these days. They do look good. Did you read the books growing up? Just curious. I never did. Tried reading The Hobbit but couldn't get through that either.

I was (and still am a little) a big fantasy buff. I read all that stuff.

 

Someone gave me a box set of LOTR. It is incredibly overrated to my mind. Not a good read.

 

Its basically the Elvis of fantasy. Without it, much of what comes after doesnt exist. But not something I want to listen to.

[Gepetto 979]

I loved the movies, I have the Extended editiions all on Blu Ray, Hobbit too. Seen them all 3 or 4 times.

[vuduchile 1,940]

I guess geeks gotta be geekin'.

[MTSkiBum 1,593]

I was (and still am a little) a big fantasy buff. I read all that stuff.

 

Someone gave me a box set of LOTR. It is incredibly overrated to my mind. Not a good read.

 

Its basically the Elvis of fantasy. Without it, much of what comes after doesnt exist. But not something I want to listen to.

This. I read the books and they were very overrated.

 

 

Bunch of nerds in here.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

LOTR was great but Hobbit movies sucked a$$. I kept waiting for Jar Jar Binks to enter.

[edjr 5,547]

I guess geeks gotta be geekin'.

 

It ain't the geek club for nothin'!

[cbfalcon 824]

 

I read the hobbit when I was 20

 

(1st book i ever read the whole way through, true story)

.

You didnt have to try and convince us by saying true story. We already believed you.

[edjr 5,547]

You didnt have to try and convince us by saying true story. We already believed you.

 

FU

[Herbivore 904]

This. I read the books and they were very overrated.

 

 

Bunch of nerds in here.

said the nerd who picked Disgaea

 

LOTR the movie and book were both amazing. The movie got nearly everything from the book perfect. Pretty much only cut out Tom Bombadil. They then changed too much in the Two Towers.

[Reality 2,710]

This. I read the books and they were very overrated.

 

 

Bunch of nerds in here.

 

 

said the nerd who picked Disgaea

 

 

We really need a sarcasm emoji.