Embracer Group Buys Middle-earth Enterprises
In February this year, I wrote a blog post about how Middle-earth Enterprises were seeking to auction off the various rights they hold for the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. Today the Embracer Group announced that it was buying these rights as part of an ongoing acquisition strategy. The Swedish video game and media holding company has also purchased Limited Run Games, Tripwire Interactive as well as Middle-earth Enterprises portfolio. They recently acquired premium titles such as Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, and Thief. The Embracer Group currently owns more than 100 studios including Borderlands developer Gearbox, Saber Interactive, and THQ Nordic. Saudi Arabia recently bought a $1 billion stake in Embracer, which is around 8% of the company’s total shares. Embracer’s recent purchasing spree comes months after it acquired Square Enix’s three major Western game studios. In a press release the cost of buying the right to Tolkien’s work is £653,000,000 ($786,000,000).
In February this year, I wrote a blog post about how Middle-earth Enterprises were seeking to auction off the various rights they hold for the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. Today the Embracer Group announced that it was buying these rights as part of an ongoing acquisition strategy. The Swedish video game and media holding company has also purchased Limited Run Games, Tripwire Interactive as well as Middle-earth Enterprises portfolio. They recently acquired premium titles such as Tomb Raider, Deus Ex, and Thief. The Embracer Group currently owns more than 100 studios including Borderlands developer Gearbox, Saber Interactive, and THQ Nordic. Saudi Arabia recently bought a $1 billion stake in Embracer, which is around 8% of the company’s total shares. Embracer’s recent purchasing spree comes months after it acquired Square Enix’s three major Western game studios. In a press release the cost of buying the right to Tolkien’s work is £653,000,000 ($786,000,000).
Middle-earth Enterprises was originally a division of The Saul Zaentz Company, a Hollywood production studio. In 1976 they bought all the rights associated with Tolkien’s literary work apart from the publication of the books which remained with Harper Collins. The acquisition was required to make the 1978 animated feature film version of The Lord of the Rings, directed by animator Ralph Bakshi. The initial purchase of rights also included the screenplay for John Boorman’s proposed live action adaptation of Tolkien’s iconic trilogy. Since then, any commercial undertaking seeking to use any of Tolkien’s intellectual property has been dependent upon a licensing arrangement with Middle-earth Enterprises. To date this has included motion pictures, video games, board games, theme parks, stage and wider merchandising. However, they do not cover television which falls outside of the scope of the rights.
Whenever there is a change of ownership of rights, it always tends to send a ripple of concern among companies that currently hold licences. Do those who now control the intellectual property intend to make any radical changes to the status quo. It is worth noting that during his lifetime Saul Zaentz who owned Middle-earth Enterprises was somewhat of a Tolkien purist. Hence apart from two cinematic trilogies and a handful of video games, Middle-earth related products and marketing has not become as ubiquitous as Star Wars or Marvel. However, after the death of Saul Zaentz in 2014 and Christopher Tolkien’s resignation from the Tolkien Estate in 2017, there seems to be a sea change in the positions of the various rights holders. Hence Amazon Prime secured the rights for a television show based upon the Appendices of The Lord of the Rings.
The Embracer Groups press release indicates that some ongoing projects will remain unaffected by the change of ownership. However, they also suggest that they have broader plans for the intellectual property they’ve acquired. “Key upcoming works set in Middle-earth, in which Middle-earth Enterprises has financial interests, include the much-heralded Amazon series The Lord of the Rings: Rings of Power which will premiere on September 2, 2022, set thousands of years before The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings; the animated movie The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim (Warner Bros), set for release in 2024, and the mobile game The Lord of the Rings: Heroes of Middle-earth (Electronic Arts).Other opportunities include exploring additional movies based on iconic characters such as Gandalf, Aragorn, Gollum, Galadriel, Eowyn and other characters from the literary works of J.R.R. Tolkien, and continue to provide new opportunities for fans to explore this fictive world through merchandising and other experiences”.
Naturally, as a long time player of the MMORPG The Lord of the Rings Online, I’m curious to see if this change in rights ownership will have an impact upon the game. At present LOTRO is developed by Standing Stone Games which is owned by Daybreak Game Company, which is in turn owned by Enad Global 7 (and not The Dave Clark Five). Recently after some changes in share ownership there may have been a reverse takeover and the former may own the latter. Regardless of this corporate structure, LOTRO is dependent upon a licence, previously from Middle-earth Enterprises. This was renewed circa 2017 and has not been raised since then by any party as a matter of concern. At present there are no obvious licensing issues for LOTRO and there appears to be a further expansion for the game in development. As ever, the best policy seems to be to watch, wait and enjoy the game for the present.
Middle-earth Enterprises to Auction Off Rights
In 1969 J.R.R. Tolkien sold the motion picture, merchandising, stage and other rights to The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings and other literary works to United Artists. UA were riding high at the time with the success of In the Heat of the Night and The Graduate. Allegedly Tolkien made the deal to pay off a tax debt, although this may be apocryphal. He was paid £100,000 which is equivalent to £1,680,000 today. He also retained a 7.5% royalty interest that has now been transferred to the Tolkien Estate. UA toyed with the idea of adapting The Lord of the Rings and many cinematic luminaries were associated with the project. In the early seventies British film director John Boorman was tasked with writing a screenplay. Boorman, an established director with a track record of being experimental, set about developing a script with his long term collaborator, Rospo Pallenberg. However, the project was cancelled due to costs and the studio getting “cold feet”.
In 1969 J.R.R. Tolkien sold the motion picture, merchandising, stage and other rights to The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings and other literary works to United Artists. UA were riding high at the time with the success of In the Heat of the Night and The Graduate. Allegedly Tolkien made the deal to pay off a tax debt, although this may be apocryphal. He was paid £100,000 which is equivalent to £1,680,000 today. He also retained a 7.5% royalty interest that has now been transferred to the Tolkien Estate. UA toyed with the idea of adapting The Lord of the Rings and many cinematic luminaries were associated with the project. In the early seventies British film director John Boorman was tasked with writing a screenplay. Boorman, an established director with a track record of being experimental, set about developing a script with his long term collaborator, Rospo Pallenberg. However, the project was cancelled due to costs and the studio getting “cold feet”.
In 1976 United Artists sold most of their rights to Tolkien's work to the Saul Zaentz Company. Zaentz, an established film producer best known for One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, then established Tolkien Enterprises to manage the rights that he'd acquired. Two years later, he produced Ralph Bakshi’s animated adaptation of The Lord of the Rings. The company name was later changed to Middle-earth Enterprises to avoid confusion with the Tolkien Estate. Over the next two decades Middle-earth Enterprises entered into various licensing and merchandising deals for both video and tabletop role-playing games. In 1997,a deal was struck with New Line Cinema for a live-action film adaptation of The Lord of the Rings. The trilogy of films released between 2001 and 2003, made over $3 billion at the box office. A further trilogy of films were made between 2013 and 2015, based upon The Hobbit.
Since the success of Peter Jackson’s films, you would have thought that Middle-earth Enterprises would have capitalised more upon the intellectual property that they controlled. Yet Saul Zaentz was quite a Tolkien purist and along with Christopher Tolkien (Tolkien’s son), was not keen to see the brand “debased”. However, Zaentz died in 2014 and in his last years Christopher Tolkien stepped from the Tolkien Estate, down due to ill health. Tolkien’s grandchildren apparently have a more innovative approach to the running of the Tolkien Estate. Hence in 2017, they made a deal with Amazon for the global television rights for The Lord of the Rings. Jeff Bezos is a consummate fan of Tolkien and beat Netflix and HBO in the bidding war for the TV rights, paying $250,000,000. Apparently, the Tolkien Estate is so pleased with the development of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power that they have provided access to material from The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales.
Which brings us neatly to yesterday’s announcement by Middle-earth Enterprises that they are to auction off the rights they own pertaining to Tolkien’s work. Episodic, big budget, fantasy television shows are a very lucrative business. If you want verification then cast your mind back to a popular HBO series based upon the works of George R.R. Martin. Hence, with The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power due for release in September of this year, Middle-earth Enterprises obviously thought it was the right time to sell their rights. Note that these include merchandise and video games. Two lines of business that have great commercial potential. It is logical to assume that Amazon will want to acquire these rights as it will compliment their existing Tolkien based portfolio perfectly. Middle-earth Enterprises rights are currently valued at $2 billion.
However, business is seldom black and white. I’m sure there may well be other interested parties such as Disney, Netflix or HBO. They may be “curious” about the intellectual property and what it can yield. Or they may be interested in curtailing the business ambitions of a competitor. Buying rights, intellectual properties and patents and then sitting on them is a thing. It’s not always about your own products but sometimes stopping other people’s. Furthermore, if Amazon do buyout Middle-earth Enterprises, what impact would that have upon existing licensed products? Daedalic Entertainment is currently developing a Gollum themed game. And then there is the long standing MMORPG, The Lord of the Rings Online. If the licence that Standing Stone Games currently rely upon isn’t renewed then it would mean the closure of the game. Yes, we’ve endured such shenanigans before. But last time Amazon wasn’t involved.
It’s also worth remembering that Amazon were developing their own MMORPG in conjunction with Athlon Games. However Athlon Games were bought out by Tencent Holdings and Amazon was “unable to secure terms to proceed with this title”. This raises some interesting questions. Was the game completed? What has happened to the code? Was it scuttled purely due to legal issues IE who got what percentage? If these “problems” were resolved, IE Amazon bought out Tencent’s stake, could the game go ahead? If Amazon did launch its own MMORPG based upon Tolkien’s work, would they want a competitor? Remember that Star Wars: Galaxies was closed to clear the path for Star Wars: The Old Republic. The auctioning of Middle-earth Enterprises rights at this time is not a coincidence. I have a suspicion that when the dust settles Amazon will be holding all the cards. And where there’s a winner there’s also a loser or losers.
The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies Extended Edition (2014)
This December marks the 20th anniversary of the release of The Fellowship of the Ring, the first instalment of Peter Jacksons' adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s iconic novel, The Lord of the Rings. To celebrate this occasion, I shall post new reviews of the extended edition of all three films, as well as those of The Hobbit trilogy, which were made a decade later.
The Battle of the Five Armies is noticeably shorter than it's two predecessors, mainly because there is insufficient narrative to sustain the proceedings. Even the extended edition which adds a further 20 minutes to the running time, increasing it to 164 minutes, is mainly driven by one ongoing action sequence which is the titular battle. After the somewhat languid pace of the first movie and the bloated excess of the second, this further change of pace seems somewhat perplexing. Despite the more economical running time, events occur very rapidly. Perhaps a little too rapidly. It can be cogently argued that it somewhat diminishes the impact of some of them. Perhaps the biggest issue being the demise of Smaug. It comes promptly at the start of The Battle of the Five Armies and although spectacular, it quickly negates a major plot element.
This December marks the 20th anniversary of the release of The Fellowship of the Ring, the first instalment of Peter Jacksons' adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s iconic novel, The Lord of the Rings. To celebrate this occasion, I shall post new reviews of the extended edition of all three films, as well as those of The Hobbit trilogy, which were made a decade later.
The Battle of the Five Armies is noticeably shorter than it's two predecessors, mainly because there is insufficient narrative to sustain the proceedings. Even the extended edition which adds a further 20 minutes to the running time, increasing it to 164 minutes, is mainly driven by one ongoing action sequence which is the titular battle. After the somewhat languid pace of the first movie and the bloated excess of the second, this further change of pace seems somewhat perplexing. Despite the more economical running time, events occur very rapidly. Perhaps a little too rapidly. It can be cogently argued that it somewhat diminishes the impact of some of them. Perhaps the biggest issue being the demise of Smaug. It comes promptly at the start of The Battle of the Five Armies and although spectacular, it quickly negates a major plot element.
Smaug is killed by Bard but his body falls on Lake Town leaving it in utter ruin. The survivors of Esgaroth are aided by the Wood Elves and both parties subsequently seek restitution from the Dwarves. The men of Lake Town hold the Dwarves accountable for their current situation and the Elves who harbour a longstanding grudge regarding outstanding debts that the Dwarves have not paid. However, Thorin refuses to help which leads to a diplomatic impasse. He summons his cousin Dain from the Iron Hills to provide reinforcements. In the meantime Azog then springs his trap and lays siege to Erebor and all camped outside, resulting in the battle between Dwarves, Elves, Men and Orcs. The film does resolve the major storylines, yet it does feel both a little rushed and contrived. Again the screenplay feels the need to reference and link to future events featured in The Lord of the Rings.
Lore purists will find The Battle of the Five Armies the hardest to stomach because Peter Jackson really does indulge his penchant for narrative simplification, restructuring events and the fetishization of weapons, armour and fantasy combat. The Fili, Tauriel, Legolas love triangle and associated fallout is simply too contrived and unengaging. The White Council's assault on Dol Guldur featuring a 92 year old Christopher Lee beating seven bells out of the Ringwraiths, although thoroughly amusing, does raise an eyebrow. The fact that you can conveniently ride from Lake Town to Mount Gundabad in a day and that Middle-earth is populated with Frank Herbert style giant worms, may also come as a surprise to the faithful. The less said about Beorn free falling from an eagle and turning into a Werebear on the way down, the better.
As I have mentioned in my previous reviews, the depiction of Thorin in these movies is woefully lacking, turning him into a broody, pouting, inaccessible caricature. This time round for want of a better description, Thorin goes a bit "Macbeth". I'll give credit where credit is due and state that Richard Armitage does provide a good performance. But the screenplay doesn't really do the character justice and the plot device about the "Dragon's sickness" is arbitrary to say the least. Yet every now and then, there are sequences and passages of dialogue that come directly from the book. Once again, for everything that Peter Jackson gets right, there's also something that is way off the mark. The pivotal point of the movie should have been Thorin's death but it lacks any emotional impact and is only saved by the presence of Martin Freeman.
Dain Ironfoot (Billy Connolly) makes an impressive entrance riding a War Boar and has an expanded role in the extended version. Beorn and Radagast appear briefly but serve no major purpose than to provide reinforcements to the climactic battle. And what on earth possessed Peter Jackson to kill off Stephen Fry so quickly in the story and yet keep Alfrid Lickspittle as some crass source of so-called comic relief? Mercifully, we still have stalwart performances from Martin Freeman and Sir Ian McKellen who do much of the heavy lifting. Lee Pace proves to be a more interesting character this time round, as Thranduil's motives prove to be less binary than those of Thorin Oakenshield. He tempers his desires for restitution when he sees the extent of the Elven dead and sees the folly of his actions.
As ever the set pieces are immaculately produced and push the violence levels for this kind of movie to the limit. They stay on the right side of the ratings board mainly because the bulk of the decapitations, impalements and bludgeonings happen to non-humans. The death of more central characters tend to be more discrete. The main problem with the frenetic action is that it strives to continuously outdo itself, resulting in scenes that tax the audience's credibility even for this genre of movie. For example Legolas climbs a flight of stone steps leading to a crumbling tower, literally as they fall away beneath him, proving that Elves are indifferent to the laws of physics. A better director would restrain themselves, rather than allow such self indulgence and excess. Also some of the mutilated Orcs and Trolls seem more at home in Clive Barker’s Hellraiser than in Tolkien’s The Hobbit.
If you like the aesthetic that Peter Jackson has created over the years, as well as grandiose spectacle, then The Battle of the Five Armies will prove to be an entertaining diversion. If you want anything more, then prepare to be disappointed. I find it ironic that a trilogy of movies about the adventures of Bilbo Baggins, seems so content to include so little of him on screen. By changing the shift of the story from his perspective, to that of the wider events in Middle-earth, something very important has been lost from these sprawling adaptations. Peter Jackson and his team may well be very knowledgeable in the works of Professor Tolkien but I do wonder if he has fully understood them. As I've said before, these movies are very much Jacksons’ interpretation of The Hobbit. I wonder if there would have been a greater emotional depth and perception of the source text, if these films had been directed by Guillermo del Toro as they were originally intended?
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug Extended Edition (2013)
This December marks the 20th anniversary of the release of The Fellowship of the Ring, the first instalment of Peter Jacksons' adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s iconic novel, The Lord of the Rings. To celebrate this occasion, I shall post new reviews of the extended edition of all three films, as well as those of The Hobbit trilogy, which were made a decade later.
I love the medium of film immensely. I like a wide range of genres and will happily watch weighty human dramas as well as the worst sort of trashy exploitation fodder. The key to reconciling such widely differing types of cinema is to judge them within their own context. Therefore don't compare the respective worth of Citizen Kane with The Golden Voyage of Sinbad, or Bicycle Thieves with The Medusa Touch. So because of the nature of Peter Jackson's adaptation of The Hobbit, I am prepared to make concessions to the fact that it is a big budget fantasy blockbuster franchise. Also the source material from which the film derives is quite sparse, often being nothing more than footnotes, or summations of history. Thus there is scope for a lot of "adaptation", artistic license and creativity. Jackson got a lot of this right with The Lord of the Rings trilogy, over a decade ago. I do not believe that to be the case this time round.
This December marks the 20th anniversary of the release of The Fellowship of the Ring, the first instalment of Peter Jacksons' adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s iconic novel, The Lord of the Rings. To celebrate this occasion, I shall post new reviews of the extended edition of all three films, as well as those of The Hobbit trilogy, which were made a decade later.
I love the medium of film immensely. I like a wide range of genres and will happily watch weighty human dramas as well as the worst sort of trashy exploitation fodder. The key to reconciling such widely differing types of cinema is to judge them within their own context. Therefore don't compare the respective worth of Citizen Kane with The Golden Voyage of Sinbad, or Bicycle Thieves with The Medusa Touch. So because of the nature of Peter Jackson's adaptation of The Hobbit, I am prepared to make concessions to the fact that it is a big budget fantasy blockbuster franchise. Also the source material from which the film derives is quite sparse, often being nothing more than footnotes, or summations of history. Thus there is scope for a lot of "adaptation", artistic license and creativity. Jackson got a lot of this right with The Lord of the Rings trilogy, over a decade ago. I do not believe that to be the case this time round.
The Desolation of Smaug sets off at breakneck pace and continues at that speed throughout it's 186 minute running time. The extended edition is 25 minutes longer than the theatrical version. Again most of the new material is embellishments and does not significantly alter the storyline. Many of the new characters that are introduced are quite intriguing because the screenwriters have been effectively handed a blank canvas, due to the original text being so vague or simplistic (remember that Tolkien's book is a children's story). Thus we meet Beorn (Mikael Persbrandt) the skin-changer along with his Bear alter ego. This bold interpretation has him the last of his race, after being hunted for sport by the Orcs. The Elven King Thranduil, played by Lee Pace, is a greatly expanded role. He is shown as a ruler keen to secure his kingdom’s borders from the ills of the world and possibly someone who blames the Dwarves of Erebor indirectly for a family death. His riding an Elk is a wonderful visual embellishment and conceit. However, not all of the new ideas work. I found the concept of “the tombs of the ringwraiths” to be fundamentally lore breaking and foolish.
Modern film making, especially with regard to digital effects and editing afford directors far more visual freedom. As a result, the cinematography of Andrew Lesnie never remains still. He is unquestionably the master of crane and tracking shot, but it beggars the question are they always required? Would the story arc really suffer that much, if the pace slowed just for a while, to allow the viewer to digest the events that have happened so far? Tolkien certainly understood this issue of pace in his writing. Blame can also be laid at the door of editor Jabez Olssen, who constructs action scenes that are so fluid and rapidly cut together they are difficult to follow at times. And there are many such scenes in The Desolation of Smaug and they divert the story progression significantly.
After escaping the Orc, the Dwarves journey through Mirkwood only to be captured by the Elven King Thranduil (Lee Pace). Bilbo's battle with the spiders is concisely distilled. I loved the way he could understand their language when he put on the ring. Jackson excels at little embellishments like this. However, conversely his efforts to bolster the continuity with the previous trilogy can also be somewhat heavy handed. Bilbo's struggle with the allure of his newly found "precious" are far from subtle. The Dwarves' captivity and escape is deftly handled and I was even happy to go along with the introduction of Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly). I gritted my teeth and rolled with the return of Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and the contrived interaction he had with Gimli's Father, Gloin. The introduction of the Bard (Luke Evans) and the expanded role he plays within the story is quite inventive. I think it helps having him as a quasi Robin Hood figure with the Lake Town community makes him more plausible as a future leader. Stephen Fry’s cameo as the Master was indulgent but droll. The addition of Alfrid Lickspittle (Ryan Gage) as a comic foil is not so successful.
It was about two thirds into the movie that I began to feel that the narrative was becoming too ponderous and drawn out. It began to sag under the weight of its self satisfied approach. This was no longer Peter Jackson's adaptation of Tolkien’s The Hobbit, but simply Peter Jackson's The Hobbit. A lot of the “creative ideas” were not working and by the time the plot reached Smaug, I was fast losing interest. Tauriel “spiritual romance” with injured Kili (Aidan Turner) was stilted and frankly poorly written. Gandalf's excursion into Dol Guldur was melodramatic and contrived, especially the unnecessary manner that Sauron reveals himself to be the Necromancer. The idea of introducing Bolg, son of Azog as a second tier bad guy, to me just showed that the screenwriters (Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens) are tying themselves in knots with their desire to dovetail in everything and anything from a lore perspective.
Now on the subject of Smaug “the chiefest and greatest of all calamities”, I must praise all at Weta Digital for creating the most awesome and truly terrifying dragon since Vermithrax Pejorative from Dragonslayer. Benedict Cumberbatch is perfect voice casting and I was initially impressed with the scenes between him and Bilbo. They captured the spirit of the book superbly. Sadly the director’s need for yet another inexorably long action scene that wasn't in the least required, soon killed my interest. Hence we had the preposterous attempts by Thorin and company to try and kill Smaug by smothering him in molten gold. The very climax of The Desolation of Smaug, that should have been the film’s crowning glory, was for me quite the opposite. I actually found myself wishing for the final thirty minutes of the movie to end as soon as possible.
The second movie in any trilogy is always a very difficult beast to master. There is a requirement for characters to grow and evolve. In box office terms there is a need to provide not just more of the same but increase the sense of spectacle. If done well you will potentially have a movie that is better than the first. Consider The Empire Strikes Back, Spiderman 2 or Aliens. Unfortunately this cannot be said of The Desolation of Smaug. New characters are lost in a cacophony of action scenes and mayhem. Be warned this movie pushes what you can get away within the PG-13 rating. And there are too many clumsy nods to The Lord of the Rings. It seems at times like a list of essential similarities, tropes and idioms is being ticked off. With regard to Jackson’s blank cheque to expand on story points and fill in the so-called blanks, there reached a point where I thought that he had simply strayed too far from what was canonically acceptable.
Like the previous film, one of my main criticisms is based upon the portrayal of certain characters. Bilbo has precious little to do in this instalment. Furthermore the significance of actions and his personal growth is not explored sufficiently. In the book it is this part of the story where the Dwarves begin to deem him a hobbit of merit and value his contributions to their quest. This theme is conspicuously lacking in The Desolation of Smaug. Also again I protest at Jackson's interpretation of Thorin Oakenshiled. In this film he becomes borderline unlikeable. The entire approach is just too binary and formulaic. This is a character that I am supposed to revere, admire and feel for. Again, as with the previous film, those feelings are reserved for Balin instead, played by the superb Ken Stott.
Raiders of the Lost Ark and movies like it have proven that blockbusters can be populist, stylish and entertaining as well as commercially successful. The Desolation of Smaug did indeed clean up at the box office. However it is a very self indulgent piece of cinema and sadly the embodiment of style over substance. Yes, I enjoyed facets of the production and found elements to praise. However, I will not allow my affection for the original book or for Peter Jackson's previous trilogy to colour my judgement. I have to call a spade a spade and say that The Desolation of Smaug is too focused on being a spectacle, at the expense of the story and cast. The extended edition does precious little to remedy this. It is too loud and sprawling and certainly will test the casual viewer’s patience.
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey Extended Edition (2012)
This December marks the 20th anniversary of the release of The Fellowship of the Ring. The first instalment of Peter Jacksons' adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s iconic novel, The Lord of the Rings. To celebrate this occasion, I shall post new reviews of the extended edition of all three films, as well as those of The Hobbit trilogy, which were made a decade later.
Firstly let me start by saying I think the word unexpected is very apt in respect of the first instalment of Peter Jackson's three part adaptation of Tolkien's prequel to The Lord of the Rings. It is genuinely surprising how well parts of the narrative had been adapted and interpreted. Similarly there are other aspects that are less successful. Overall the good outweighs the bad but only the most ardent fanboy or girl would think the movie flawless. When one considers its problematic production along with the change of directors, this is quite an achievement. I wonder how much of Guillermo del Toro’s material survived into Peter Jacksons, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens revised screenplay? Secondly, a decade on from The Lord of the Rings, there has been a further move away from physical visual effects and filming on photographic film. Both of these changes are noticeable in An Unexpected Journey but the presence of Peter Jackson and his very specific style of filmmaking maintains a very strong sense of continuity.
This December marks the 20th anniversary of the release of The Fellowship of the Ring. The first instalment of Peter Jacksons' adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s iconic novel, The Lord of the Rings. To celebrate this occasion, I shall post new reviews of the extended edition of all three films, as well as those of The Hobbit trilogy, which were made a decade later.
Firstly let me start by saying I think the word unexpected is very apt in respect of the first instalment of Peter Jackson's three part adaptation of Tolkien's prequel to The Lord of the Rings. It is genuinely surprising how well parts of the narrative had been adapted and interpreted. Similarly there are other aspects that are less successful. Overall the good outweighs the bad but only the most ardent fanboy or girl would think the movie flawless. When one considers its problematic production along with the change of directors, this is quite an achievement. I wonder how much of Guillermo del Toro’s material survived into Peter Jacksons, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens revised screenplay? Secondly, a decade on from The Lord of the Rings, there has been a further move away from physical visual effects and filming on photographic film. Both of these changes are noticeable in An Unexpected Journey but the presence of Peter Jackson and his very specific style of filmmaking maintains a very strong sense of continuity.
Many of the production staff who worked on the original trilogy are present again for The Hobbit. Artists John Howe and Alan Lee as well as cinematography by Andrew Lesnie ensure that there’s a seamless continuation of the established aesthetic of Middle-earth. Howard Shore's magnificent score utilises leitmotifs we have previously heard in The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Furthermore, his new material is very strong and introduces some very portentous themes for the new characters. The film is technically superb but one expects nothing less from this film maker. Therefore I would like to focus more upon the narrative than the production design, because The Hobbit has been greatly expanded to accommodate its trilogy format. Is the story treated appropriately and presented in a way that will please both consummate fans and newcomers alike?
Broadly speaking I’d say yes. At least in this first instalment, An Unexpected Journey. If you are a Tolkien purist then you may be disappointed or upset by some of the changes that have been made. I sympathise with this perspective but understand the fact that Peter Jackson has to make the story accessible to a wider audience and that cinema is a very different medium to the written page. The key word is “adaptation” and the fact that film requires archetypes who have clear and traditional story arcs. Therefore characters and lore are altered to provide us with a definite hero and villain. That is not to say that the script deviates radically from the book, as it does not. The nuts and bolts of the story are there. But as with The Lord of the Rings, characters have to be refined and events compressed or augmented to satisfy the required tropes of cinematic “high adventure”.
Hence we just get a far more heroic Thorin Oakenshield played by an exuberant and somewhat bombastic Richard Armitage. The character is simplified and presented as someone to root for. He is an exiled King whose family has suffered death and ruin. We also get a specific enemy to boo and hiss in the form of albino orc Azog. The role of Radagast the Brown (Sylvester McCoy) is expanded upon and acts as a conduit between the central plot and the backstory of the rise of the Necromancer in Dol Guldur. McCoy’s performance is mercurial and quite engaging. Once again Ian McKellen dominates the screen as Gandalf, a role he seems sublimely suited for. The casting of Martin Freeman as the young Bilbo Baggins is similarly perfectly conceived. He plays the hobbit with an air of curiosity and confusion, as he strays from his comfortable home in The Shire, out into the wider and more dangerous world.
However I do think that An Unexpected Journey has a pacing issue. We start with a rather traditional framing device in which old Bilbo (Ian Holm) is writing his memoirs on the eve of his going away birthday as depicted in The Fellowship of the Ring. The story then shows the fall of Dale and Erebor to the Dragon Smaug (who is teased and not fully seen). Finally after establishing the entire point of Bilbo’s forthcoming adventure to retake Erebor, events turn to a younger Bilbo (Martin Freeman) and his subsequent meeting with Gandalf. Introducing the twelve dwarves is another problematic aspect of the film. Some are granted a fair amount of screen time where others are hastily added to the narrative. The use of songs directly from the text is another embellishment that although is laudable from a lore standpoint, is questionable from a cinematic perspective. It takes a while for the movie to get under way from Bag End. It's curious because Peter Jackson has managed to take lengthy passages of text in the past and condense them quickly and efficiently without any dramatic loss. Consider the Council of Elrond in The Fellowship of the Ring.
With regard to the expansion of text, some of it works very well. I found myself pleasantly surprised by Sylvester McCoy's portrayal of Radagast (although I still think the Bunny Sled is a bridge too far) as well as the depiction of the White Council. I loved the way Gandalf rolled his eyes at the arrival of Saruman (Christopher Lee) and the way that Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) clearly holds Mithrandir in high regard. The film also greatly benefits from its mainly British and Antipodean cast. The commonalities between cultures, idioms and dialect aids the realisation of Tolkien's written work. The humour present in the film is not out of place, especially in the way that Elves and Dwarves do not get along. However, where An Unexpected Journey succeeds the best is in the way it handles the most iconic scenes from the book. Bilbo's encounter with Gollum (Andy Serkis) is truly menacing and a highlight of the film. The exchange of riddles is superbly realised and the chemistry between the two performers is palpable.
Peter Jackson has gained a reputation over the years for being able to craft complex and frenetic action scenes. It has become a selling point. Sadly my biggest criticism about An Unexpected Journey, is that there are possibly too many action scenes, with some too close together. The escape from the Great Goblin (Barry Humphries) is a very complex and extravagant set piece. Blink and you’ll miss what’s happening as Goblin limbs and heads fly left, right and centre. As soon as Bilbo and the Dwarves escape the Misty Mountains there is immediately another fiery denouement, as Thorin and company climb a copse of fir trees to avoid a Azog and a pack of wargs. Although technically well implemented it is somewhat taxing to the senses and after a while actually becomes quite dull. I appreciate the need to end the film on a high point and dramatic climax but again there persists this sense of uneven pacing. I must add that the ending is tempered by a wonderful codicil involving Smaug that is certainly a wonderful taster of things to come.
I am a Tolkien fan and also someone who enjoys quality film making. Sometimes you have to curb your enthusiasm for much beloved source material, as the requirements of film as a medium are specific and different. “Show don’t tell” is the defining mantra of cinema which can be difficult when adapting lore heavy, narrative books. There are flaws in An Unexpected Journey but they do not derail the entire story. The film is still very creative and can be exciting. It is also quite strong in content with quite hard edged action sequences. At its heart still lies director Peter Jackson's love for the Professor's work and despite moments of indulgence, this still comes across. Compromise is not always a dirty word and in this case is possibly a necessary tool in bringing this story to as wide an audience as possible. However, Jackson still makes the mistake of reducing complex and venerable characters to somewhat binary representations. Thorin is not easy to warm too and it is Balin (Ken Stott) who comes across as far more sympathetic, likeable and wise.
The extended edition of An Unexpected Journey includes 13 minutes of additional material to the theatrical release, which brings the running time to 182 minutes. The extra scenes are mainly embellishments and I would argue that they do not dramatically alter the tone and feel of the film. My thoughts are mostly the same for both the theatrical and extended edition. I suspect the uneven pacing that I’ve referenced stems from Peter Jacksons’ extrapolation of the story. The White Council scenes are a great idea but they also smack of a need to “join the dots” between this trilogy and the former. The flashback to the Battle of Azanulbizar is also well conceived as a means to give weight to the recurring theme of the misfortunes of Durin’s folk and to bolster the kingly nature of Thorin. However, the fact that Thorin is subsequently somewhat bellicose undermines this. However, Martin Freeman stands out and often compensates for the excessive action scenes. Existing Tolkien fans are probably better disposed to this new trilogy by default. However, although entertaining, there is a somewhat forced quality to this adaptation of The Hobbit. Casual viewers may well find it a little too self serving.
Revisiting Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings
In December it will be the twenty year anniversary of the release of The Fellowship of the Ring. The first entry in Peter Jackson’s trilogy of film adaptations of Professor Tolkien’s iconic novel, The Lord of the Rings. I was utterly swept up in the hype and media frenzy that persisted for three years around these movies between 2001 and 2003. I certainly have fond memories of seeing each film on the first day of its release at the prestigious Leicester Square Odeon in London. Broadly speaking I was very impressed with all three films at the time of their release. However, over the years excitement and fandom has been tempered with a greater degree of critical analysis and appraisal. Having recently watched the Extended Editions of all three films, remastered in 4K, I now think it would be pertinent to revise my thoughts on them and repost them here on Contains Moderate Peril. This initial post is intended more as an overview on the trilogy. I shall write three new in depth reviews in due course.
In December it will be the twenty year anniversary of the release of The Fellowship of the Ring. The first entry in Peter Jackson’s trilogy of film adaptations of Professor Tolkien’s iconic novel, The Lord of the Rings. I was utterly swept up in the hype and media frenzy that persisted for three years around these movies between 2001 and 2003. I certainly have fond memories of seeing each film on the first day of its release at the prestigious Leicester Square Odeon in London. Broadly speaking I was very impressed with all three films at the time of their release. However, over the years excitement and fandom has been tempered with a greater degree of critical analysis and appraisal. Having recently watched the Extended Editions of all three films, remastered in 4K, I now think it would be pertinent to revise my thoughts on them and repost them here on Contains Moderate Peril. This initial post is intended more as an overview on the trilogy. I shall write three new in depth reviews in due course.
One of the most striking aspects of Peter Jackson’s films is the overall production design and the aesthetics of Middle-earth in the Third Age. Fans had already started becoming accustomed to a common visual approach to Tolkien’s work, care of John Howe and Alan Lee, the artists that publisher Harper Collins had been using for several years prior to 1999 when filming started. Inviting both to be artistic designers on the films provided a sense not only of continuity but also of a formal aesthetic across the entire intellectual property. Both artists have a knack for combining real world historical elements, with fantasy creating styles of armour, weapons, architecture and clothing that looks real and credible. There is incredible attention to detail present in every element of the production, just as there is in Tolkien’s source text.
In a similar vein, filming in New Zealand was a wise decision as it provides such a diversity of environment and ecosystems. It really is ideal for recreating much of Middle-earth. Jackson’s visual realisation of The Shire is very lush and green. Similarly, the Southern Alps of the South Island effectively capture the spirit of Tolkien’s descriptions of the Misty Mountains and are very imposing. Filming outside of the US also had definite cost benefits to the overall production. However, not every geographical aspect of Middle-earth is as well represented. I have always felt that the Rangitata Valley did not adequately capture the rolling grass plains of Rohan. To my mind it wasn’t green enough. Rohirric culture is based upon both Goths, Scandinavians and the medieval Anglo-Saxons and so I envisage Rohan being more akin to European grasslands. However, such criticisms are far from a deal breaker in respect of one’s appraisal of the overall trilogy.
A key element in Tolkien’s writing is the use of music and how it is an integral part of all the cultures of Middle-earth. Composer Howard Shore wisely made Tolkien’s songs a key part of his soundtrack. As well as writing leitmotifs for central characters and recurring story themes, he also incorporated Sindarin text and other dialects into much of the ambient music to further embellish scenes. It really adds to the overall feeling of “world building”. In many ways his music for all three films feels like a character in its own right. His music also allows for the compression of the narrative and to convey plot points. When Aragorn heals the sick after The Battle of the Pelennor Fields, the music succinctly reinforces the visual images. Rather than having to explain that "the hands of the king are the hands of a healer" what the film shows is further reinforced by the accompanying score. However, although this is a joy for Tolkien fans, its subtleties may be lost on the casual viewer.
Peter Jackson also made a wise decision by casting a group of international character actors rather than smothering his production with box office stars. Sean Connery as Gandalf may well have broadened the appeal of the films but ultimately his larger than life persona would have been a poor fit for the nuances of the character. Casting Ian McKellen was a far more practical choice and proved infinitely more beneficial as the actor utterly made the role his own. Christopher Lee was another cany choice. Not only was he an experienced and subtle actor but a Tolkien scholar as well. The narrative complexity of The Lord of the Rings feature films did not need the additional burden of celebrity stars bringing their own baggage to the production. Using lesser known actors allowed audiences to focus upon their performances rather than be distracted by their sheer presence.
Tolkien’s body of work is remarkable for the way it successfully manages to encompass era defining events, yet still being able to tell the story of those caught up in them. This is something a lot harder to do on screen. Peter Jackson excels at creating complex and large scale set pieces but sometimes they tend to dominate the proceedings at the expense of narrative depth. It was one of the criticisms that Christopher Tolkien made, who felt that the focus of the movie was on action and spectacle at the expense of story and lore. I feel the reality lies somewhere in the middle. Certainly the Extended Editions of all three films addresses this issue, reinstating story content that was excised from the theatrical edits. Ultimately viewers have to come to terms with the fact that these three movies are Jackson’s “adaptation” and reflect upon the meaning of that term.
Hence we come to the thorny issue of how any film version of a complex book leads to key plot elements and characters being either simplified or removed for reason of accessibility. Personally I don’t especially like the “streamlining” of certain characters for the sake of the wider story, although I understand why Jackson did this. I feel that his portrayal of Theoden is somewhat bland, portraying him as a grief stricken King who is indecisive. I also feel it is incorrect to depict Aragorn as conflicted with self doubt. But these were done to make the plot more straightforward and understandable among mainstream viewers, who are not familiar with the books. I do like the extrapolation of the roles and relationship between Saruman and Wormtongue. Also having several Orc characters act as narrative conduits also works well. It is sad that Gil Galad and Elendil were also watered down or removed but it would have bloated the screenplay too much to include all canonical characters.
Twenty years on, I am not quite so enamoured with Peter Jackson’s trilogy and feel that there are elements that could have been improved or handled differently. However, there is still an inherent power to his films and he still merits a great deal of praise for crafting such an imposing adaptation of a book that many claimed was “unfilmable”. He definitely got specific elements one hundred percent right. The Amazon television production set in the Second Age of Middle-earth that is currently being filmed, is maintaining the same design and visual aesthetic. Howard Shore is also involved to keep a sense of musical continuity. All of which raises the point, will the next adaptation of The Lord of the Rings be via the medium of streaming television, rather than cinema? Such a platform is not burdened by running time constraints. It could therefore facilitate a more comprehensive realistion. Whatever the future brings, I don’t think Peter Jackson’s film will be the only ever adaptation of The Lord of the Rings.
The Silmarillion by J. R. R. Tolkien - Read by Martin Shaw (1998)
Let’s not be coy about this. J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Silmarillion is not in any way a light read. It has a complex narrative, filled with staggering amounts of lore to digest. I certainly wouldn’t recommend it to anyone as their first point of entry into the Tolkien Legendarium. I think this is a book that you tackle after The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, if you are sufficiently enamoured with the threads of a wider backstory that are alluded to in both those volumes. If that is the case then brace yourself. However, despite its sprawling histories and dense genealogies, The Silmarillion is an incredibly rewarding book. There is an air of majesty surrounding the epic stories it contains and its themes about the eternal struggle between the dark and the light are timeless. Due to the immense detail that Tolkien lavishes upon the text, Middle-earth feels like a genuine living, breathing world. A world of languages, culture, geography and history. To date it has never been equalled.
Let’s not be coy about this. J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Silmarillion is not in any way a light read. It has a complex narrative, filled with staggering amounts of lore to digest. I certainly wouldn’t recommend it to anyone as their first point of entry into the Tolkien Legendarium. I think this is a book that you tackle after The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, if you are sufficiently enamoured with the threads of a wider backstory that are alluded to in both those volumes. If that is the case then brace yourself. However, despite its sprawling histories and dense genealogies, The Silmarillion is an incredibly rewarding book. There is an air of majesty surrounding the epic stories it contains and its themes about the eternal struggle between the dark and the light are timeless. Due to the immense detail that Tolkien lavishes upon the text, Middle-earth feels like a genuine living, breathing world. A world of languages, culture, geography and history. To date it has never been equalled.
The Silmarillion is the jewel in the crown of J.R.R. Tolkien’s imaginative writing, a collection of narratives ranging in time from the Elder Days of Middle-earth, through the Second Age and the rise of Sauron, to the end of the War of the Ring. The Ainulindalë is a myth of the Creation. In the Valaquenta the nature and powers of the gods is described. Quenta Silmarillion is set in an age when Morgoth was the first Dark Lord and dwelt in Middle-earth. The Elves made war upon him in his impenetrable fortress in Angband for the recovery of the Silmarils. Three jewels containing the last remaining pure light of Valinor, seized by Morgoth and set in his iron crown. The Akallabêth recounts the downfall of the great island kingdom of Númenor at the end of the Second Age. Of the Rings of Power tells of the great events at the end of the Third Age, as told in The Lord of the Rings.
The Silmarillion is a history, albeit an invented one. The book is not linear, nor is it always chronological. It blends expository mythological texts with more traditional story-telling. Despite this structure, it is hard not to feel a sense of awe at the totality of Tolkien’s visions. The book is a prodigious chronicle, highlighting events and individuals with a scope too large to easily summarise. Needless to say, it can often be difficult to keep track of all the characters. Often one story dovetails or impacts upon another, so that it frequently feels like a single narrative rather than a collection of smaller stories. There are events such as the founding of great cities, establishing dynasties, the sundering of peoples and the inevitable waging of war. Throughout these events there is tragedy, beauty, torture, escapes, murders and betrayals. Some characters are noble where others are blighted by hubris, although it often goes ill for them. Although these tales are long and complex, they’re never dull.
The HarperCollins audiobook, recorded in 1998 by British actor Martin Shaw, is possibly the most accessible way for relatively new fans of Tolikien’s writings to tackle The Silmarillion. Shaw narrates with a strong degree of reverence that borders on religious solemnity, guiding listeners carefully through epic battles and epochal events, as well as the legions of protagonists, antagonists and side characters. Shaw skilfully handles the difficult pronunciations of Tolkien's invented languages and inspires a frisson of pleasure when he breaks the straight narration to slip into character voices. The measured pacing of his reading is invaluable to the listener in allowing them to reflect upon the unfolding story and then digest it. I would also recommend listening to this audiobook while having a map of Beleriand to hand. Seeing the geography of the regions discussed is a major asset in understanding the events described. The Silmarillion read by Martin Shaw is currently available on Audible and would make a welcome addition to any Tolkien fan’s library.
Unfinished Tales by J. R. R. Tolkien - Read by Timothy and Samuel West (2021)
First published in 1980, Unfinished Tales is a collection of stories by J. R. R. Tolkien, that spans from the Elder Days of Middle-earth to the end of the War of the Ring. For those who have read both The Silmarillion and The Lord of the Rings, this book provides additional insights and more detailed accounts of many key events of the First, Second and Third age. Such as Gandalf’s informative tale of how he came to send the Dwarves to Bag-End in search of a burglar, the appearance of the sea deity Ulmo before Tuor on the coast of Beleriand and an in depth description of the military organization of the Riders of Rohan. This collection of stories and essays by J. R. R. Tolkien were never fully completed during the author’s lifetime but were posthumously edited by his son Christopher Tolkien and present with notes, annotations and were required a detailed commentary.
First published in 1980, Unfinished Tales is a collection of stories by J. R. R. Tolkien, that spans from the Elder Days of Middle-earth to the end of the War of the Ring. For those who have read both The Silmarillion and The Lord of the Rings, this book provides additional insights and more detailed accounts of many key events of the First, Second and Third age. Such as Gandalf’s informative tale of how he came to send the Dwarves to Bag-End in search of a burglar, the appearance of the sea deity Ulmo before Tuor on the coast of Beleriand and an in depth description of the military organization of the Riders of Rohan. This collection of stories and essays by J. R. R. Tolkien were never fully completed during the author’s lifetime but were posthumously edited by his son Christopher Tolkien and present with notes, annotations and were required a detailed commentary.
Unfinished Tales also contains the only stories about the island of Numenor before its downfall, and all that is known about the Five Wizards that made up the Istari. Christopher Tolkien’s notes are invaluable, highlighting any deviations in lore with other books in the Tolkien Legendarium. They also help the reader to grasp the evolution of many of the tales and subject matter and provide a sense of context within the rest of his Father’s writings. The commercial success of Unfinished Tales demonstrated that there was still a strong demand for Tolkien's work after his death and that readers would avidly consume any material that provided further insight into the history of Middle-earth. Encouraged by the result, Christopher Tolkien embarked upon the more ambitious twelve-volume work entitled The History of Middle-earth which encompasses nearly the entire body of his Father's writings about Middle-earth.
This May HarperCollins released a new unabridged audio recording of this seminal text featuring the combined vocal talents of Father and Son, Timothy West CBE and Samuel West. The production is exemplary and the quality of reading outstanding. Both Messr West Senior and Junior, being established actors, navigate the choppy waters of pronouncing names correctly with ease. I would go so far as to say that their combined flawless diction adds immensely to the proceedings. The central narrative is told by Samuel West and his Father Timothy reads Christopher Tolkien’s annotations and notes. Furthermore, they read at a measured pace allowing the listener to digest the narrative which at times can be quite complex. It is a far cry from previous unofficial audio versions which have been read in the most perfunctory fashion and without any degree of enthusiasm. Hence I wholeheartedly recommend this version of Unfinished Tales due to its accessibility and quality.
The Lord of the Rings Unabridged Audio Soundscape Project
I have reviewed several audio recordings of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings over the years. My personal favourite is the BBC Radio adaptation from 1981, which has a superb cast of British character actors and does a wonderful job of adapting the text without diminishing the scope of the narrative. This is a dramatisation, rather than a straightforward reading of the book. However, if the latter is what you are looking for then the go to version is 1990 recording by Robert Inglis. He provides unique voices for all characters and even sings the songs included in the source text. And then there is the quirky Mind’s Eye Production from 1979, which is another dramatisation. This is a flawed version with a focus upon the character dialogue with much of the lore removed. Yet it has its charm and includes the often omitted Tom Bombadil. However, quite recently I accidentally stumbled upon a fourth adaptation and was surprised not only by the quality of the production but the curious history associated with it.
I have reviewed several audio recordings of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings over the years. My personal favourite is the BBC Radio adaptation from 1981, which has a superb cast of British character actors and does a wonderful job of adapting the text without diminishing the scope of the narrative. This is a dramatisation, rather than a straightforward reading of the book. However, if the latter is what you are looking for then the go to version is 1990 recording by Robert Inglis. He provides unique voices for all characters and even sings the songs included in the source text. And then there is the quirky Mind’s Eye Production from 1979, which is another dramatisation. This is a flawed version with a focus upon the character dialogue with much of the lore removed. Yet it has its charm and includes the often omitted Tom Bombadil. However, quite recently I accidentally stumbled upon a fourth adaptation and was surprised not only by the quality of the production but the curious history associated with it.
The Lord of the Rings Unabridged Audio Soundscape Project, to give it its official title, is a reading by American filmmaker and artist, Phil Dragash from 2013. This 48 hour long version features a spirited reading by Mr Dragash, who gives all major characters distinct personalities, as well as ambient sound effects and music by Howard Shore from the feature film trilogy. This adaptation is presented as three books with each chapter being an individual recording. Initially this unique production was available on YouTube and the audio was accompanied by hand painted artwork, again by Phil Dragash. Sadly due to copyright reasons, this impressive one man creation was taken down and is not readily available as it does somewhat stray from the traditional boundaries of what is a “fan production”. However the excellent original artwork is still available on Phil’s website.
The Lord of the Rings Unabridged Audio Soundscape Project is the very definition of a labour of love. It would appear that this recording took three years to produce and refine. It is made to a very high standard, although there are a few misread lines here and there. Phil does well with providing interesting voices for so many characters and despite not being a professional actor he interprets the dialogue well and provides it with dramatic inflection. The sound effects add to the atmosphere, as does the clever use of Howard Shore’s iconic score. It provides an emotional anchor and a sense of familiarity to the proceedings. Sadly, it also raises legal issues which is why this production is not widely available. However, Google is your friend. Seek and you will find as they say. You will be rewarded with a distinctive audio adaptation of The Lord of the Rings, comparable to both the BBC and Rob Inglis versions.
The Lord of the Rings: 10 Things You May Not Know About the Animated Film
Ralph Bakshi’s 1978 adaptation of Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings often polarises fan opinion. There is much to admire and there is also much to dislike in this 133-minute animated feature film. However, for many of us, this was our first visual foray into Middle-earth and for good or ill, it had an impact. You’ll certainly see several homages to it in Peter Jackson’s trilogy. And like so many cinematic adaptations of iconic books, The Lord of the Rings journey to the big screen was far from easy. Here are ten anecdotes regarding the film and its production.
Ralph Bakshi’s 1978 adaptation of Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings often polarises fan opinion. There is much to admire and there is also much to dislike in this 133-minute animated feature film. However, for many of us, this was our first visual foray into Middle-earth and for good or ill, it had an impact. You’ll certainly see several homages to it in Peter Jackson’s trilogy. And like so many cinematic adaptations of iconic books, The Lord of the Rings journey to the big screen was far from easy. Here are ten anecdotes regarding the film and its production.
1.) In 1969, the rights to The Lord of the Rings were acquired by United Artists from Tolkien himself for the cost of $250,000. Film makers Stanley Kubrick and John Boorman both contemplated adapting the story.
2.) United Artists had to purchase the John Boorman script to allow the Bakshi production to commence. It cost $3 million and was immediately abandoned in favour of a more literal adaptation.
3.) An early draft of the new screenplay was written by Chris Conkling, who told most of the story in flashback from Merriadoc Brandybuck's point of view. After Ralph Bakshi and Saul Zaentz saw Conkling's first draft, they hired fantasy author Peter S. Beagle to re-write the script. He restored much of Tolkien's original dialogue.
4.) At two hours and thirteen minutes, this was the longest feature-length animated film made at that time. The production cost was $4,000,000
5.) Bakshi and his cast and crew went to Spain and filmed a substantial amount of material using actors and stuntmen in full costume. The footage was subsequently rotoscoped and integrated into the traditional animated material.
6.) Several of voice artists who worked on the Bakshi film, subsequently reprised their roles for the 1981 BBC Radio adaptation three years later. These were Michael Graham-Cox as Boromir and Peter Woodthorpe as Gollum/Smeagol.
7.) Numerous scenes where filmed and subsequently cut for technical reasons or for the pacing of the story. This included Gandalf’s battle with the Balrog as they fell into the abyss in Moria. Part of it can still be seen in the film during a flashback sequence.
8.) The film's score was composed by Holly wood veteran, Leonard Rosenman. Bakshi wanted to include music by Led Zeppelin but was hampered by complex legal and rights issues.
9.) The film was originally intended to be distributed as The Lord of the Rings Part One. According to Bakshi, United Artists executives told him that they were planning to release the film without indicating that a sequel would follow, because they felt that audiences would not pay to see half of a film.
10.) The film was adapted into comic book form with artwork by Spanish artist Luis Bermejo, under license from Tolkien Enterprises. Three issues were published for the European market and were not published in the United States or the UK due to copyright problems.
The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien (1990)
In 1989 Eclipse Comics produced a three-part adaptation of The Hobbit by Chuck Dixon, Sean Deming and illustrated by David Wenzel. A year later, due to public demand, this was subsequently re-issued as a single graphic novel that has remained in print ever since. The writers wisely chose to sensitively abridge Tolkien’s source text, rather than adapted the story and make any major changes. Hence this graphic novel version of The Hobbit retains much of the dialogue from the original novel and subsequently maintains the book’s inherent charm. There are no major plot omissions and the narrative flows well. The panel layouts are innovative and accommodate a wealth of written material without overwhelming the artwork.
In 1989 Eclipse Comics produced a three-part adaptation of The Hobbit by Chuck Dixon, Sean Deming and illustrated by David Wenzel. A year later, due to public demand, this was subsequently re-issued as a single graphic novel that has remained in print ever since. The writers wisely chose to sensitively abridge Tolkien’s source text, rather than adapted the story and make any major changes. Hence this graphic novel version of The Hobbit retains much of the dialogue from the original novel and subsequently maintains the book’s inherent charm. There are no major plot omissions and the narrative flows well. The panel layouts are innovative and accommodate a wealth of written material without overwhelming the artwork.
Tolkien's The Hobbit is a substantially different book to in comparison to The Lord of The Rings both in narrative style and tone. It was squarely aimed as children and takes a much lighter tone than its sequel. Artist David Wenzel captures this aspect superbly with rich, colourful illustrations. His visualisation of Middle-earth is lush and very European. His depiction of Bilbo Baggins, is suitably ruddy cheeked and rustic. He also distils the characters age and placid demeanour very well. His Goblins are scary but not the feral, demonic entities we see in Peter Jackson’s movies. His Dwarves are regal and less military than other depictions. Gandalf is especially understated, looking more like a village elder than a wizard. Overall the artwork is vivid, and all the characters are clearly defined, which significantly contributes to the readers emotional investment.
Part of the great appeal of Tolkien's work is the mental imagery that it inspires among readers. Tolkien often gave detailed description of people and places but always provided scope for those reading his books to conjure up their own unique interpretations. However, over the years a strong consensus on visual interpretations has developed, due to the popularity of Alan Lee's and John Howe's body of work. Their influence is such that both worked as creative consultants on both of Peter Jackson’s movie trilogies. David Wenzel's graphics are very different from this perceived status quo, yet clearly captures the essence of the story and offers strong characterisations. The Hobbit graphic novel also provides a great alternative introduction to Tolkien's work, without compromising the Professors narrative skills. This version of The Hobbit is therefore a welcome addition to anyone's bookshelf.
Middle-earth and Non-Canonical Stories
Canon and lore are sacred cows to many fans. Any deviation from the clearly established is met with scepticism and on occasions outrage. It is the hill they are prepared to die, defending. In the past I have felt equally as strong about this matter as others but over the years I have become increasingly relaxed about such things. I guess once you realise that your childhood memories cannot be ruined, despite what some claim, then you cease to worry as much. If you do not like an adaptation, extrapolation or continuation beyond the canon of a particular IP, then you simply say, “it’s not for me” and move on. Not liking an idea or concept because it doesn’t conform your preconceptions and personal tastes does not give you the right to try and quash it. So overall, I don’t mind Tom Cruise being Jack Reacher. A female Doctor Who is fine with me. I even like the movie adaptation of Raise the Titanic.
Canon and lore are sacred cows to many fans. Any deviation from the clearly established is met with scepticism and on occasions outrage. It is the hill they are prepared to die, defending. In the past I have felt equally as strong about this matter as others but over the years I have become increasingly relaxed about such things. I guess once you realise that your childhood memories cannot be ruined, despite what some claim, then you cease to worry as much. If you do not like an adaptation, extrapolation or continuation beyond the canon of a particular IP, then you simply say, “it’s not for me” and move on. Not liking an idea or concept because it doesn’t conform your preconceptions and personal tastes does not give you the right to try and quash it. So overall, I don’t mind Tom Cruise being Jack Reacher. A female Doctor Who is fine with me. I even like the movie adaptation of Raise the Titanic.
However, as I mention, I wasn’t always this easy going. Tolkien’s body of work has long been something I enjoy and hold in high esteem. Thus, when both The Lord of the Rings: War in the North and Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor were both announced respectively in 2011 and 2014, I was highly sceptical. Initial marketing showed a great deal of imagery devoid of any context. How could a Ranger be a Wraith and why were Eagles being used as mounts? Yet over time, as more information filtered through, it became clear that these were not total bastardisations of Tolkien’s work and I ended up buying and enjoying both games. In fact, I would go so far as to say that it was their innovative extrapolation of the lore that was one of the primary reasons I liked both titles so well.
What becomes apparent when playing The Lord of the Rings: War in the North and Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor is that although they are derived from Tolkien’s work, they are more of a continuation of Peter Jackson’s cinematic adaptations. They certainly have the same detailed aesthetic and action focus. However, the stories of both games have creative plots that are based heavily in Middle-earth lore. The Lord of the Rings makes it clear in the Appendices that the War of the Ring was fought on multiple fronts. Both Gondor and Erebor were assailed by Sauron’s forces and Dol Guldur was destroyed by the Elves. So, the threat of third front hailing from Angmar, as seen in The Lord of the Rings: War in the North, is hardly a stretch either narratively or militarily. Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor is equally as creative exploring the fate of Celebrimbor. It delves in to many aspects of Tolkien’s work from the Blue Wizards, Saruman’s hunt for the ring, as well as the ongoing wane of Gondor.
These games along with Standing Stone Games’ Lord of the Rings Online succeed as they journey beyond established canon, due to the love and affection their writers have for the source material. Rather than abandon established ideas, these games develop them and frequently fill in the grey areas of known lore. When one considers the magnitude of Sauron’s empire, surely he would have a much wider chain of command, other than just the Nazgûl. Hence, I do not balk at the Black Númenórean Lieutenant named Agandaûr, or the three Black Captains; the Hammer of Sauron, the Tower of Sauron and their leader, the Black Hand of Sauron. All make sense and play a specific role in the Dark Lord’s military hierarchy. Furthermore, we have seen in the source text, that Orcs and Uruks have personalities, as well as aspirations and agendas of their own. Thus, I found the character Ratbag in Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor very plausible as he tries to do a deal with Talion to establish his power base. Also, having made some checks, I cannot find any definitive proof that Smaug was the last Dragon in Middle-earth. So I have no major prejudice against Draigoch or Úrgost.
Sadly, where I am happy to accommodate the aforementioned games non-canonical narratives, I feel that I have to draw a line with fan fiction. The standard of knowledge, research and writing seen in LOTRO, The Lord of the Rings: War in the North and Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor simply isn’t present in grassroot fan generated content. Many fan writers just don’t have the necessary skills to forge a compelling narrative. It’s something you’ll see in many Star Wars and Star Trek fan films. They will often sport exemplary production values given the financial constraints but the dialogue is usually amateurish and embarrassing. Boundless love and enthusiasm are no substitute for genuine talent. Star Trek Continues transcends the traditional fan film label, due to the pedigree of those associated with the production. The Hunt for Gollum and Born of Hope don’t quite hit that level of professionalism, although they certainly raised the bar for Tolkien based fan movies.
It was recently announced that the three-way legal dispute between the Tolkien Estate, Middle-earth Enterprises and Warner Bros. has now been settled, which raises the question of further game development of Tolkien’s IP. Middle-earth: Shadow of War is due to be released on October and I am very interested as to where the story goes next. I see from trailers that Shelob is now part of the narrative, which is a bold move indeed. If this title is as equally successful as its predecessor then surely more games of this idiom will follow. Because of the specific terms of the licence, future material is somewhat tied to the scope just The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Yet because both of these books encompass a vast world of lore, much of which has never been fully explored or even fleshed out, we are potentially faced with a very creative opportunity. At present, due to the standard of what has already been released, I do not fear what may follow. Therefore, perhaps some fans should try and take a fresh look at this situation and revise their opinions regarding non-canonical stories.
The Songs of Middle-earth: Part One
Tolkien's use of song and verse are an integral part of his writings. I am not musically talented myself, nor am I a scholar of song structure but I appreciate how he uses them for plot exposition and character development. In The Lord of the Rings, the medium of song is also used as a means of conveying the enormity of Middle Earth and the wealth of history therein. They give us a sense of the realms lore and heritage, stretching back over millennia. The respective sophistication of each song also reflects the culture that created them. Songs from The Shire are rustic and quaint. The songs of Men are bombastic and bold. Whereas Elven music is often melancholy and complex.
Tolkien's use of song and verse are an integral part of his writings. I am not musically talented myself, nor am I a scholar of song structure but I appreciate how he uses them for plot exposition and character development. In The Lord of the Rings, the medium of song is also used as a means of conveying the enormity of Middle Earth and the wealth of history therein. They give us a sense of the realms lore and heritage, stretching back over millennia. The respective sophistication of each song also reflects the culture that created them. Songs from The Shire are rustic and quaint. The songs of Men are bombastic and bold. Whereas Elven music is often melancholy and complex.
Norse and Anglo-Saxon Mythology were immensely important and influential on Tolkien. Thus, many of his songs are in the idiom of Norse poetry. He often uses literary devices such as the pitch of repeating vowel sounds (assonance) as well as the resonance of repeating consonant sounds (both in alliteration and in consonance). Tolkien himself sanctioned composer Donald Swann (of Flanders and Swann fame) to set some of his work to music and it met with his approval. Yet there are no definitive musical versions. This leaves a great deal of scope for artists from all musical disciplines to interpret his work.
A Google search will provide you with a wealth of artists that have attempted to bring Tolkien’s songs to life. From Rick Wakeman, Daniel McCarthy to Sir Christopher Lee. I have selected a few of examples of these for your consideration. Some are the exact songs as they were written by the Professor himself, with accompanying music. Others have been cleverly adapted or abridged. I have even included some material that was simply inspired by Professor Tolkien's work.
The BBC radio adaptation of The Lord of the Rings in 1981 was a milestone in radio drama. Composer Stephen Oliver made an immeasurable contribution to the production with his intelligent and musically literate expressions of Tolkien's written work. O Elbereth Gilthoniel is a paean in reverence of the star Queen. Oliver cleverly adapts the Sindarin text into a beautiful and expressive song, sung in the style of a madrigal. It is a bold interpretation yet it works superbly, reflecting the artistic dignity of the Elves.
A Elbereth Gilthoniel
silivren penna míriel
o menel aglar elenath!
Na-chaered palan-díriel
o galadhremmin ennorath,
Fanuilos, le linnathon
nef aear, sí nef aearon!
A Elbereth Gilthoniel
o menel palan-diriel,
le nallon sí di'nguruthos!
A tiro nin, Fanuilos!
O Elbereth Starkindler,
white-glittering, slanting down sparkling like a jewel,
the glory of the starry host!
Having gazed far away
from the tree-woven lands of Middle-earth,
to thee, Everwhite, I will sing,
on this side of the Sea, here on this side of the Ocean!
O Elbereth Starkindler,
from heaven gazing afar,
to thee I cry now beneath the shadow of death!
O look towards me, Everwhite!
Now this may be a controversial choice, coming from the 1977 animated version of The Hobbit. It is not a film held in high regard. In the Valley, Ha! Ha! written by Jules Bass and performed by Glenn Yarbrough is based upon the song the Elves sing as the Dwarves, Gandalf and Bilbo ride down into the Valley of Rivendell for the first time. The musical arrangement is very much a product of the seventies and the warbling voice of Mr. Yarbrough is not to everyone's liking. Yet it catches the light-hearted spirit of the source text very well and it is worryingly hummable. I have warmed to it in recent years and consider it a good example of less being more.
O! What are you doing,
And where are you going?
Your ponies need shoeing!
The River is flowing!
O! Tra-la-la-lally
Here down in the valley!
Ha ha!
O! Where are you going,
With beards all a-wagging?
No knowing, no knowing
What brings Mister Baggins,
And Balin and Dwalin
In June in the valley
Ha ha!
O! Will you be staying,
Or will you be flying?
Your ponies are straying!
The daylight is dying!
To fly would be folly,
To stay would be jolly!
O! Tril-lil-lil-lolly
Ha ha!
O! What are you doing,
And where are you going?
Your ponies need shoeing!
The River is flowing!
O! Tra-la-la-lally
Here down in the valley!
Ha ha!
Mithrandir by Leonard Rosenman with lyrics by Mark Fleischer, comes from the 1978 animated version of The Lord of the Rings. The score by veteran composer Rosenman is not considered to be a particularly innovative piece of work but it is both functional and adequate. Director Ralph Bakshi found it clichéd and wanted a soundtrack by led Zeppelin. The song is somewhat traditional in its style, starting with elements of a holiday choir and ending in a Miklos Rozsa style biblical idiom. Yet despite its clumsy implementation the lyrics are a curiously accurate summation of Gandalf's character. The song is sung in Lothlorien as a lament to the Grey Pilgrim and is moving in a rather honest and simple fashion.
Let the night never cease to call you
Let the day nevermore be the same
Though you've gone where we cannot find you
In each heart you have set your name
Mithrandir far you wander
And long may your name be sung
Through kingdoms of starlight
And realms of the sun
Mithrandir though you're hidden
We're still guided by your light
You're walking beside us
A friend in the night
We were lost when the dark descended
And the light gathered into a storm
You appeared like a sunlit morning
At the winds of a world at war
Mithrandir far you wander
And long may your name be sung
Through kingdoms of starlight
And realms of the sun
Mithrandir though you're hidden
We're still guided by your light
You're walking beside us
A friend in the night
Mithrandir rising through the shadow
Like a star shining deep in its home
You will dwell in our hearts forever
Nevermore will we stand alone