[Galadriel55]

I think the issue around sex/nude scenes is not so mich in their presence as in their use. GOT early seasons are known to have sex scenes just for the purpose of sex scenes - the story does not necessarily benefit from the expliciteness, nor even from the existence of the scene at all. Tolkien can write about nudity and sex and rape, but he'd never spend half a page describing someone's private parts in exquisite detail. He is more the type to let you know exactly what haplened, but to keep the details of the bedroom behind the curtain. It's not the presence of the scenes so much as the way they are done and the purpose they contribute to the story.

Would I watch a GOT style sexed up thing with Tolkien names? I would for Second Age material, to give it a fair chance as a very loose adaptation. I wouldn't if it attempts to adapt any more solid material. However, Hui said before that some sources say the sexualized angle is not what they are going for. Still, the nudity is not the reason I wouldn't watch it - I purposefully haven't watched movie adaptations of books that I really liked because I know they won't do it justice for me. Hence, if it's a very loose adaptation, I don't really care what they do with it, I will treat it basically as a work of its own, or a fanfiction. But if it sticks to the text enough to sort of follow the stoey but also warp everything, nah.