Or no Hobbits at all...

[zxcvbn]

Originally Posted by Galin

Well, on the languages, Jackson chose much fabricated Neo-elvish over much of Tolkien's actual Elvish in the books.

Blame David Salo for that. Only a tiny minority of Tokien fans study Middle-earth linguistsics, and I doubt there is anyone on this forum who has enough knowledge
to distinguish between 'authentic' Sindarin and Salo's neo-Sindarin. I'm pretty sure Jackson also knows zip about Elvish, so he approached one of the most well-known Tolkien linguists out there, David Salo. Who, by the way, is respected and considered a credible source on Tolkien linguistics by MOST of the Tolkien fan community. It's only in hardcore linguistic circles, consisting of those who've studied Tolkien languages for years, that he's disliked for his inaccuracies.

Originally Posted by Galin

Disagree with this if you like, but to my mind Jackson didn't have to go to the Estate or anyone to represent Tolkien's Elvish, just the books basically (maybe to someone on pronunciation, though the books are quite handy there too).

The LOTR books only contain about two to three dozen Elvish words, all in all. To properly study Elvish you need someone who's spent years reading Tolkien's unpublished texts.

Originally Posted by Galin

In any case, what proof is there (I'm not saying there isn't any) of Jackson wanting to go to Christopher Tolkien, or anyone who is actually part of the Estate, for advice on languages, costumes, architecture, for a more accurate vision of Middle-earth? And how far was this going to go, even if true? And did it include advice on story too? proper emphasis on battles or monsters? important themes? advice on characters?

It would be logical. What else would they want? What proof is there that the filmmakers only wanted the Estate's official endorsement?

It seems to me that some people are going out of their way to 'prove' how Jackson intentionally 'bastardized' the books for profit.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by zxcvbn

'Blame David Salo for that. Only a tiny minority of Tokien fans study Middle-earth linguistsics, and I doubt there is anyone on this forum who has enough knowledge to distinguish between 'authentic' Sindarin and Salo's neo-Sindarin. I'm pretty sure Jackson also knows zip about Elvish, so he approached one of the most well-known Tolkien linguists out there, David Salo. Who, by the way, is respected and considered a credible source on Tolkien linguistics by MOST of the Tolkien fan community. It's only in hardcore linguistic circles, consisting of those who've studied Tolkien languages for years, that he's disliked for his inaccuracies.'

Whether the Neo-elvish is accurate enough is beside the point however. Nobody was needed to invent any; rather someone associated with the films decided more was 'needed' I guess. A claim that Jackson desired accuracy concerning the languages, which he probably did with respect to invented stuff, is one thing -- but then, since Jackson largely chooses fabricated Elvish over Tolkien's actual examples -- well this seems to be rather an odd choice with respect to accuracy to my mind.

Originally Posted by zxcvbn

The LOTR books only contain about two to three dozen Elvish words, all in all. To properly study Elvish you need someone who's spent years reading Tolkien's unpublished texts.

The books contain more than just a scattering of words of course -- basically incorporate the Elvish that appears in the tale, and have a pronunciation coach maybe. See Carl Hostetter's previous quote (in my post) for why.

(...) It would be logical. What else would they want? What proof is there that the filmmakers only wanted the Estate's official endorsement?

Back up the train here -- you wrote: 'Maybe New Line had that kind of attitude, but there's no doubt PJ and the folks at Wingnut Films and WETA only wanted the Estate's assistance to help create a more accurate, painstaking vision of Middle-earth. Notes on Tolkien linguistics, advice on costumes, architecture etc.'

I don't need positive proof that Jackson only wanted an official endorsement. I asked for proof because you appeared to claim there was no doubt concerning your statement. So far it appears (now) to be your opinion, but I thought the wording implied there was more in the way of some evidence I was unaware of.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

It's not unlike Gen. Omar Bradley's status as "advisor" on the biopic Patton. Coppola got a very big-name endorsement; Bradley got a pot o' cash and a glowing, almost saintly portrayal onscreen.

What was never in play was anything resembling historical accuracy.

[Sauron the White]

Well, having just returned from a week of fun in the sunny climes of the Florida Keys, I must say that not one thing has been cleared up in my absence. I do find it interesting that the complaint filed is now available online and has been extensively quoted here and elsewhere, but the key elements have not been disclosed. And what are those?

The most important things as I see them is the definition of income, expenses and what is allowable and what is not. If NL is going to claim that their expenses times the 2.6 multiplier factor yield a number that denies the Estate any revenues at this time, then the important thing is to determine how that series of numbers is put together.

A week ago I wrote that we need to know how the contract defines the permissable expenses that the filmmaker is allowed to use before determining if the 2.6 multiplier goes into effect. AS OF TODAY, WE DO NOT KNOW THAT.

A week ago I wrote that we need to know how the contract defines the monies that amount to gross receipts or income. AS OF TODAY, WE DO NOT KNOW THAT.

Until we know those things, we are just running all our collective mouths as we attempt to discuss this suit without proper evidence. Of course, that has never stopped anyone here before.

I hesitate to get into a discussion about the motives of the filmmakers and if they should have, or if they did, consult Christopher Tolkien. Some here have floated the idea that if they - Jackson and company- would have given CT a veto over the scripts they maybe he would have helped. That is simply something that no filmmaker would want to do unless they had absolutely no other way of obtaining the rights. You are giving a veto to somebody who may not know beans about the filmmaking process, script writing, directing or anything else asociated with films.

Ernest Hemmingway said the best thing a author and producer could do was to meet on a deserted beach at midnight and toss the book and a briefcase filled with money to each other and never see or talk to each other again. Hemingway knew what he was talking about. And it looks like JRR Tolkien took Hemingways advice because his agreement with UA gave him not even the merest suggestion of a whisper of influence. And he was happy with enough with that to sign the contract.

If the Estate wants fans to be informed about this lawsuit and wants fan support for their position, they would do well to release the important language defining the items I have mentioned here. Without that, we are only getting very spotty information which in the end is like trying to read so many tea leaves.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

As I see it, our purpose in discussions here at the Downs is to talk about content, not about finances. So unless there is something really important that needs to be said about this issue, let's chill it. There's no sense in getting hot and bothered over an issue that concerns none of us directly and that cannot be influenced by any of us.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

If the Estate wants fans to be informed about this lawsuit and wants fan support for their position, they would do well to release the important language defining the items I have mentioned here.

As if the Estate cared about either, or 'fan support' mattered a hill of beans in court.

The Estate's *lawyers* have not yet filed the original contracts. Eventually they will. That's the way litigation works.

[Sauron the White]

from Estelyn

There's no sense in getting hot and bothered over an issue that concerns none of us directly and that cannot be influenced by any of us.

I agree with that statement that nobody should get hot and bothered about this because none of us have a dime to make either way. That is true. And you certainly have taught me that no discussion should be heated. Nice and proper with all courtesy and respect extended to all.

However, I do think that this entire situation could have impact upon all of us who have an interest in future films about Middle-earth particularly the announced HOBBIT film and a bridge film. Since the Estate has announced that part of their suit is to explore the idea that NL can be stripped of rights to make these films, and many of us want these films, there is a very direct effect upon us. That is what makes this an interesting topic for discussion here and a very much on topic subject for discussion.

from WCH

As if the Estate cared about either, or 'fan support' mattered a hill of beans in court.

There are several kinds of courts. There are courts of law and there is the court of public opinion.

The Estate's *lawyers* have not yet filed the original contracts. Eventually they will. That's the way litigation works.

If and when that happens, I would be greatly interested in seeing the actual language to see if it is indeed specific in offereing crystal clear definitions of the various terms in the contract identifying what these acceptable expenses are and how they are calcualted and what constitutes income and how that is calculated. Until we have that nobody here can make any judgment as to if or how much the Estate has been cheated by NL or how much money is due to them.

I totally agree that the Estate should get every dollar owed to them under the contract. NL has a terrible record of paying off profit sharing partners so it would not surprise me at all if the Estate is just the latest in that line. However, the deal the Estate has if far different than simple profit sharing becauses of this expenses times 2.6 multiplier. That makes their profit sharing far different than Saul Zaentz, Peter Jackson or anyone else.

JRR Tolkien may have made the best deal in the history of selling film rights. Or he may have made a terrible deal. We will not know that until these facts come out.

I suspect that even when they do, they will be less than crystal clear and offer much wiggle room for accountants and attorneys to earn their princely salaries in court for the next couple of years.

[davem]

Re 'Fan support": Ace Books anyone?

[zxcvbn]

Originally Posted by Galin

Whether the Neo-elvish is accurate enough is beside the point however. Nobody was needed to invent any; rather someone associated with the films decided more was 'needed' I guess.

Originally Posted by Galin

The books contain more than just a scattering of words of course -- basically incorporate the Elvish that appears in the tale, and have a pronunciation coach maybe. See Carl Hostetter's previous quote (in my post) for why.

The films had several scenes where characters exchange Elvish dialogue which does not match the books word-by-word, and many of the songs in the soundtrack had Elvish lyrics. This demanded a lot more words and grammar than was printed in the LOTR books.

Originally Posted by Galin

A claim that Jackson desired accuracy concerning the languages, which he probably did with respect to invented stuff, is one thing -- but then, since Jackson largely chooses fabricated Elvish over Tolkien's actual examples -- well this seems to be rather an odd choice with respect to accuracy to my mind.

Re-read my previous post before repeating the same argument again. Jackson himself didn't know anything about Elvish, so he hired Salo. From his point of view, Salo's Elvish was as accurate as can be, since he probably hasn't read any critiques of Salo's work from the scholarly community.

Originally Posted by Galin

Back up the train here -- you wrote: 'Maybe New Line had that kind of attitude, but there's no doubt PJ and the folks at Wingnut Films and WETA only wanted the Estate's assistance to help create a more accurate, painstaking vision of Middle-earth. Notes on Tolkien linguistics, advice on costumes, architecture etc.'

my apologies. I should have phrased that a little differently. I'm not SURE that 'PJ and the folks at Wingnut Films and WETA only wanted the Estate's assistance to help create a more accurate, painstaking vision of Middle-earth. Notes on Tolkien linguistics, advice on costumes, architecture etc.' but that is certainly my opinion, seeing as that's what the creators of the stage play asked for(and recieved) from the Estate.

Originally Posted by Galin

I don't need positive proof that Jackson only wanted an official endorsement.

Then you have some doubt about that statement? It seems WCH doesn't. So I, in turn, take the liberty to ask him for proof.

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

It's not unlike Gen. Omar Bradley's status as "advisor" on the biopic Patton. Coppola got a very big-name endorsement; Bradley got a pot o' cash and a glowing, almost saintly portrayal onscreen.

What was never in play was anything resembling historical accuracy.

Originally Posted by Galin

I asked for proof because you appeared to claim there was no doubt concerning your statement.

I'm afraid I don't have solid proof because most of the facts are unknown. You'll find that most of the posts here are made up of inferences made from known facts
instead of pure fact.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by zxcvbn

The films had several scenes where characters exchange Elvish dialogue which does not match the books word-by-word, and many of the songs in the soundtrack had Elvish lyrics. This demanded a lot more words and grammar than was printed in the LOTR books.

Yes, and this includes a decision on someone's part to add more fabricated Elvish. Since none was necessarily 'needed' for a film, I'm not sure what the point is here.

Re-read my previous post before repeating the same argument again. Jackson himself didn't know anything about Elvish, so he hired Salo. From his point of view, Salo's Elvish was as accurate as can be, since he probably hasn't read any critiques of Salo's work from the scholarly community.

I'll try a question here: was it Salo's decision to discard much of Tolkien's Elvish in favor of invented stuff?

One doesn't need to know much about Tolkien's Elvish to see what appears in the book, and incorporate that into the films. One might need help in incorporating it 'correctly'... but that doesn't mean adding all kinds of invented stuff while discarding Tolkien's material.

[Sauron the White]

It seems a fair gesture on the part of a filmmaker to go out and hire an expert on something of which he has little knowledge. That is what happened with the hiring of Salo. Instead of criticizing Jackson for this effort, it would seem some praise is in order for him attempting to go the extra mile to get things right. This kind of constant carping simply reinforces the idea that nothing short of a literal word for word translation- in this case Elvish words = from the page to the screen would have pleased some. I know of no cases where audiences emptied from the theaters in anger screaming "the Elvish was wrong"

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

I know of no cases where audiences emptied from the theaters in anger screaming "the Elvish was wrong"

Possibly not. Most scholars of Middle-earth and Tolkien's languages would probably be too polite and socially gracious to do that.

I did, however, hear of mutterings to the effect of, "The Elvish has left the building."

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Possibly not. Most scholars of Middle-earth and Tolkien's languages would probably be too polite and socially gracious to do that. I did, however, hear of mutterings to the effect of, "The Elvish has left the building."

Indeed 'it left'.

And, just for clarity here, for the thread, to my mind Carl Hostetter (since he is a scholar) is not criticizing how 'wrong' he thinks the fabricated Elvish is, or might be (regarding grammar or pronunciation), but rather that it does not capture the spirit of the books due to its nature. Moreover, it has taken over the linguistic stage not simply due to its own bulk, but due also to a disappearance of Tolkien's actual examples.

Not that I can speak for Mr. Hostetter, but I see nothing in the quoted section above about grammar or whatever... indeed he adds 'however skillfully' because that's not the point.