Could (Should) the Simarillion become a film?

[Kaiserin]

Hmm... I've got mixed feelings about a "Silm" movie ... of course there would be an initial excitement about seing the Silm on film, but then when I get to thinking of how it could be totally massacred and messed up - horrible would be an understatement (how about "blasphemy"? ) <P>Hard to imagine it all compresed into a few hours. There would have to be a lot of narration and explanation - and that would just ruin the whole reason for making it visual.<P>The Silmarillion is too "history-ish". To make this a success, there would have to be an awfully good director, a screenplay writer who can work miracles, an outstanding cast and a superhuman creative team ... and a budget that is several oliphaunts huge. <P>Galadriel would make an awkward "focal point" since most of the story doesn't have anything to do with her - not directly, anyway. At most, she can be the narrator with a third-person perspective.<P>I'd agree with the others' posts about Beren & Luthien's story and Turambar's tale as the most "film-worthy" parts of it. But if you take only parts of the Silmarillion, you might as well give it a whole different title. I mean, what's the point of calling it "The Silmarillion" if it's just going to be a very small fraction of the whole thing? But then, imagine a film called "Beren and Luthien" or "The Tale of Túrin Turambar" or "Fëanor"? - Those are really sucky titles.<P>If those big movie companies wouldn't invest in a Silm-film (and that seems likely), Tolkien fans would have to settle for viewing a low-budget one. (A low-budget Silm? Hardly possible!) Now <I>that</I> will be a waste of time and effort.<p>[ 5:08 AM January 15, 2004: Message edited by: Kaiserin ]