Peter Jackson to film "Lord of the Rings Sequels"

[Dark Lord]

Yeah, that's why I hate Aprils Fools. I really hope PJ makes a lotr sequel though.

[Zigûr]

Originally Posted by Dark Lord

I really hope PJ makes a lotr sequel though.

Even though there's no substantial source material to base one on?

It's interesting to think that The Lord of the Rings has to be one of those rare examples in fiction where a sequel actually lives up to the standard of the original, and in this case enlarges it and contributes something more (whether it improves upon it is a matter of taste). Modern culture is so content with sequels (or prequels) that re-tread the same old ground over and over again, which is only really designed to make money for businesses, not provide some fresh artistic statement to audiences. I don't get why people are happy to let the works they love stagnate into franchises.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

I don't get why people are happy to let the works they love stagnate into franchises.

Especially when the original works in question are not only the product of a long-dead author, but also would as "new" sequels inevitably be Hollywood mass-produced clones of every other Next Big Thing in the theaters nowadays.

[Dark Lord]

Well, like stated above, I believe that Tolkien intended the saga to continue, even though he did cancel 'The New Shadow', I still believe he wanted it to continue on.

And correct me if I am wrong, I don't think Tolkien estate has the rights to the movies, there fore unable to do anything. Who ever has the rights to the movies can make another LOTR movie if they choose to do so. Please correct me if I am wrong.

[Herald_of_Mandos]

Originally Posted by Dark Lord

Well, like stated above, I believe that Tolkien intended the saga to continue, even though he did cancel 'The New Shadow', I still believe he wanted it to continue on.

And correct me if I am wrong, I don't think Tolkien estate has the rights to the movies, there fore unable to do anything. Who ever has the rights to the movies can make another LOTR movie if they choose to do so. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Exactly! Just like the article says, it's all in the Appendices somewhere! If it's not in yours, well you must have the wrong edition...

[Zigûr]

Originally Posted by Dark Lord

Well, like stated above, I believe that Tolkien intended the saga to continue, even though he did cancel 'The New Shadow', I still believe he wanted it to continue on.

I would dispute this. I don't think Tolkien ever considered or wanted the history of Arda to continue beyond the Fall of Sauron - that's exactly why he stopped writing "The New Shadow". Without 'incarnate evil' there was nothing left to write about. Fictional history became real history.
I think that "other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama" quote is regularly taken out of context, incidentally. See, for instance, Letter 292 for an instance of Professor Tolkien's opinion of sequels not penned by his own hand.

Originally Posted by Dark Lord

And correct me if I am wrong, I don't think Tolkien estate has the rights to the movies, there fore unable to do anything. Who ever has the rights to the movies can make another LOTR movie if they choose to do so. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I don't think anyone said anything about the Estate. It's not that the movies couldn't be made; I was suggesting that they shouldn't be made. What would they base them on anyway? They only have the rights to adapt The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. The rights to "The New Shadow", by the way, are very definitely in the hands of the Estate, just like The Silmarillion and everything else.
Even if they did just make one up (which I imagine could put them in a dubious legal position), why would anyone want it if it wasn't based on Professor Tolkien's own work? What would be the point?

[Dark Lord]

I would dispute this. I don't think Tolkien ever considered or wanted the history of Arda to continue beyond the Fall of Sauron - that's exactly why he stopped writing "The New Shadow". Without 'incarnate evil' there was nothing left to write about. Fictional history became real history.

Dagor Dagorath? That is a prophecy, even though it may not be clear, but it still was written.

Even if they did just make one up (which I imagine could put them in a dubious legal position), why would anyone want it if it wasn't based on Professor Tolkien's own work? What would be the point?

Simple. Money hungry companies don't really care if it was written by a the best author and if they destroy it's lore.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Dark Lord

Dagor Dagorath? That is a prophecy, even though it may not be clear, but it still was written.

But what would it be? Two (or in case PJ was the director, four) hour long movie which is about the battle between Ancalagon and Eärendil and Túrin and Morgoth and who knows what? There is not much space for any story development, really. It will be just one big battle on screen.

[Zigûr]

Originally Posted by Dark Lord

Simple. Money hungry companies don't really care if it was written by a the best author and if they destroy it's lore.

But I already mentioned that the profit motive is why companies would want to do it. My question was why fans would want it. You yourself said you hope they make sequels. Would you really want that even though there are no events following The Lord of the Rings left to adapt without enormous amounts of pure invention?

I actually once read a fan-made supplement for Games Workshop's The Lord of the Rings tabletop game which took the "Blue Wizards turned evil" concept to embellish Aragorn's conflicts with the Easterlings in the Fourth Age - probably the most sensible sequel idea I've ever read, but then again fan fiction doesn't interest me (as I recently told someone who claimed that as a Tolkien afficionado I must have read some unlicensed Russian publication that characterised the villains as misunderstood or some such thing).

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Dark Lord

Well, like stated above, I believe that Tolkien intended the saga to continue, even though he did cancel 'The New Shadow', I still believe he wanted it to continue on.

Tolkien abandoned The New Shadow because, in his own words, it would have been a "thriller", and thus "not worth doing". Shame Peter Jackson couldn't have such wisdom.

Originally Posted by Dark Lord

Simple. Money hungry companies don't really care if it was written by a the best author and if they destroy it's lore.

Which is why they ought to let Tolkien be. His work has been commercialized too much as it is.

[Nerwen]

Well, like stated above, I believe that Tolkien intended the saga to continue, even though he did cancel 'The New Shadow', I still believe he wanted it to continue on.

Originally Posted by Dark Lord

Dagor Dagorath? That is a prophecy, even though it may not be clear, but it still was written.

Mmmn. Seems to be a bit of a confusion of ideas here, Dark Lord. Yes, in-story "the saga continues"– in the sense that events of some kind are presumably going to go on happening in Middle-earth– but this is true of any book whatsoever unless it finishes with all the characters dying and the world ending. And yes, Tolkien does mention, or speculate on, some of this "future history" in various places. Okay. That in no way implies that he intended "the saga to continue" in the real world in the form of sequels (particularly not ones made up out of thin air by other people). I'm really not sure how you're arriving at that.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Originally Posted by Dark Lord

And correct me if I am wrong, I don't think Tolkien estate has the rights to the movies, there fore unable to do anything. Who ever has the rights to the movies can make another LOTR movie if they choose to do so. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Quite correct. Saul Zaentz and whomever he chooses to license those rights to, such as Peter Jackson, could legally drop trou, take a gigantic dump on a pile of film stock, and call it "Tolkien." Oh, wait, PJ already did that.....

[Mithalwen]

Is there any evidence Dark Lord, beyond your wishful thinking? Personally if an author chooses not to continue a sequel and dismisses the concept in no uncertain terms then I take it as rather overwhelming evidence that he had drawn a line. He wasn't keen on the idea of films being made of his published work so I can't see he would have been chuffed about concotions. Only movie rights to LOTR and the Hobbit were sold they haven't carte blanche over the whole corpus.

Some literary estates do authorise sequels and no doubt they could have made megabucks if Tolkien's estate had gone likewise. Whatever people think of Christopher Tolkien (and I know I am much more of a fan than some) the fact is that he was JRRT's choice as literary executor. If he trusted his son as to the exploitation of his works I don't see why anyone else thinks they are better judge of his wishes. We are free to create our own fan works but bottom line we are playing in someone else's sandpit...

[Dark Lord]

Fans would most likely watch a movie anything to do with Middle - Earth regardless if it was written by J.R.R or not. Curiosity. Even if people didnt like it, and they watched it at the cinemas, too bad, the money is already coming in for them even if you passionately hated it.

I am not sure where I am going with this, but I have read quite a lot of articles and in most it says...

While evil would continue to exist, Sauron could never emerge as a Dark Lord again and never would have the power to create an army or draw evil creatures to his rule as he once did

To me, this implies there is an ultimately high chance of 'new evil' coming forth. Most of you would watch it, regardless if it was J.R.R Tolkiens work or not as stated before.