90 Miles From Tyranny : How Tolkien’s True Vision Could Be Lost in ‘Lord of the Rings’ TV Series

infinite scrolling

Thursday, November 16, 2017

How Tolkien’s True Vision Could Be Lost in ‘Lord of the Rings’ TV Series


Sometimes it’s best to just leave a good thing alone.

Amazon reportedly has closed a massive, $250 million deal to produce a new “Lord of the Rings” TV series to be based on events that take place before J.R.R. Tolkien’s famous trilogy of novels, other than those recounted in “The Hobbit,” anyway. So far, details remain murky.

However, one narrative has been constant since the deal was announced Monday: Amazon is looking to create its own version of “Game of Thrones,” the massively popular HBO fantasy series based on novels by George R.R. Martin.

While the “Game of Thrones” connection may mostly allude to the rare mass acceptance of a series in the fantasy genre, an attempt to create similarities between the series beyond the superficial would be a betrayal of Tolkien’s work.

The ethos of “The Lord of the Rings,” as conceived by Tolkien, a Catholic traditionalist who wrote the books in the 1950s, is far removed from “Game of Thrones” on a deeper level.

Yes, dragons figure in both, and both take place in medieval-style fantasy worlds. The similarities end there.

Replacing the romanticism of “The Lord of the Rings” with the Machiavellian and raunchy world of “Game of Thrones” would be a gut punch to long-term Tolkien fans and submerge the ultimate appeal of the world he created.

The temptation to please a modern audience may be too much for Amazon, which already has poured incredible amounts of money into the project.

Tolkien’s novels pit almost literal beasts against angels, while flawed men must navigate the waters of good and evil. The trilogy maintains an underlying theme focused on the corruption of the world and the original sin of man.

Man, in Tolkien’s work, is easily and often corrupted, but behind that corruption, Middle Earth holds things that are truly good and...Read More HERE

No comments: