> we will never have another big-budget High Fantasy film with beautiful art design and special effects used to tell a compelling story
Fuck, I might as well shoot myself since I'm never getting my Malazan film series.
Not just that, any thread about it would be shitposted to death with bait, contrarianism, and 'hello reddit :^)'.
>YO GANDAFAUN YOU GOT THAT SWEET WIZZA CHRONIC? WANNA GET MY DICK WET IN SUM OF THAT SOUTHFARTHING SKEET!
Maybe we'll get a game of thrones trilogy
I wouldn't put them under high fantasy either, I was just trying to think of good fantasy movies in general. I'm also pretty sure Spirited Away came out before Fellowship, unless you're talking about the books obviously.
Ah you're right, Spirited Away came out a few months before Fellowship. My mistake. Fantasy is just a tough genre for Hollywood to embrace, since most of them see it as a big budget gamble, like the WoW movie even has cheap actors but it still cost $130 million+.
I love Star Wars, but the Lord of the Rings has to be the best trilogy of all time.
It is seriously great from start to finish. So immersive.
I never watched the Hobbit movies and never really had an interest. Looks less compelling, and kinda garbage 2bh.
>I never watched the Hobbit movies and never really had an interest. Looks less compelling, and kinda garbage 2bh.
They are no way near as good as LOTR.
They are still fun and good movies, though.
>I never watched the Hobbit movies
Eh, you're not really missing much at the end of the day. They're just so inferior to the original trilogy, it's really sad. I wouldn't say the worst movies ever either, they have their moments without doubt. Just moments though.
>You did it, Mr. Frodo! You're The Lord of the Rings™
Looking back it's weird this got made at all. It must have been one hell of a gamble, right? The geek shit wasn't as big back then, and they didn't skimp on the budget at all.
I don't think studios take chances like that anymore.
No, you expected to get LOTR, which you didn't get.
The Hobbit was doomed the moment they did LOTR first. It could never have worked, pacing and scale wouldn't have allowed it.
Even if The Hobbit was a perfect movie, it HAD to be done first, the scale of events are much smaller than LOTR. It's not the high fantasy adventure tale they wanted at the time they did LOTR. I want to strangle whose ever idea it was to make the sequel before the start.
Yep. It sucks that every possible High Fantasy movie would be focused on the diversity of it's characters rather than the quality of the story.
I watched The Lord of the Rings trilogy for the first time a few weeks ago (Just before Christmas) and it was honestly just a breath of fresh air to witness quality film-making, good action and strong character performances. I was thoroughly engrossed. And that's coming from someone who dislikes most action and adventure movies made these days.
I think my favourite moment in the trilogy is when Frodo and Samwise are at Mount Doom. Frodo is about to destroy the ring and then he says "It's mine". The fucking look on Samwise's face after he says that, all the despair, shock and disbelief on his face, it just stood out to me. The fact that they've both been through all this shit only for Frodo to say "No" and the way that Samwise's actor manages to portray all those emotions in a few seconds, it's really just incredible.
Definitely my favourite trilogy of all time undoubtedly.
What is good about it? Do you really enjoy paper-thin characters and descriptions of landscapes that much?
Tolkein may have had his talents at lore writing (given he spent decades on it and was a philogist) but he was not a good writer by any stretch once you divorce the books for that stuff. He and GRRM are about on equal level
How will that even work chronologically?
The other books/movies were about following a bunch of protags on a journey but that book is a mess of different events and stories taking place around different periods of time, not to mention the shit during the Second age.
On a scale of 1 to Rage, how angry does the term
>Medieval European PoC
One was an Oxford professor esteemed by colleagues of same status.
One was a man who served in the most bloody battles of the first world war.
One has recivied recognition for his works in literature in a time when actual literature was still being written.
The other is a fat slob who is riding the formers coat tales and will never finish his work in a competent manner.
Except they are. Both write in a completely simplistic prose to communicate the story and little else. Tolkein just uses a mythic flavouring and well-placed archaisms. GRRM sucks at that, but his characters are much better developed. They both overly describe useless things and GRRM obsesses over food, sigils and certain phrases whereas Tolkein prefers poems, songs and affecting a cozy atomsphere with his constant digressions to "homely houses" and other nonsense.
Either way, they are fantasy garbage. Tolkein is a sacred cow, that's all that shields him. Even fantasy before him is much better
depends, moors and asians both existed back then. as long as the people in the movie are aware that seeing a nonwhite is pretty rare then its ok. if king arthur is black as hell then its a problem
>One was an Oxford professor esteemed by colleagues of same status.
Ok I agree Tolkien is obviously better than GRRM, but his colleagues were not fond of him. Actually they were embarrassed by him and his written works, saw fantasy as a lowbrow genre of the academic world. It's quite sad how he was ostracized after his huge public success honestly.
Except Tolkein was ridiculed by and large in his time because his writing was shit. He was laughably recommended for a Nobel prize, they soundly rejected the notion of even nominating him. He just isn't good at all. He and his copycats write at the same level
You know, I actually liked Alfrid, and I hated that they killed him off in the extended version. Not every single unsavory character needs to die, a sort of redemption arc would have suited his character better.
I'm not saying Tolkien is an excellent writer, I'm not defending it
But saying he is on any kind of equal level with GR "fat pink mast"" RM that I can't accept
>Tolkein may have had his talents at lore writing (given he spent decades on it and was a philogist) but he was not a good writer by any stretch once you divorce the books for that stuff. He and GRRM are about on equal level
"Suddenly the king cried to Snowmane and the horse sprang away. Behind him his banner blew in the wind, white horse upon a field of green, but he outpaced it. After him thundered the knights of his house, but he was ever before them. Eomer rode there, the white horsetail on his helm floating in his speed, and the front of the first éored roared like a breaker foaming to the shore, but Théoden could not be overtaken. Fey he seemed, or the battle-fury of his fathers ran like new tire in his veins, and he was borne up on Snowmane like a god of old, even as Orome the Great in the battle of the Valar when the world was young. His golden shield was uncovered, and lo! it shone like an image of the Sun, and the grass flamed into green about the white feet of his steed. For morning came, morning and a wind from the sea; and the darkness was removed, and the hosts of Mordor wailed, and terror took them, and they fled, and died, and the hoofs of wrath rode over them. And then all the host of Rohan burst into song, and they sang as they slew, for the joy of battle was on them, and the sound of their singing that was fair and terrible came even to the City."
"Sunset found her squatting in the grass, groaning. Every stool was looser than the one before, and smelled fouler. By the time the moon came up she was shitting brown water. The more she drank, the more she shat, but the more she shat, the thirstier she grew, and her thirst sent her crawling to the stream to suck up more water. When she closed her eyes at last, Dany did not know whether she would be strong enough to open them again. She dreamt of her dead brother."
I think the main reasoning behind that was because many counter culture movements of the 1960s latched onto Lord of the Rings and he was mortified by that idea given how conservative he was. Felt as if they were getting the wrong message from his work.
Is this meant to be some hidden knowledge? Where have I said his actual writting is above standard? It's not.
His legendarium which is quite literally the largest and most fleshed out fantasy universe out there is what gets him all his praise.
>There will never be a movie with Bigatures combined with CGI ever again
JUST MY LIFE INTO PIECES
And the fact that he can detail this whole univers ein less than 400 pages, it's amazing.
GRRM can't even write a proper story with what? 5 books all over a thousand pages in length?
Not him, but I expected to get the lighthearted, fun fantasy adventure tale about a hobbit. You know, an adaptation of the book Tolkien wrote. And what I got was one way to slow build up to that, and then 2,5 movies about the dwarf edgelord Thorin Oakenshield and his companions, Steven Fry and this guy Lickspittle (ugh), a lovestory between a dwarf and an elf that wasn't in the book, Legolas for some reason, a cgi shitfest and a bunch of unnecessary references and hints to LoTR that I dudn't need since I've already seen it, while the producers tried to make this clusterfuck of an unnecessary trilogy "The Lord of the Rings 2.0".
>anyone can write a better universe than Tolkien did
>a man who single handedly created the modern fantasy genere
People have been trying since he first published his books. No one has even come close.
No it's because I don't care
Look at Robert Jordan's turgid behemoths. If he spent 20 years just on building a world like Tolkein, do you not think it would not be larger in scope?
Fantasy predates him m8. He didn't create anything other than the path for 1000 copycats
not enough desert levels or tropical savanna climates to justify em pigments and need of photodestruction of folate, famila
everything south east of Mordor seemed to fill the formula though so the blue wizards might have been blacked
There are plenty of niggers in LotR try reading it again.
Lol, what did I misunderstand? Modern fantasy predates him. Lord Dunsany is the one who started it. The same year LotR came out, Broken Sword (also based on Scandi myths) came out. Tolkein did not start anything. That is like saying Rowling started a new genre because people copied her en masse
The sequence of LotR mirrors almost exactly the sequence of the Star Wars movies, it's really interesting. The third film of the trilogy is by far the worse, and the newly adapted trilogy is horrendous, with massive overuse of CGI and very little directorial control.
I 100% agree, apart from the idea that Lord Dunsany started it, either. In particular Tolkien himself is hugely inspired by William Morris, and character names (like 'Gandalf' and 'Shadowfax') are directly stolen by Tolkien from William Morris' works.
I'm not the guy you were initially arguing with, but was that your argument? I thought you were saying that nobody had managed to create a world like Tolkien.
First, they totally have. Like M.A.R. Barker 100% isn't as famous as Tolkien but his world is equal to Tolkien's.
Second, it's a lie to say that everyone is trying to recreate Tolkien's worldbuilding. There are (very good) fantasy authors who are deliberately not trying to do that. You can count a reaction to someone's work as an inspiration from it, maybe, if you're really desperate to try to score points here, but people like Moorcock and M. John Harrison and Mieville are not trying to be Tolkien at all.
If your point is actually about fame then yeah I'd say apart from Harry Potter no work of fantasy since the 40s has been as famous as that of Tolkien's.
>First, they totally have. Like M.A.R. Barker 100% isn't as famous as Tolkien but his world is equal to Tolkien's.
That's not how it works. If it were anywhere near Tolkien in terms of content, or relvence of said content, they would be getting recognition.
They are not.
My point NOW, is that Tolkien created the modern fantasy genre.
My point WAS that it wasn't his prose or literary skill which made him famous, but the creation of his universe.
I dunno dude, The Wheel of Time is pretty fucking dense.
>> we will never have another big-budget High Fantasy film with beautiful art design and special effects used to tell a compelling story
And one that has a new movie for three concurrent years.
It's Tolkien-esque. That's the point, all fantasy now has a Tolkien feel. That's how good he was.
Dense =/= good. Tolkien's work (The Hobbit, Sil, LOTR) takes up about 1500 pages. There is then Histories which is about 5000 pages which backs it up with more writings by Tolkien.
Race is only interesting in our world because of racial conflict and colonialism spreading slavery, which was directly tied to sugar cane and black people being well suited to working in hot environments.
If such a situation doesn't exist in a fantasy world there is no need to emphasize race.
If you cut out braid tugging, sniffing, skirt smoothing, shawl twitching, spanking, "I wish X was her, he knows how to deal with women" and hands going over breasts, that'd be 20% of the content gone 2bh
>The Silmarillion movie is made
>The Noldorians are mexicans
>The Sindar are asians
>The Edain are proud African men
>The Easterlings are white people allied to the CGI Orcs
>Saurons maiar form is a blonde man with blue eyes
>Morgoth is shown to have dark fiery orange hair and a strange obsession to extend the Thangorodrim with a great wall against the Noldorians and "make Arda great again"
>Beren is a big black man
>Luthien a beautiful white woman
>turns out Thingol and Melian are transvestite lovers while the Sons of Feanor are all gay for Big Edain Dick
>there are also a bunch of self-insert female protags that are shown to overpower the Dark forces of Morgoth and save Gondolin City from the great siege
>in the end the Valar send down their forces and smite the evil white men and restore multicultural harmony upon Arda
>Eonwe who is also a big black man is showered in white elf/human pussy while rap music is heard in ancient Eldarin
>Directed by: JJ Abrams
>That's not how it works. If it were anywhere near Tolkien in terms of content, or relvence of said content, they would be getting recognition.
No, that's nonsense. You don't develop recognition as a fantasy novelist simply by having a complex universe, and you must see that for yourself. You can have a universe as complex as Tolkien's content without being as impactful as Tolkien, and you can be as impactful as Tolkien without having a universe as complex as Tolkien. The two components are not connected as you seem to be bitching it - content is not inherently related to the relevance of said content.
Did Tolkien create the modern fantasy genre? I can't agree that he did. I think without authors like William Morris you would never have gotten Tolkien as he was (without Dunsany you would never have gotten Lovecraft as he was), and it's certainly true that popular fantasy novels were being written before Tolkien . The strongest statement I can make agreeing with you here is that Tolkien established new genre staples in modern fantasy and for years afterwards was dictating the content of it.
With regards to the creating of the universe that made him famous, I don't agree with that either. A lot of the detail of Tolkien's universe is extraneous to the main text and is not usually taken in by the casual reader. It's not this one criteria that allowed Tolkien to become so famous.
look, if it doesn't matter one way or the other, why not?
having some diversity is as arbitrary as having all white, but the former is more inclusive and hence better
I disagree with your basic assumption that general "inclusivity" is better. Would you agree with the recent King Arthur TVs how that is portraying Lancelot as a black man, despite hundreds of years of tradition and saga? If ti doesn't make sense in the universe, why add it? It adds nothing of value to the material, and it simply changes it just to change it.
Unless one is creating an original universe.
>No, that's nonsense...
You are completely misunderstanding what I am saying, not sure if it's on purpose so you can formulate an argument or not. Tolkien has set the bar, you cannot argue that fact, you are saying there are works out there better than Tolkiens, if it were, it would be getting recognition as being so. Those works aren't getting that recognition. YOU MAY THINK THEY ARE BETTER THAN TOLKIEN, THAT IS FINE. It's not an objective view though, that's a subjective one.
>Did Tolkien create the modern fantasy genre?...
It's a literal fact. People would be imitating the people you are mentioning, if it weren't the case. EVERYONE who likes fantasy will agree that Tolkien creating the genre as we know it today, except the people here of course, he created Orcs as we have them, elves and dwarves as we know today, are all Tolkien inventions.
>With regards to the creating...
Have you actually read Tolkien? Everywhere they go is ruined ancient remnants of the past ages which is heavily detialed in his other works, there is no one without the other.
You are literally wrong in everything you have said, you aren't looking at this with an unbiased view, you're simply attempting to argue, which isn't working in your favor.
>Unless one is creating an original universe
this, I'm not saying "turn mythic characters black" or something. I'm not saying to blackwash existing characters either. the genre as a whole however, needs diversity going forward
The Hobbit movies aren't terrible. There's good parts, but they're overshadowed by the shit art direction and filler sub plots that were used to squeeze out 3 films instead of 2. If they dropped the filler and shot it the same way as LOTR then it could have been great.
I am genuinely attempting to argue, but you're just indicated you think it's possible to have an objective view of "better" in literature and that quality and impact both = popularity, so this was all pretty fucking retarded in the first place (much like yourself).
Defeats Shelob, then kills 4 Uruk-hai. Mother fucker carries Frodo up Mt. Doom. Underrated character and underrated performance.
>Except they are. Both write in a completely simplistic prose to communicate the story and little else.
So you're saying they are good writers, who don't make their books deliberately obtuse for the sake of getting approval from a tiny group of jaded critics.
The ONLY real purpose of the written text is to communicate the story. A master of prose differs from an untalented writer only insofar as he can use language to show, not tell, particularly when setting the mood.
>They both overly describe useless things
GRRM maybe. But of course it is not foods. It is plotlines that give us very little information relevant to the overall story, compared to their volume.
That's not at any point what I was trying to do, but you are completely retarded if you think there's such a thing as an objective standard of better in fantasy lit. And you're basing that on popularity, which is doubly retarded.
>it's possible to have an objective view of "better" in literature
Yes it is.
>and that quality and impact both = popularity
Yes they are. Classics are classics because their books are getting printed (or, now, digitally published) and sold to this fucking day.
Which, of course, provides us at least one objective metric for quality in literature - lasting popularity.
Read the book. All ring bearers went to Valinor. Sam wears the ring at one point.
Worst part of the movie was not including this.
When you actually get to thinking about how everyone is dressed and cities and governments are set up, WoT ends up being much more later Renaissance than any kind of Medieval. Except for gunpowder and some other scientific advancements, which is more than made up for with magic, they're practically in the 1600-1700s.
I read a lot of lit man. Right now I'm reading Anna Seghers and Isaac Babel, it's not all genre fiction for me. There's a lot of fantasy/SF I read too, most of which I dislike but I appreciate the genre and there are some very good writers of fantasy/SF they're just sometimes hard to find.
I dont understand why people get mad about the lack of "diversity" in the lotr universe. Its pretty obvious from the source material that Tolkien meant it to be a nordic fantasy tale with characters whose morals and motivations are heavily inspired by catholicism.
Done so far:
LOTR: done, and well
Hobbit stretched out into three OTT FX flicks
Conan: 2 movies, second being Disney-tier
GoT: currently being padded out on TV
His Dark Materials: neutered to the point of no sequels (needs redoing)
Shannara: being teenagered to death on MTV
Discworld: half a dozen TV movies & cartoons, none of which are really any good
Harry Potter: 8 movies made from 7 books to varying degrees of success
Chronicles of Narnia: please stop them making more...
Earthsea: TV miniseries that wasn't too shabby.
The stuff that's left?
Wheel of Time: probably next on the list after they finish butchering Shannara
Sword of Truth: next on the chopping block after WoT?
Mistborn: non-standard fantasy?
Fritz Leibers Swords books: not PC enough for today's audiences
Kingkiller Chronicles: Rothfuss hopefully is saying 'nope!' until he gets a decent production team
Elric: pale genocidal maniac... nope
The First Law: never get done, far too raw and violent
Black Company: as with First Law
Malazan: maybe some idiot won't be put off by the sheer size of the doorstop books
Salvatore's Drizzt books: maybe if Warcraft does well
Dragonlance: nice option, very possible
Chronicles of Thomas Covenant: ... yeah, right
Bartimaeus: I wish
>Chronicles of Narnia: please stop them making more...
They already stopped.
Don't forget Willow, the Troll series and also Witcher already has a bunch of movies and series with a very limited release, also the upcoming Warcraft movie... :(
>Kingkiller Chronicles: Rothfuss hopefully is saying 'nope!' until he gets a decent production team
This has been picked up actually for a pretty large media project it looks like.
>Working on a fantasy series currently
>It's fucking excellent
>It will only ever get a small following if any due to slightly low budget
>Shit like Shannara Chronicles gets thousands thrown at it
It's a painful business.