Assume Peter Jackson by whatever means is given the right to film The Silmarillion. He is given carte blanche creative control with only 2 exceptions. It must be only one movie, and the movie must not last more than 200 minutes including credits, even on an on-demand release. I would pretty much definitely go to the cinema to see it, as although I’ve read The Silmarillion I don’t remember much about it and am not inclined to read it again. The big problem with the Hobbit movies was that Jackson had the opportunity to add stuff and the stuff he added was poor quality. If given a situation where he needs to think more about “what can I leave out or condense?” I think he’d do much better.
I tried to watch his Hobbit, and I couldn’t make it thru the first movie, so I have no idea what he added to drag out a relatively short book to 3 movies. However, I gave up on my one and only try to slog thru The Silmarillion, therefore I might consider watching it so I can decide if I’ll try to read it again. Maybe. Depending on the reviews.
I would, but it really needs to be a series of short movies.
I would wait until I heard reviews from other Tolkien fans. With the Lord of the Rings, Jackson proved that he could do it right, and with The Hobbit, he proved that he could do it wrong, too. I’d want to know which it was before seeing it.
If I were giving him advice on the matter, I’d tell him to pick just one of the stories (probably either Beren and Luthien or the Children of Hurin), and make the movie of that, leaving out all of the other tales.
I haven’t even bothered with the last two Hobbit movies.
You can’t make a single movie out of the Silmarillion. We’re talking about 500 years of history, with several separate sets of characters.
You can make a movie about Feanor, and a movie about Beren and Luthien, and a movie about Turin, and a movie about the Fall of Gondolin. These all follow discrete events with a reasonable time frame, and a conventional story arc. Beginning, middle, conclusion.
What he should have added was plot. What he added instead were set action pieces. The empty calories of movie making. If you can delete a set piece from a movie and in has zero effect on the plot - it makes for a pretty crappy, unmemorable movie.
The Silmarillion is kind of the opposite The Hobbit. It’s a big pile of unfinished stories. So it would be perfectly appropriate to pick out bits of it and fill them in with more detail as separate films.
I don’t see why you can’t make one movie with several acts that involve separate characters, some of which could be focused on and some glossed over or condensed.
Agreed, almost word for word. The rise and fall of Numenor would also make a great movie.
I wouldn’t. After finally binge watching the Lord of the Rings on a flight to Seoul, I wouldn’t want to see any other adaption by Peter Jackson.
FTW, Peter Jackson gave a talk on LOTR at a corporate event in Melbourne I attended about 8 years ago. He was interesting.
And who to cast in any such movie(s)?: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=668570
He will focus on one storyline
I loved FELLOWSHIP, liked TOWERS, hated RETURN, kind of liked KONG in spots, despised LOVELY BONES, and detested the first HOBBIT so much I swore never to give him any more of my money. And given that SILMARILLION is by far my favorite Tolkien work, and the things I like about books do not make for good movies, I wouldn’t see a Jackson adaptation of it if it starred a resurrected 1958 Grace Kelly as Luthien and she was nice in every scene.
I thought the Lord of the Rings film trilogy (Extended Edition) was superb.
I didn’t think much of the Hobbit films.
The main reason for this was that Peter Jackson had years to prepare for LOTR (writing scripts, finding locations, designing clothing / armour / weapons, creating models and CGI etc.), but was only called in to make the Hobbit after the original Director (Guillermo del Toro) dropped out.
Filming the Hobbit then turned into a mad rush (e.g. going from two films to three) and the quality suffered.
If you give Jackson enough time (i.e. years) to select suitable material from the Silmarillion (as Acsenray rightly said, “It’s a big pile of unfinished stories”), write a suitable script and consult with geniuses like Alan Lee and John Howe to do the conceptual design again, then you will have a wonderful film.
If you rush it, it won’t be.
I typically enjoy seeing other people’s visions/versions of what JRRT’s works mean to them. So I’d go see it.
I actually like Sil better than LOTR, though not by much. So I’d love to see Beren, Turin, Earendil, Melian and others rendered into cinema.
And like PJ’s other JRRT-related works, I’d love some of it, agree with a lot, disagree with a lot, and be blown away by at least a few things he tried, while also disappointed by some of his other interpretations. When he fails, he generally fails of the promise but not of the seed.
And I’d depart from it calling it a thing that was good to have been.
Tho 3 hours would be rushing it a bit. Do an HBO miniseries.
I would watch it to find out what happens in it because I sure as hell can’t get through the damn book.
NUDE in every scene. Stupid autocorrect.
The Simarillion is the book that I think would work well in a multi-movie format. It’s a lot of stand-alone stories with one narrative thread running through it. Easy enough to cut out the individual stories and turn them into movies.
I’d hate to see it butchered into one single movie with most of the movie being given over to Middle-earth versions of “pod races” and battles that look like they’re designed to be the basis of video games.
But I probably still wouldn’t watch. Too much time given in his versions to battles and “pod-races” and not enough to characters and non-action story development.
I made it through Part 1 of The Hobbit. “Watched” Part 2 by having the TV on in the other room and occasionally popping in on it. Didn’t bother at all with Part 3.
At first I didn’t appreciate it, but the more I read it, the more I fell in love with it. Now it’s favorite by a mile.
He couldn’t get through the begats at the beginning of the book in less than three hours. No way would I watch it.