[Timoni]

Sorry to go back to an earlier subject--but I think the reason "The Princess Bride", the movie, was almost as good as the book is because the author (William Goldman) was so involved in it. (I think he was a writer AND producer, but it might have been just one or the other.)

Though the LoTR movie doesn't have Tolkien around to protect it, I think it's got such a wide following, and this movie costs so much, that everyone involved in it realizes they'd be insane to screw around with it. I know the director, Peter Jackson, regularly visits (visited?) fansites, to see what people were saying and, I gather, to get inspiration.

[Cadfael]

Practically everything to do with Tolkien's work is tightly controlled by his son, Christopher, who also owns any movie rights... or did, I should say.

[Barbarossa]

Actually the film rights were sold already at a time when J.R.R. still lived (1971). Since then they were resold several times and used once, for that terrible Bakshi (sp?) animation movie. Fortunatly Tolkien put a paragraph in the contract that the right can't be sold to Disney in any form. That paragraph proved it's use when Miramax was bought by Disney and had to resell the rights to new line (the studio that does the trilogy now. Miramax is rumored to have planned for a 2-film version with a female Gandalf, or would that be Gandalfine?

[Rob B]

Yeah, I remember seeing that non-Disney clause in JRRT will as well. Just imagine, hobbits singing to Phil Collins or Elton John, Gandalf with a big puffy nose with Robin Williams voice.

to quote The Simpsons:
Adolf Hitler and Walt Disney were the two most evil people who ever livedD'oh!

[wolfshead]

saw the lOTR trailer yesterday when my partner and i went to see DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS. it looked good but I cringed a bit when Galadriel said something like 'Even little people can change the world'. I mean YYUUCCKKK!! Where did that come from???
Still, seeing the trailer was better than watching Dungeons and Dragons!! Every cliche in the book; we laughed all the way through (for all the wrong reasons!)

[Pluvious]

The only problem that I can potentially see with the LOTR's movie is that the story is a big pile of pooh. The stars are a bunch of little people. Who came up with that? How are they supposed to fight world domination and stuff? Weird...

[FitzChivalry]

Hey! are you hinting to a problem with the original book too? tsk tsk...

Anyway, i'm glad the movie is made about LoTR, instead of something like The Farseer or A song of ice and fire or Amber, i'm ready to enjoy a fantasy movie, and because i don't hold Tolkien as the best ever fantasy writer i wouldn't be afraid of it being bad really...
I wouldn't wanna see one of my favorite series, the ones i mentioned, put on the big screen because i would be too afraid they will be ruined. So i'm looking forward for this movie.

[Belderan]

Lord of the rings was crying out to be made into a film. After seeing a few of the many trailers circulating the film buff world, i think Ian Mkellen looks great, but as for everyone else, dont you think Elijah Woods a bit too much of a pretty mommys boy to play that part?

[MajicK]

I am quite looking forward to this movie. But that's probably because I haven't read the book (or books, i think it is). Would it be best to read them first (we've got until sept., i believe) or to watch the film?

[wastra]

I personally like much of hte casting (except Liv Tyler as Arwen- she's just weird looking, not beautiful at all, if you ask me).

Sean Austin, btw, is Sam. An earlier post had him listed as playing "Bean." Is that Sam's character in a foreign language version or something?