The Silmarillion Movie: Will it ever be made?

[srlotr27]

I've been reading The Silmarillion and am over halfway through. Many of the events in the book are so extraordinary and ethereal that it seems like producing a movie would be an extremely tough task. None the less I really want to see a movie made, it almost has to because it is the only work left from Tolkien's middle earth which hasn't been brought to the silver screen. What are your thoughts? I made a poll with some responses!

 

[Tinúviel-]

It doesn't need to be. But if it is, I hope they stick to the source material without inserting any stupid agendas/propoganda.

 

[Hisoka Morrow]

In comparison with film, I prefer TV series. Yet if streamlining it well, I think it's worthy to try.

 

[Olorgando]

I voted "No, because ..." for one reason.
If you mean the entire published book, it would be "No way!"
The constituent parts "Ainulindalë", "Valaquenta", "Quenta Silmarillion", "Akallabêth" and "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" are just too disparate to fit into one movie. And the time period covered is all roughly 7,000 Years of the Sun, plus the preceding Years of the Two Trees, plus the time before that, when the Valar and Maiar had not even settled in (fled to) Valinor.

Some stories - the Big Three "The Children of Húrin", "Beren and Lúthien", and "The Fall of Gondolin" come to mind naturally - might be considered filmable. All three, however, cover years if not - if childhood and youth are included - decades. PJ did compress the 17 years between Bilbo's long-expected party and Frodo's departure from Hobbiton into an undetermined, but certainly much shorter period.

I have wondered if one consideration for Christopher Tolkien publishing the Big Three as stand-alone books (2007, 2017 and 2018, respectively) might have been copyright. Relative to the published "Silmarillion" that makes an extension of 30 respectively 40 and 41 years.

 

[Ealdwyn]

There is enough material in the Sil for a movie - and more - to be made of each chapter. That said, I don't want to see movies/TV series made.

I don't see how anyone could bring life to JRRTs vision. PJs LotR movies had their good points, but there was so much that was disappointing. The Hobbit movies are a hot mess. The problem is that the studios only ever view it as an opportunity to make a shed load of money. While that mindset exists, and while the 'art' of JRRT is secondary to making money, we will never have an interpretation that does the material justice.

I have wondered if one consideration for Christopher Tolkien publishing the Big Three as stand-alone books (2007, 2017 and 2018, respectively) might have been copyright. Relative to the published "Silmarillion" that makes an extension of 30 respectively 40 and 41 years.

A good point. It wouldn't surprise me in the least.

 

[Erestor Arcamen]

Nope, PJ would make it awful as he did with The Hobbit and LOTR and I don't trust anyone else to do it justice.

 

[Olorgando]

Doing it, or them, the books, justice isn't necessarily the point, as we have found out in PJ's six films.
I still would hesitate to bet against our getting nostalgic for PJ's work (at least LoTR, and especially FoTR), after the Amazon series starts. 🥶

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

The Amazon series is set in the Second Age, so may cover part of the Silmarillion -- perhaps the Fall of Numenor -- but who knows?

 

[Miguel]

A compilation of animated short films depicting it would be nice, like Animatrix. If some of it could be directed by Yoshiaki Kawajiri it would be amazing.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

I still have the Russian and Finnish LOTR's to watch. 😂

 

[Tinúviel-]

The Amazon series is set in the Second Age, so may cover part of the Silmarillion -- perhaps the Fall of Numenor -- but who knows?

A very woke Silmarillion 😬

 

[Shadow]

I can’t see an adaption happening anytime soon.

 

[Oromedur]

In time I think we will see elements of The Silmarillion on screen. Hopefully in the form of a TV series.

It wouldn’t make sense to even try to bring it to any form of screen media as an individual piece because it is not an individual piece.

 

[Shadow]

If the Amazon show is well received and the Second Age is mined to the limit, they could move further back in time. I agree the small screen is the best chance at it happening.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

I think the main obstacle to it is the Tolkien Estate owning the rights to the First Age material, and I believe they're very leery about releasing them.

 

[Halasían]

Every time I see polls like this, it seems that Peter Jackson has to be included as some sort of Tolkien Middle Earth god of some sort. He eff'd up the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit, and i hope he doesnt get the chance to eff up the stories in the Silmarillion.

 

[Keith Mathison]

I hope no one ever tries to make film versions of these tales. They would almost certainly turn the earliest stories into something silly looking. Consider every movie that has ever been made with gods and goddesses as main characters. They all look ridiculous.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

I thought Niall McGinnis and Honor Blackman were pretty good as Zeus and Hera in "Jason and the Argonauts". They weren't main characters, of course.

 

[Olorgando]

Every time I see polls like this, it seems that Peter Jackson has to be included as some sort of Tolkien Middle Earth god of some sort. He eff'd up the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit, and i hope he doesnt get the chance to eff up the stories in the Silmarillion.

That't our (book nerd) view as to what PJ did with the content that was the basis for his films.
Hollywood suits don't care squat about any content except one: the content of the kitty, aka box office receipts.
What are those numbers?
LoTR $ 2.98 billion box office gross, budget $ 281 million
TH $ 2.93 billion box office gross, budget $ 655 million

Target audience? Certainly not us. Perhaps the one time anyone was nervous about the "bookies" was at the premiere of "Fellowship" in December 2001. They had already done principal photography for all three films (no idea what portion of the total budget that meant), so a hostile reaction might have put the whole enterprise in jeopardy. Book sales for LoTR spiked in that time 2001-2004, not sure if the effect was as big for TH, it definitely being a children's book. But the core audience was and remains the film-only crowd.

And, like it or not, PJ's stuff is the gold standard for film or TV visuals for Middle-earth (and probably a lot of other stuff, too). Even if he's not involved in any way, the Amazon crowd will be unlikely to try and reinvent Middle-earth from scratch. They might do some borrowing from more recent stuff, like GoT, or ... what's that stuff I keep getting reading suggestions about? ... "Vikings", I think. Having seen neither, others must judge if these seem to have been influenced - or not - by PJ's Middle-earth visuals, or by each other ...

 

[srlotr27]

That't our (book nerd) view as to what PJ did with the content that was the basis for his films.
Hollywood suits don't care squat about any content except one: the content of the kitty, aka box office receipts.
What are those numbers?
LoTR $ 2.98 billion box office gross, budget $ 281 million
TH $ 2.93 billion box office gross, budget $ 655 million

Target audience? Certainly not us. Perhaps the one time anyone was nervous about the "bookies" was at the premiere of "Fellowship" in December 2001. They had already done principal photography for all three films (no idea what portion of the total budget that meant), so a hostile reaction might have put the whole enterprise in jeopardy. Book sales for LoTR spiked in that time 2001-2004, not sure if the effect was as big for TH, it definitely being a children's book. But the core audience was and remains the film-only crowd.

And, like it or not, PJ's stuff is the gold standard for film or TV visuals for Middle-earth (and probably a lot of other stuff, too). Even if he's not involved in any way, the Amazon crowd will be unlikely to try and reinvent Middle-earth from scratch. They might do some borrowing from more recent stuff, like GoT, or ... what's that stuff I keep getting reading suggestions about? ... "Vikings", I think. Having seen neither, others must judge if these seem to have been influenced - or not - by PJ's Middle-earth visuals, or by each other ...

I agree with you. The money is always the one major factor when it comes down to high budget theatrical productions, and if there is a projection that the Silmarillion would bring in it would certainly be in the works. The matter is, finding the person to commit to bringing the writings to life. And that is why I think the demand would simply be to great as the Silmarillion seems like a very difficult book to adapt to film without royally pissing off the fans, hence my understanding and agreement with the consensus that book fans would not support him or ANY director that doesn't completely include all the details that always get left out of movie adaptations. (Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, Harry Potter, etc.)

However, to any one potentially invested in an adaptation that opposes the fact that Peter Jackson would make the most sense as a director for a hypothetical Silmarillion film just doesn't resonate with me. To say that anyone other director could be chosen just wouldn't sit right in my opinion given he does hold some weight of the series that fans like myself have come to love. The Amazon production of Middle Earth makes sense not have PJ because its a spin off that he might not have even been asked to be part of, or could have the ability to accept due to previous commitments. (someone fact check me if you know otherwise, it would be interesting to read up on). Quite frankly I might not even be interested in watching the Amazon series either, but that remains to be seen.

The Silmarillion would be a gem of its own that would require the same attention that of which Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit received and then some if it were to be made.

Now, the weird thing is, I am writing here to support Peter Jackson due to the fact that he was ultimately the person who was chosen as director of the past films. Who is to say that if it were another director who took on the role wouldn't have done an equal or better job? We will never know, unless there is some sort of alternate universe where say Guillermo Del Toro directed it, but I hope you understand why I stand by Peter Jackson being the best person for the job.