Prime Video first announced The Lord of the Rings series in July 2019, they revealed Shippey was part of the production as a Tolkien Scholar.
However, back in February, Vanity Fair led their readers to believe that Shippey was canned for giving an “unsanctioned interview to a German fan site” where he opined “on what the show could and could not explore.”
Now this new rumor from YouTuber George Molho of YouTube channel George The Giant Slayer claims Shippey was actually canned because he was warning Prime Video that they were “polluting the lore.”
At this point, however, as an "enlightened" European 😉 , I have to disagree a bit. What you have seen so far in the trailers and teasers was all very chaste and childlike.Not only would Molho detail this rumor regarding Shippey’s firing, but he would also excoriate Prime Video for including nudity in the show as revealed in a number of behind-the-scenes photos from the production as well as a newly released photo from the show.
"Nothing is evil in the beginning"
https://twitter.com/x/status/1541453841408765953
What do you think about that phrase? Can we say of Sauron or Melkor that they were not evil in the beginning?
What about orcs born from other orcs, that is, not Melkor's first orcs, made from captured elves by torture or magic (at least according to the Sil.)?
Philosophically, one can certainly discuss this quite extensively. But Tolkien's mythology is based on the struggle between good and evil.
Of course, this is anything but "modern", since today every villain needs his story, why an originally innocent being could become such a bitter, mean creature, and so on. But with Tolkien's mythology it is different. Even though there may be several individuals like Gollum, Saruman or Denethor etc. who are more in line with this modern conception of evil or who became evil at some point, overall it is about the fight against ultimate evil.
I think it is also an illusion in reality that no one is evil from the beginning. Some people are just emotionless psychopaths from birth, and the more intelligent ones shamelessly exploit their lack of compassion to gain power. There is also scientific research that confirms this.
Why someone is or becomes "evil" can therefore have cultural, sociological or fateful reasons or developments as its basis. Or it can happen due to seduction, manipulation or brainwashing methods by other malicious, intelligent entities. But it can also be innate, for example through a genetic defect. And the latter I would postulate for example with the orcs. Even if Tolkien's mythology may not have anything like genetics in the scientific sense, it would still be passed on from generation to generation. In addition, there is the education and socialization component as well as the influence of Sauron and the Ring etc. After the destruction of the Ring, they may no longer have been bound to a superior evil will, but that did not automatically make them to innocent, free and good beings from whom an evil demon just had escaped (like in Warcraft).
So I wouldn't like it if they used their phrase as an opportunity to portray the orcs as mere victims to be pitied, or even Sauron/Annatar as someone who was just misunderstood and driven to evil by adverse circumstances.
What would fit to Tolkien's statements, however, would be, if Sauron at first regrets to have got involved with Morgoth (not because he feels guilty, but because he was on the losing side), but is too cowardly and too proud to face the Valar, and at the same time has the will to make Middle-earth his subject; at first perhaps even in the sense of wanting to create order, even if ultimately according to his will. It would be important, however, that he pursues the purpose to force in particular the Elves under his control from the very beginning. In further respect also the humans, with whom he quickly finds out that he can easily manipulate them and use them for his purposes, while the orcs, whom he perhaps actually even detests, serve him only as a "dirty" tool, if it is no longer possible otherwise - later, of course, as his main weapon.
It's funny that the list is that long, before the series even come out...
Funny? Well, rather sad. But yes, in a way, it's all very funny too.It's funny that the list is that long, before the series even come out...
I may have to watch this-- despite my cautious outlook when talking about the new Rings of Power. It may be worth my time, but it looks to be deceiving to say all shall be given in one minute.Funny? Well, rather sad. But yes, in a way, it's all very funny too.
But for those who find this too much petty detail (by now, by the way, he's already on part 6), here's another excellent analysis, where three key points are pointed out by one example.
I have already fast-forwarded to the right place, so you don't have to listen to the long intro.I may have to watch this-- despite my cautious outlook when talking about the new Rings of Power. It may be worth my time, but it looks to be deceiving to say all shall be given in one minute.
But we're their markets.
This is very true. Amazon is trying to appeal to every audience that they can, and by doing that they are alienating some people. You cannot make everyone happy all the time.No, no.. you see... if they stick enough 'explicit material' in there, they gain a whole new market that otherwise would not bother.
A great deal of mankind exists to relish in the debased and shameful.
We must remember that Amazon has but one objective - to maximize on its profits from whatever it does. They do not do that by restricting the appeal they can put into anything.
Even the casual observer can see their changes in the recent very few years to "puff the pocketbook" in every way.
Marketing 101, folks.. marketing 101.
This is very true. Amazon is trying to appeal to every audience that they can, and by doing that they are alienating some people. You cannot make everyone happy all the time.
But what bothers me about this series is that Amazon is trying to force an agenda into Tolkien's works, and whether you believe with that agenda or not, no one can deny that Tolkien did not put it into his world of Middle-Earth. His world was one of passion and lore, and he was not a believer in pushing real-world junk and politics into the beauty of imagination and faerie-stories often classified as fantasy.
It doesn't even bother me that they have such agenda. It is completely their choice what to believe but forcing these things onto people through the beauty of Tolkien's works seems an insult to Tolkien and his legacy. Not to mention, Amazon harbors great favor to industries and using technology. Tolkien was mostly against both of those things, and he believed in what is real and natural. He loved nature and the outdoors, unmechanized farmland, and not the factories and inventions, even of his times.
That is why I truly am displeased with this series. It is putting things in Tolkien's writing, that just wasn't there. Not just adding a character, story element, etc. but pushing a mindset and an agenda that Tolkien never pushed into his works, because he had the wisdom to draw a clear separation between imagination and enjoyment, and beautiful, constructive fantasy, and the real-world with all its problems. Sure, he included basic human-themes and timeless truths, but he wasn't pushing a political or social agenda or view, and from what I have seen, this series seems to be doing just that.
I know what it is you speak of. Many are unwilling, and it is probably best to not bring up on this thread or Forum, but I thought "Agenda" was a loose and vague enough term that those who knew what I spoke of would understand, and those who did not, or disagreed with me, wouldn't find any offense. I always try to follow this site's rules, as I don't want to ruin this incredible place.You are correct in citing "The Agenda". And that "Agenda" goes much beyond just the use, abuse and destruction of works like Tolkien's. But I hesitate to enter into that discussion further, as it inevitably takes us where many are unwilling to go.
Discussing real-world politics and religion that is directly connected with Tolkien, his works or adaptions (however loosely the term is used), is ok. It only becomes a problem when the discussion moves beyond those bounds. There were many issues in the early days of these Forums so the limits were set as they stand now.I know what it is you speak of. Many are unwilling, and it is probably best to not bring up on this thread or Forum, but I thought "Agenda" was a loose and vague enough term that those who knew what I spoke of would understand, and those who did not, or disagreed with me, wouldn't find any offense. I always try to follow this site's rules, as I don't want to ruin this incredible place.
Yes. I'm aware. I don't honestly mind it at all. I think it's altogether a good rule. Tolkien is so wonderful, and if we mixed in all the baggage and junk from real-world politics and religion, not only would it be extremely contraversial, but it would stray further and further from it's intended purpose; a place for lovers of Tolkien and his works to come together, and discuss them.Discussing real-world politics and religion that is directly connected with Tolkien, his works or adaptions (however loosely the term is used), is ok. It only becomes a problem when the discussion moves beyond those bounds. There were many issues in the early days of these Forums so the limits were set as they stand now.
At one time while Dave Pence was the owner/webmaster he set up a sister site "Project Evil" which was to host all real-world political and religious discussions. We had a couple of interesting threads on there but unfortunately not many would go over to it despite the number that used to be involved on here.
There were many issues in the early days of these Forums so the limits were set as they stand now.
At one time while Dave Pence was the owner/webmaster he set up a sister site "Project Evil" which was to host all real-world political and religious discussions. We had a couple of interesting threads on there but unfortunately not many would go over to it despite the number that used to be involved on here.
Yes. I'm aware. I don't honestly mind it at all. I think it's altogether a good rule. Tolkien is so wonderful, and if we mixed in all the baggage and junk from real-world politics and religion, not only would it be extremely contraversial, but it would stray further and further from it's intended purpose; a place for lovers of Tolkien and his works to come together, and discuss them.
I had heard of this sister site. I understand somewhat why people wouldn't go over there. I'm not certain I would - just too much anger on sites like that it seems. Still, nice to know the history of this awesome place.
It is!Indeed, it is a great rule..!
Unfortunately not. We did try to get people over to it but one of the issues we had there, ironically, was that some wanted to limit what particular real-world political and religious subjects could be discussed lolVery interesting. 😂😂😂
Interesting that I'm just finding out about this now.
Does this site still exist?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Are you happy to accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Are you happy to accept cookies and these technologies?