Lord of The Rings: Hunt for Gollum
- Thread starter teragon
- Start date
Solo4114
Master Member
It's just such a dumb, naked cash-grab. I mean, look, maybe it'll turn out to be terrific. I do really enjoy Andy Serkis' work. But, like...there's no story here. Or at least no Tolkien material. You're pretty much just taking a few lines of exposition and trying to blow them up into a film (and, let's be honest, set up a trilogy) based on nothing that doesn't even really go anywhere.
I mean, really, what's the story supposed to be here, exactly? Some characters chase Gollum and fail to catch him, while Gollum continues to elude them. That's not a story. That's barely even a bullet point.
I mean, really, what's the story supposed to be here, exactly? Some characters chase Gollum and fail to catch him, while Gollum continues to elude them. That's not a story. That's barely even a bullet point.
Last edited:
Darth Lars
Master Member
There is already an old fan-film called The Hunt for Gollum based on the same story in Tolkien's books.
It got blocked on Youtube a couple days ago because of a mistakenly filed copyright strike from someone at WB who must have thought it had something to do with the new movie, but apparently that got resolved.
It got blocked on Youtube a couple days ago because of a mistakenly filed copyright strike from someone at WB who must have thought it had something to do with the new movie, but apparently that got resolved.
Solo4114
Master Member
I'd be fine with seeing the First Age or stuff from the Silmarillion that touches on the Second Age. I gather that's basically impossible because the family is pissed about having been jacked around on copyright stuff with LOTR.
I'm hoping that Season 2 of Rings of Power isn't as underwhelming as Season 1 was, but we'll see.
Beyond that, I'm not really interested in Middle Earth as a setting, per se, outside of playing RPGs in that setting. For films? Nah, pass.
I'm hoping that Season 2 of Rings of Power isn't as underwhelming as Season 1 was, but we'll see.
Beyond that, I'm not really interested in Middle Earth as a setting, per se, outside of playing RPGs in that setting. For films? Nah, pass.
That's a shame. I've wanted to see the story of Beren and Luthien (and Morgoth) since before The Hobbit came out!
It's like making a whole Star Wars movie (or more) out of Han's comment about "that bounty hunter on Ord Mantell".
I mean, sure, you can hang a series of action scenes on it. But you can do that with an episode of 'Mythbusters' too.
The problem is that there isn't much room for character development/stakes because we already know those characters didn't inexplicably change in the middle of LOTR. There isn't much room for larger plot developments either, for the same reason.
It's a decent premise for a video game where character growth is less of a priority. It's not a decent premise for a movie/TV.
The only way I see it working is if they use Gollum & Aragorn as IP support props and make some other new character(s) the ones that do all the growing & changing. (Furiosa changes while Max basically stays the same. Etc.)
I mean, sure, you can hang a series of action scenes on it. But you can do that with an episode of 'Mythbusters' too.
The problem is that there isn't much room for character development/stakes because we already know those characters didn't inexplicably change in the middle of LOTR. There isn't much room for larger plot developments either, for the same reason.
It's a decent premise for a video game where character growth is less of a priority. It's not a decent premise for a movie/TV.
The only way I see it working is if they use Gollum & Aragorn as IP support props and make some other new character(s) the ones that do all the growing & changing. (Furiosa changes while Max basically stays the same. Etc.)
Seriously... I mean, what if somebody took a throwaway line like, i don't know, "You fought in the Clone Wars?", & decided they wanted to tell that story?
It's just unneeded nonsense.
(IDK how to do the eye roll emoji, so imagine it here please)
It's just unneeded nonsense.
(IDK how to do the eye roll emoji, so imagine it here please)
They can do it “Disney-style” and deconstruct Gollum, the villain, and make him a misunderstood anti-hero, like Cruella or Maleficent…
Last edited:
Perfect!!! Another Vegan special on the menu...just what I was hoping for.
Jodo
Master Member
“What’s tators, precious?”
ScourgiousJinx
Master Member
Funny how some are interested in entire trilogies and shows based on one throw away line of dialogue and completely uninterested in possible projects based on other throw away lines of dialogue. It's almost like they're completely different things that have have entirely different implications and nuances about them.
Yeah, I don't think the SW comparison is close enough to be valid. Star Wars is about the clearest case in franchise history of a series that was intended to get prequels all along.
The story definitely had meaty stuff taking place before the first movie. ESB and ROTJ focus on the redemption of a character that the audience had never even seen fall from grace. The audience never really even knew why he fell. They never got 1 second of footage of him before the fall (to build any sympathy for him). It was all left for the prequels to cover. It's kind of amazing that the OT ever worked (and still works) when viewed by itself.
Lucas added "episode 4" to the opening crawl of ANH as soon as it became clear he would have the budget to make any more SW movies. He could have called it "episode 1" if all he wanted to do was justify the next few entries.
Lucas has claimed he wanted the "Ep 4" label there even in 1977 but the studio brass talked him out of it because they feared audience confusion.
We'll never know (he retcons his old intentions a lot) but I could believe that particular story. It sounds plausible for the studio to say that. They didn't get ANH and they feared nobody else would.
Lucas filmed the Anchorhead scenes with Mark Hamill because of conventional wisdom & advice. It's unusual to wait so long before introducing the protagonist. (Yeah, he eventually scrapped the scenes. But it's interesting that they were even filmed. Lucas was a frugal filmmaker and ANH was a tight shoot even for him. They barely had the footage to get it finished.) My point is, in 1976 Lucas was still yielding to outside advice in a way that he wouldn't do later.
The story definitely had meaty stuff taking place before the first movie. ESB and ROTJ focus on the redemption of a character that the audience had never even seen fall from grace. The audience never really even knew why he fell. They never got 1 second of footage of him before the fall (to build any sympathy for him). It was all left for the prequels to cover. It's kind of amazing that the OT ever worked (and still works) when viewed by itself.
Lucas added "episode 4" to the opening crawl of ANH as soon as it became clear he would have the budget to make any more SW movies. He could have called it "episode 1" if all he wanted to do was justify the next few entries.
Lucas has claimed he wanted the "Ep 4" label there even in 1977 but the studio brass talked him out of it because they feared audience confusion.
We'll never know (he retcons his old intentions a lot) but I could believe that particular story. It sounds plausible for the studio to say that. They didn't get ANH and they feared nobody else would.
Lucas filmed the Anchorhead scenes with Mark Hamill because of conventional wisdom & advice. It's unusual to wait so long before introducing the protagonist. (Yeah, he eventually scrapped the scenes. But it's interesting that they were even filmed. Lucas was a frugal filmmaker and ANH was a tight shoot even for him. They barely had the footage to get it finished.) My point is, in 1976 Lucas was still yielding to outside advice in a way that he wouldn't do later.
Last edited:
My point is this...
Everyone keeps speaking of this story like it was a 2-day road trip that was offhandedly mentioned in a line of dialog.
Between the time Gandalf realized that Bilbo had left Frodo the Ring, & the time everyone met at Rivendell to begin the fellowship, there were SEVENTEEN YEARS where Gandalf was trying to find the origins of Bilbo's ring, & during almost the entire 17 year period, he & others (like Aragon) were actively hunting for Gollum.
By contrast, from the time Frodo leaves the Shire until he returns is about ONE year.
My Clone Wars line was just something I figured everyone would be familiar with. It wasn't a 1:1 comparison.
I mean, I LOVE Star Wars, but Lucas took his childhood of Buck Rogers & Flash Gordon, wrapped it around the ideas of Campbell's mythology, soaked it in whatever he could outright steal from Frank Herbert, & created a phenomenon & cultural touchstone that hasn't been replicated.
Tolkien was a genius.
Everyone keeps speaking of this story like it was a 2-day road trip that was offhandedly mentioned in a line of dialog.
Between the time Gandalf realized that Bilbo had left Frodo the Ring, & the time everyone met at Rivendell to begin the fellowship, there were SEVENTEEN YEARS where Gandalf was trying to find the origins of Bilbo's ring, & during almost the entire 17 year period, he & others (like Aragon) were actively hunting for Gollum.
By contrast, from the time Frodo leaves the Shire until he returns is about ONE year.
My Clone Wars line was just something I figured everyone would be familiar with. It wasn't a 1:1 comparison.
I mean, I LOVE Star Wars, but Lucas took his childhood of Buck Rogers & Flash Gordon, wrapped it around the ideas of Campbell's mythology, soaked it in whatever he could outright steal from Frank Herbert, & created a phenomenon & cultural touchstone that hasn't been replicated.
Tolkien was a genius.
I see your point.
I guess I just don't see the opportunity for character growth/changes or pivotal stuff in the larger story. It would make for a 'Shadows of the Empire' type of fill-in story. A lot of stuff may happen but you're left with a beginning & endpoint that are already known.
'Rogue One' worked because it was in the midst of PT/OT events but it was not starring PT/OT characters. I think they would need to do something similar for this Tolkien thing to work.
. . . but then a new problem arises: The LOTR fans will cry "bait and switch!" They will do that because the new characters will dominate the story and they will probably be a bunch of poorly-written diversity checkboxes. Viewers will quickly grow tired of wading through the slog of those scenes hoping for the short clips of the old LOTR heroes. The latter's screen time will be reduced because of the plot/character needs, and also because the LOTR movie actors will need to be de-aged by 25 years.
It's comparable to Star Wars in the sense that it won't work unless it has top notch writing - and that's probably out of the question in 2024.
I guess I just don't see the opportunity for character growth/changes or pivotal stuff in the larger story. It would make for a 'Shadows of the Empire' type of fill-in story. A lot of stuff may happen but you're left with a beginning & endpoint that are already known.
'Rogue One' worked because it was in the midst of PT/OT events but it was not starring PT/OT characters. I think they would need to do something similar for this Tolkien thing to work.
. . . but then a new problem arises: The LOTR fans will cry "bait and switch!" They will do that because the new characters will dominate the story and they will probably be a bunch of poorly-written diversity checkboxes. Viewers will quickly grow tired of wading through the slog of those scenes hoping for the short clips of the old LOTR heroes. The latter's screen time will be reduced because of the plot/character needs, and also because the LOTR movie actors will need to be de-aged by 25 years.
It's comparable to Star Wars in the sense that it won't work unless it has top notch writing - and that's probably out of the question in 2024.
Similar threads
