Papa's Gonna Buy You A Diamond Ring: Forging The Rings of Power
Talkin' bout Tolkien
The most expensive TV show of all time…does this mean anything to you?
Peter Jackson’s Rings trilogy wasn’t the most costly. Its budget wasn’t even especially big, considering the epic scope of his high fantasy films. Tolkien’s world is massive, and the War of the Ring is but a fraction of the meticulously fleshed out mythology crafted by the author. If you choose to go back to the very beginning, you’ll be surprised at what you find. I’m talking God figures, long lost civilisations, and prophecy. The whole nine yards, and then some.
So, there’s ample material for a TV series to cover.
But this source material, some of which you may have at least heard of, such as The Silmarillion, as well as The Children of Hurin, which is more of a deep cut, are strange beasts, if you ask me. Further complicating things, Amazon apparently doesn't have full rights to The Silmarillion, so they still need to be selective about what’s included in the show.
While there is a tangible narrative present in these materials, said works still come across more like historical texts from a fictional universe. A comparison to a far briefer book, George RR Martin’s Fire and Blood, which sheds historical context on the histories of House Targaryen, is apt here. And not least because the adaptations have arrived on our streaming services almost simultaneously. Spooky. Perhaps this synchronicity was foretold in one of the franchises’ forgotten tomes…
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power is a prequel presented as an extension of the Middle Earth-bound tales already consumed by audiences. Ditto for House of the Dragon, which the creators want you to know is an incestuously close relative of Game of Thrones, recycled theme tune included.
But in the case of Rings of Power, it seems the show’s connection to the theatrical LotR canon thus far is a little more tenuous.
This is in no small part because the events of the show are set many hundreds of years before the Fellowship of the Ring was formed, which is at once an exciting prospect and a bit of a downer.
On one hand, audiences can expect to be treated to see the events that ultimately put in motion the events they put in motion. On the other hand, the aforementioned mythology is so dense that reverting to the early years of Middle Earth is a bit like releasing a prequel series to The Sopranos, but set during the American War of Independence (I’m hooked already, tbh).
That being said, due to the extended lifespans of numerous characters, there are key names that will resonate with viewers. A young Galadriel is placed centre stage in The Rings of Power.
She’s questing to stop a nascent threat from Sauron, the tenacious villain that never quite gets the memo, defeat-wise.
Another long-lived elven name you’ll remember is Elrond, here cast as a plucky young politician, writing speeches for the elf King Gil-Galad. This guy featured in Peter Jackson’s films for around three seconds, so mad props to him for getting a more sizable role this time around.
Mergers & acquisitions
So it seems the show is benefiting greatly from the key attributes of Tolkien’s inventions. A measure of consistency can be achieved through incarnations of characters who endure all the way to the Third Age of Middle Earth. Name recognition is important for audience retention, after all. It seems to me that a central issue is that the viewer will tune in, hoping to get that PJ-brand Rings action, only to receive revised versions of the characters and world.
Familiarity is comforting. That’s why Amazon spent around $250 million on the rights to certain properties from Tolkien’s Estate, just as Disney paid through the nose to pry Star Wars from the muscular, if not slightly moist clutches of one George Lucas.
With that amount of money at stake, the risk of producing a wholly original and unproven property is far too great. One does not simply walk into an adaptation of original intellectual property.
So, is Amazon Studios cheating its viewers, giving them the Rings experience they were able to offer given the circumstances, under the guise of the one viewers actually wanted?
It is admittedly tricky to pass judgment, seeing as only a few instalments have streamed thus far. We can only speculate based on that which we’ve been treated to.
With that amount of money at stake, the risk of producing a wholly original and unproven property is far too great. One does not simply walk into an adaptation of original intellectual property.
It’s true that the show looks magnificent. Many television shows fail to nail a genuinely cinematic scope and aesthetic. Rings of power isn’t one of them. What I would say is, while the majesty of Tolkien’s world has been portrayed to near-perfection, the characters themselves are in danger of being lost in the fold.
This was never an issue with PJ’s films. He clearly identified with the central protagonists, demonstrating a love of creature comforts and community, and contrasting this with portrayals of ‘big folk’ such as the more archetypal heroes, like Aragorn, true heir to the throne of men, and Legolas, elven prince and bow-fancier. Jackson also brought his signature silly humour, as seen first in his early splatter films, Bad Taste (1987) and Brain Dead (1992).
Interestingly, Jackson was once courted by Amazon to consult on the show, only to be ghosted.
So, The Rings of Power needs to offer something else, not necessarily in the vein of Jackson’s eccentricities, sense of humour, and lack of pretension, but something else that prevents the show from becoming a po-faced fairy tale that’s merely beautiful to look at, functioning best as a screensaver on your widescreen.
The hand that feeds you
The Lord of the Game of Thrones, George RR Martin, was hugely inspired by his RR namesake, among other literary cornerstones and rarer gems, of course.
This is expressly clear in his dizzying world-building. But there are, of course, some sizable differences in their respective fictional realms. I’m not really referring to depictions of geography and civilization, although these certainly come into play.
George pointed to Boromir as a particularly praise-worthy creation, stating his morally grey depiction was all the more compelling due to his conflicted interests. He was on a mission for his father, Denethor, the steward of Gondor, who demanded his son return from Rivendell with the ring of power so that it could be weaponized for the benefit of his subjects. But Bormomir was swayed by his love and loyalty to his newfound friends in the Fellowship. It was his lack of clarity as a character that resonated.
Game of Thrones took note of this, resulting in a litany of dubiously good and reluctantly evil characters populating the series.
Moreover, Martin, perhaps at risk of biting the hand that fed him, took aim at certain unanswered questions surrounding the inner-workings of Middle Earth. For example, upon Sauron’s defeat, what became of the orcs? Or more to the point, did Isildur’s newly crowned heir arrange an orc baby genocide?
Another interesting gripe felt by Martin related to the less-than-epic detail of Aragorn’s tax policy. Just what was his economic manifesto, exactly?
You may think George is nitpicking here, but it seems to me he has a point, at least in terms of adapting Middle Earth for a modern audience.
Viewers at home devoured Game of Thrones, en masse. It set the standard for popular fantasy. A key reason for its success was its ability to work around the more mundane elements of the genre, such as silly names, wacky creatures, and a generally tiresome, nerdy attention to detail - be it special swords, enchanted lakes, or fetching straw hats.
Thrones smashed through all that with a more modern take on the genre, swearing, slicing, and fucking its way into the hearts and minds of you and me. It also gave us a refreshing insight into various aspects of life in this world of myth that audiences are seldom afforded. We were granted a look into how a world such as this would actually work, again recalling Martin’s comments about Aragorn’s failure in terms of orc infant-slaying and fiscal policy.
The difference
Here, a significant difference between the two franchises is made clear. Lord of the Rings is a work of ‘High Fantasy’, meaning it concerns itself with wizards, kings, and knights, as opposed to the nitty-gritty of common folk. Do the characters have sex, or are they bereft of genitals, like dolls? Do they ever get bored of questing and lay low in the pub? Tolkien wasn’t going to tell us, because his sights were fixedly aimed high, not low.
Another interesting gripe felt by Martin related to the less-than-epic detail of Aragorn’s tax policy. Just what was his economic manifesto, exactly?
Game of Thrones did no such thing, and that’s why the screen adaptation was a hit. I guess that makes it ‘low’, like the ‘low born’ bastards playing second fiddle to their high-born overlords. The question is, will Rings of Power take heed of this?
It seems like a jolly good idea if they want to recoup their quarter-billion investment. Beyond Amazon’s economic policy, thinking in terms of artistic integrity and what might make for the best Tolkien show possible, it’s questionable as to whether Rings should sacrifice its inherent high fantasy trappings established by JRR, simply to satiate a mass audience.
If Rings did, it would hopefully also inherit GoT’s championing of ethically nebulous characters. Moral binaries are old hat. I think we got enough of that sort of thing from the bedtime stories of our childhood. Tolkien’s books, as well as Jackson’s films, never address the finer points of life in Middle Earth. Or should we say, the realities of any world, real or fictional? This includes a very limited, for want of a better word, Orthodox view on sexuaility and race. Perhaps JRR is looking down on us from Valhalla, in shock, observing a desensitisation to carnal horrors and lamenting our loss of innocence as a species.
Happily, TV is a bit more grown-up now, or thinks it is, anyway. People of colour are now finally being represented on our screens. The same goes for non-hereosexual folk. This is reflected in Amazon’s new Rings series, to an extent yet to be seen in full.
Tolkien’s abandoned LotR sequel
But on a final note, did you know Tolkien had begun planning a sequel to The Lord of the Rings? I shit thee nay. It was tentatively titled ‘The New Shadow’, and was to be set a few hundred years after The Return of the King, delieating what followed after the death of King Aragorn.
The author, usually more than happy to go into infinitesimal detail about his own world, became rather depressed about the project, though. He observed that upon evil’s defeat, the world would indeed become complacent upon a definitive return to equilibrium. The status-quo, he felt, would result in the bad times being swiftly forgotten, with goodness becoming as bland and unmoving as the air we breathe.
Civilisation would slide back into the slime, morally speaking. Wizards, elves, and other pure, mythological creations would recede, their very existence becoming a hazy recollection, perhaps mistaken for a dream.
The world of men would be overrun once more, at first by grifters, chancers and politicians. In short, society would revert right back to the evil it so valiantly triumphed over, once upon a time. And so, the course would be set for the return of another monstrous, satanic evil; the titular ‘new shadow’.
It would seem Tolkien wanted his parting words to remain safely in the realm of high fantasy, where ‘tits + dragons’ would be safely kept at bay. At least while he still drew breath…