“The Lord Of The Rings” Is Coming Home In 2022

If nothing else, Amazon’s The Lord Of The Rings has already done a great deal to expose the power and influence that Peter Jackson still wields, not so much over Tolkien fandom as a whole – although his mark is certainly felt there, and his The Lord Of The Rings trilogy is understandably an entry point for many fans – but over the general public’s view of the franchise. Imagery that originated in his trilogy has become indelibly associated with the story over the past twenty years, and some hardcore fans of his films display the kind of surprisingly strong and aggressive loyalty to Jackson that makes any attempt to supplant that iconic imagery…difficult, to say the least.

The Lord Of The Rings
Hobbiton | hgtv.com

Now, Jackson’s films are each cinematic masterpieces in their own right (I am of course deliberately ignoring The Hobbit trilogy), so it’s not totally surprising that they’ve still got legions of diehard supporters. I myself am a massive fan, and if you don’t believe I’ve got a few “10 out of 10” movie reviews for the trilogy on my blog that should dispel any doubt. They are my favorite movies. But that doesn’t make them perfect, and I’ve always been open to the idea of seeing something new and unique from Amazon’s The Lord Of The Rings – especially since their show isn’t a remake of Jackson’s trilogy, something that a lot of people still don’t know and which complicates the discourse around it exponentially.

But one of many things that Jackson got right was his use of nature in the trilogy as more than just a setting, but as a main character in the story.

A deep-seated respect and admiration for nature is integral to all of J.R.R. Tolkien’s writings, and therefore to any adaptation of said writings. And by choosing to shoot almost the entirety of The Lord Of The Rings in his home country of New Zealand, Peter Jackson imbued the films with a love of nature that was not only important to the story on a thematic level, but important to him on a personal level. He utilized stunningly beautiful landscapes around the North and South Island that at that time were mostly brand new to global audiences, thereby ensuring that, for many people, Middle-earth and The Lord Of The Rings are the only exposure they have to New Zealand.

And over the past two decades, New Zealand has slowly taken on the very identity of Middle-earth, to the detriment of its own Māori culture and history, and to a point where there’s legitimate cause for concern over how much the country relies on its tourism industry, which in turn relies on The Lord Of The Rings and other big movie franchises, which in turn leads to things like the infamous “Hobbit Law” – passed in 2010 as a little incentive for Warner Brothers to make its Hobbit trilogy in New Zealand – that prevents workers in New Zealand’s film industry from unionizing. The Hobbit Law has been subtly revised several times, but not repealed, and the dispute it caused even led to a feud between Jackson and The Lord Of The Rings actress Robyn Malcolm.

But while that’s the kind of thing you might think would entice Amazon to stick around (and that’s the very reason for the Law’s conception), neither the reprehensible Hobbit Law nor New Zealand’s location incentive program (which, if I’m reading the reports accurately, would have made Amazon eligible for an “uplift” of roughly $23.1 million dollars, if not more down the line), could ultimately keep the studio in the country. Amazon announced last night that the second season of The Lord Of The Rings will move production to the United Kingdom, marking the first time in the franchise’s history that it will be filmed entirely in the nation of its origin.

The Lord Of The Rings
Mount Ngauruhoe | trekearth.com

The reaction has been divided, nowhere more so than in New Zealand itself, where Amazon’s decision will have far-ranging economic and political effects. It doesn’t help that Amazon gave very little indication of why they made the move, although it’s worth noting that many of their upcoming series’ are being produced in the UK anyway, so it may just be a matter of practicality – especially since The Lord Of The Rings is also hiring quite a lot of British actors who had been stuck in New Zealand for several months during the country’s lockdown. With the nation only just signaling its intentions to reopen its borders beginning early next year, it may be simpler for Amazon to work in a slightly less restrictive nation for the time being…although filming in New Zealand certainly came with the benefit of not having to shut down production because of COVID-19 cases every thirty minutes, which is not a guarantee in the UK.

Another benefit that came with New Zealand were its stunning landscapes and vistas, which have become visually synonymous with the fantastical realms of Middle-earth: from the hilly patch of farmland in Matamata that quite literally is the village of Hobbiton, to the slopes of Mount Ngauruhoe where the Mount Doom sequences were filmed, to the forests around Paradise that served as home to the Elves of Lórien. As has often been noted, the diversity of environments in New Zealand gave Peter Jackson’s films the look and feel of being a globe-trotting adventure, but the fact that so many of his iconic filming locations are accessible in a single vacation made them excellent for tourists trying to escape into their favorite fantasy world.

The UK may not be blessed with nearly as many mountain ranges as New Zealand, but it still boasts a number of beautiful forests, coastlines, and craggy landscapes – particularly in Scotland where, what do you know, Amazon’s The Lord Of The Rings was originally going to be filmed. As long as they continue to film on location in the UK, rather than assembling their landscapes in post-production using CGI to replicate the real deal, I don’t necessarily see an issue with this change. Maintaining visual continuity with season one is gonna be a hassle, but at this point Amazon has been filming for so long in New Zealand that they may be able to stitch reused footage into English or Scottish countrysides seamlessly. Maybe that’s what that fake production crew was actually doing this whole time…

I think one reason this decision has been met with such backlash is because it seems to confirm what’s becoming increasingly clear – that Amazon intends to cut ties with Jackson’s continuity, perhaps for good. I mean, we don’t know that for sure. They may end up returning to New Zealand for some reason. But this definitely suggests that Amazon’s The Lord Of The Rings is going to establish its own visual style and aesthetic moving forward, and I can understand why that would make some fans upset. I know I’ll be extremely angry if the rich and unique landscapes of New Zealand are swapped out for lifeless greenscreens. We saw what that looked like in The Hobbit, and it was a travesty.

But hey! Maybe we’ll see some of the locations that inspired Tolkien himself in The Lord Of The Rings. That would be pretty darn awesome, and feels like too good an opportunity for Amazon to miss. I’m gonna miss New Zealand, I’ll be honest, but I’m hoping that, in this case, change doesn’t necessarily mean a change for the worse. We’ll have to wait and see.

The Lord Of The Rings
Scottish Highlands | elitetraveler.com

If you live in New Zealand, I’d be especially interested to learn more about how this move affects the country, and if you live in the UK, I’d love to hear what locations you think would make great settings for The Lord Of The Rings! Share your own thoughts, theories, and opinions, in the comments below!

Hot Take: Sauron Is More Than Just A Floating Eyeball, OK?

Peter Jackson did a lot of things right when he adapted J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord Of The Rings to the big screen. That’s not up for debate, at least not to me. The simple way in which he empowers Frodo on Mount Doom? Flawless. The additional scenes that enrich Boromir’s character? Impeccable. The lighting of the beacons? Unsurpassable. Jackson gave us probably the best adaptation we could have asked for: a masterpiece of modern cinema that honored the already legendary source material, while making it accessible to general audiences.

Sauron
Eye of Sauron | slate.com

But then he goes and turns Sauron into a giant floating eyeball, and it’s like: seriously, PJ? You were doing so well! I mean, you butchered Faramir…and Merry…and Gimli, and Treebeard, and nearly Théoden too, but other than that you were doing so well!

On paper, this decision probably seemed like a great way to very literally interpret Tolkien’s repeated references to the malevolent, all-seeing Eye of Sauron. But in execution (and perhaps especially in hindsight, now that the sheer spectacle of a fiery CGI eyeball isn’t enough on its own to distract from the inherent silliness of that idea), Jackson’s Sauron comes across as underwhelming and unscary. He’s inspired a great many memes (most of which ask, quite profoundly I might add, what the CGI eyeball planned to actually do with the One Ring when he had obtained it, seeing as Jackson’s version seemed to lack any fingers), but fear and awe: not so much.

Yet unfortunately, it’s that image of Sauron as an eye suspended between the prongs of Barad-dûr that has become embedded in the public consciousness, supplanting both Tolkien’s own written words, and the works of countless Tolkien artists and illustrators who preceded Jackson. And the fact that Jackson’s Sauron is so borderline cartoonish has only made it easier for people to claim that Sauron is a “one-dimensional” villain and that therefore The Lord Of The Rings is a shallow “good vs. evil” fantasy. I can understand why: if I only knew Sauron as a floating eye, I too would have a hard time believing he has one of the most fascinating character arcs in all of Tolkien’s legendarium.

But Amazon Prime’s The Lord Of The Rings finally has an opportunity to change the public perception of Sauron. I’m not saying I want people to think of him as a misunderstood antihero or anything like that, but it would be nice to finally give general audiences a clearer idea of his nuances, and the layers to his motivations beyond just wanting to “cover all the lands in a second darkness”, than they would necessarily get from watching Jackson’s movies or even from reading The Lord Of The Rings itself.

The bare bones of Sauron’s backstory are covered in The Silmarillion, a compendium of tales and legends from Middle-earth’s prehistory. It’s very briefly explained there that Sauron was once a Maia – which in Tolkien’s universe means that he was something like an angel; very powerful, but a lesser spirit compared to the archangels, or Valar, who answered directly to “God”, Eru Ilúvatar. Dig a little deeper, and you’ll discover that before he was known as Sauron, this particular Maia went by the name of Mairon (which translates to The Admirable). He was a craftsman and artisan for the Valar…until he was seduced to the darkness by the fallen angel, Morgoth.

As Morgoth’s most trusted lieutenant, Mairon’s power only increased – and he became known as Sauron (The Abhorred). Throughout The Silmarillion, he and Morgoth are depicted as being largely of the same mind: and even after Morgoth’s downfall (and I mean that in the most literal sense of the word), Sauron rejects the mercy of the Valar and chooses to hide in Middle-earth, seemingly to continue Morgoth’s agenda of chaos. When he conquers the kingdom of Númenor from within, he sets up temples to Morgoth and establishes a death-cult around his former master. It’s easy to see why many fans ship the two: they’re cute in a…toxic, vicious, self-destructive sort of way.

Sauron
Sauron the Ring-Maker | quora.com

But in my opinion, even The Silmarillion strips away many of Sauron’s fascinating layers – understandably, because in its published form its basically an abridged version of a much larger and more intricate epic. Tolkien’s most concise and insightful exploration into the psyche of Sauron (again, just my opinion; feel free to disagree) comes from Morgoth’s Ring, one of many posthumously published texts on Middle-earth:

“[Sauron] did not object to the existence of the world, so long as he could do what he liked with it. He still had the relics of positive purposes, that descended from the good of the nature in which he began: it had been his virtue (and therefore also the cause of his fall, and of his relapse) that he loved order and coordination, and disliked all confusion and wasteful friction….his capability of corrupting other minds, and even engaging their service, was a residue from the fact that his original desire for ‘order’ had really envisaged the good estate (especially physical well-being) of his ‘subjects'”

I’ve referred back to this idea a number of times, and I’ve used the term “perfectionist” to describe Sauron because that’s basically what he was, before, you know…the business with the Ring. Unlike Morgoth, Sauron didn’t want to destroy Middle-earth, and Tolkien himself points out the differences between the two, writing elsewhere in Morgoth’s Ring that Morgoth represents “sheer nihilism, and negation its one ultimate object”. Morgoth wanted to literally unmake the universe; but Sauron genuinely wanted to improve upon it. And he wanted to rule the universe he fashioned in his own “perfect” image.

We can see some of that still in the Second Age of Middle-earth, following Morgoth’s downfall. He never repented of his heinous deeds, but motivated by his jealousy of the Valar and their paradise he did genuinely want to redesign Middle-earth into something beautiful – more beautiful than anything the Valar could boast of in their Blessed Realm across the sea. As Tolkien writes above, he wanted to be a tyrant, but a “good” one, one worthy of the worship and reverence he would demand and receive from his subjects regardless. One could say there’s a desperate need for self-validation in that motive; a need to prove to himself that he was still good, that Morgoth had not corrupted him entirely.

But by joining Morgoth and turning away from true perfection (i.e. Eru Ilúvatar, who made the universe and all things in it), Sauron’s noble motives were perverted and distorted to suit his master’s nihilistic goal. In Tolkien’s legendarium, only Eru is capable of creation – Morgoth, Sauron, and all those who try to imitate Eru out of spite or jealousy, are at best only capable of copying the things Eru has created, or at worst of corrupting those things. For example, Morgoth’s trolls were his inferior copies of the Ents, while his orcs were Elves and Men whose bodies and souls he had mutilated. Sauron in turn became incapable of creating anything truly beautiful or perfect.

Now imagine how that must torture a perfectionist! Did it pain him to know that everything he touched would ultimately be corrupted, that his grand aspirations were literally unachievable? Or did it only further fuel his violent envy of the Valar and of Eru? Did he become a nihilist like Morgoth before him, convinced that if he could not fix the world because he himself stood in the way of that goal, he could at least tear everything down? Sauron would make a fascinating subject for a character study.

And with Amazon’s The Lord Of The Rings, that could finally happen – at least in some form. Amazon’s show is set during the Second Age, right at that crucial midpoint in Sauron’s journey where the best and worst of his qualities are in play, warring for control over him. Morgoth is out of the picture, yet still wields power over his lieutenant’s heart. Sauron is free to be good, even perhaps desires to be good, but cannot bear the humiliation of surrendering to the Valar. Ah, the inner turmoil!

Sauron
Sauron | looper.com

If Amazon pulls this off, it would be extraordinary. Some people will probably complain about how it’s unnecessarily overcomplicating a straightforward villain, and I get all that, but also…I just want people to know that there’s more to Sauron than a giant eyeball! Is that really so wrong?

Anyway, what do you want to see from Amazon’s The Lord Of The Rings? Feel free to share your own thoughts, theories, and opinions, in the comments below!

Amazon Unveils 1st Look At “The Lord Of The Rings”, And It’s Stunning

As chance would have it, I was out today when Amazon decided to drop a first look at The Lord Of The Rings. My timing, as always, was truly impeccable. But at this point, I’ve given up trying to figure out Amazon’s schedule – they seem to have a pattern of completely ignoring all the biggest and most significant dates in Tolkien lore, and instead choosing to release massive news on random days. Take today’s first-look image, for example. August 2nd, today’s date, has no significance as far as I can tell, either in J.R.R. Tolkien’s universe, or in a meta context, as the date of any one of his major publications. Considering how Amazon paired this first-look image with a caption reading “a new journey begins”, this reveal might have been better suited for July 29th, just a few days ago – the date on which The Fellowship Of The Ring was published, sixty-seven years ago.

The Lord Of The Rings
Behold, Valinor | theverge.com

But then, look at the release date Amazon has finally chosen for The Lord Of The Rings – September 2nd, 2022. Nope, I’m not missing a two. Amazon is passing over September 22nd (arguably the single-most important date in Tolkien fandom, the date of Frodo and Bilbo Baggins’ dual birthdays and Hobbit Day to fans around the world) in favor of a completely random premiere date for their series*. I’ll give you that choosing Hobbit Day would only further blur the lines between Amazon’s prequel series and The Lord Of The Rings proper, but hey, Amazon seems to be blurring the lines between their series and The Silmarillion anyway, so what’s a little more blurriness if it means getting to celebrate Hobbit Day with a massive Lord Of The Rings event next year?

What’s not blurry is the crisp, clean image that Amazon has provided us today, on this most random of days. It’s so exquisitely detailed that you’d be forgiven for thinking it’s only a promotional photo or even a piece of concept artwork – but what we’re seeing here is apparently our very first official still from the premiere episode of The Lord Of The Rings…and reader, I’m a bit overwhelmed with emotion at the beautiful sight.

To say I cried is a bit of an understatement. I’ve been waiting for this moment for a very long time, you know. But thankfully, I’ve had a moment to compose myself, I’ve taken a deep breath, I’ve relaxed, and ERU ABOVE ARE THOSE THE TWO TREES OF VALINOR?!?!?

The image in question is deceptive in that at first glance it could be any city in the heyday of the Second Age of Middle-earth, when Amazon’s The Lord Of The Rings is set (roughly three-thousand years before The Lord Of The Rings trilogy). My initial impression was that it had to be Ost-in-Edhil, the capital of the Elven kingdom of Eregion where the Rings of Power were forged during the Second Age – I saw a city sprawling across the foothills of some mountains, a figure clad in white who I assumed was Lady Galadriel, and a pretty sunset. And then I zoomed in and realized that the sunset was in fact not a sun – but an explosion of light emanating from the silhouette of a towering tree in the far distance, with another one just behind it.

“Stunned speechless” is probably the best way to sum up my reactions to this image, then. Seeing Ost-in-Edhil and Eregion would no doubt have been cool, and would have tied in very nicely with The Lord Of The Rings, giving general audiences a hook; remember that place in the prologue to Fellowship, where the Rings were made? This is that! But seeing what I now have to believe is the Blessed Land of Aman (better known as Valinor) and the Elven city of Tirion upon the green hill of Túna, illuminated by the light of the Two Trees in the dawn of the First Age before there even was a dawn, or a sun – that’s something beyond cool. Never in our lifetimes have we seen any part of The Silmarillion adapted for the screen because access to the book and its treasure trove of iconic imagery and arcane lore was famously off-limits to filmmakers. Now, as TheOneRing.net recently reported, everything is on the table.

The Lord Of The Rings
The Killing Of The Trees by John Howe | pinterest.com

So what does that mean for the show? Well, it’s still going to be set in the Second Age, so it makes sense why this beautiful shot of a First Age landscape is drawn from the first episode. It looks like TheOneRing.net was also ahead of the curve when they revealed that the first two episodes of The Lord Of The Rings, both directed by J.A. Bayona, will form an epic feature-length film – an introduction of sorts to this new version of Tolkien’s universe. I speculated that this film would be set during the beginning of the Second Age, but it seems the story will begin even earlier in Tolkien’s timeline, during the height of Valinorian culture under the watchful eyes of the Valar, Middle-earth’s pantheon of god-like deities. This film will set up the story and our major players, and then we’ll jump into the rest of the series.

But why set the first episode so far back in the First Age? And why is Amazon concealing the identity of the white-clad figure standing near the bottom of the frame – most people think it’s Galadriel, and it very well could be (she was alive during the First Age, and lived in Valinor), but what if it’s not? Again, I think back to TheOneRing.net’s recent leaks: they revealed that neither the dark lord Sauron nor his alter ego of Annatar would be revealed in this first season of The Lord Of The Rings, but they said nothing of his original form as Mairon. My casual readers probably already abandoned this post when I started ranting about glowing trees, but hear me out: Sauron was once an angelic being named Mairon, basically a craftsman of the gods. During the First Age, Mairon lived in Valinor and would likely have traveled to and from the Elven city of Tirion to help build its towers and palaces.

The Lord Of The Rings might give us a glimpse of this pure, uncorrupted version of Sauron before his fall into darkness – precipitated, like most horrible things in Tolkien’s universe, by the tyrannical Morgoth, who seduced Sauron away from the Valar. Of course, this First Age flashback could also be setting up Galadriel’s arc or establishing the curse of the Fëanorians, or it might just be one part of a montage of Middle-earth history: but considering the hoops Amazon would have had to jump through to even get the rights to The Silmarillion that would allow them to film this, I have to assume whatever we’re seeing here is an important moment in the show. And building up the threat of Sauron, starting with the kind of complex and sorrowful backstory that will finally dispel the widespread belief that Sauron is a straightforward evil villain, seems like a worthwhile use of Silmarillion content.

Does this mean I’m going to have to resurrect my series of Second Age history deep-dives, but with the First Age too? Perhaps. We have a long wait ahead of us, but I for one welcome the extra time: I need to be prepared for this, folks! The fact that I cried over a picture of a tree should give you some hint as to the emotional state I’ll be in come September, 2022, when The Lord Of The Rings actually premieres.

The Lord Of The Rings
Galadriel | wallpaperflare.com

Let me turn it over to you, dear readers. Did you get emotional seeing this image, returning to Middle-earth (technically Aman, but whatever) for the first time since The Hobbit trilogy ended? What parts of The Silmarillion do you hope to see in The Lord Of The Rings, and when do you think Amazon will give us a proper title for this show so I can stop calling it The Lord Of The Rings and confusing half of my readers? Share your own thoughts, theories, and opinions, in the comments below!

* Okay, so I’m an idiot. September 2nd is the date of J.R.R. Tolkien’s death in 1973, not quite as “random” as all that. It feels like a strangely solemn date on which to premiere Amazon’s The Lord Of The Rings, but I did want to point this out.

Jodie Whittaker Will Exit “Doctor Who” In 2022, But She’ll Always Be My Doctor

I wish that my first post about Doctor Who here on my blog didn’t have to be sad news. The show has been around since the 1960’s, decades before I was born, but I only just got into it recently – this very year, in fact. Why? Well, partly because I had HBO Max, so the opportunity finally presented itself. But also, more importantly, because Jodie Whittaker’s Thirteenth Doctor was already inspiring to me before I ever watched a minute of Doctor Who. There’s a reason I jumped straight into her seasons without watching any of the others first (sorry to everyone from Hartnell to Capaldi, by the way).

Doctor Who
Doctor Who | bbc.co.uk

So today’s news was a bit of a gut-punch, even though it was inevitable at some point. Jodie Whittaker will leave Doctor Who in the fall of 2022, following her third season as the Doctor (which airs later this year), and three specials which will air throughout 2022, the last of which will be feature-length and in which we’ll witness the Regeneration of the Doctor into their fourteenth iteration. Whittaker will be accompanied in her departure by showrunner Chris Chibnall, who has overseen and written large parts of her three seasons, and presumably by her last remaining original Companion, Yasmin Khan, played by Mandip Gill.

All of this is customary for Doctor Who. The character’s physical form is by nature impermanent, only a vessel for a timeless message of kindness, empowerment, and empathy which outlasts any single actor. I mean, that’s the whole point, right? But as someone who only got into this fandom recently and had never been attached to any of the previous Doctors, this is my first experience with Regeneration and…it hurts. I don’t even know yet if I’ll be interested in the show post-Whittaker, or if the joy and comfort I found in Doctor Who was solely rooted in how much I loved her Doctor, specifically.

Because if I’m being honest, Chris Chibnall’s writing wasn’t great most of the time. Most of Whittaker’s best episodes weren’t even written by him. So it’s a testament to her strength, talent, and keen understanding of the role that she transcended his failures as a showrunner and still managed to take what she was given and turn it into something special, infusing Doctor Who with a fresh breeze of heartfelt humor and whimsical wonderment. Unfortunately, it’s also a testament to the additional challenges she faced during her tenure as the Doctor because she happened to be the first woman in the role.

Doctor Who
Yaz, Graham, The Doctor, and Ryan | variety.com

Before her first season even aired, bigots were directing misogynistic vitriol towards her character. From her first episode onwards, she was battling lackluster writing and an overcrowded TARDIS that seemed strangely hellbent on surrounding her with male supporting characters who seemed to get more screentime and development than she ever did. After her male Companions left the show, it seemed like there might be an opportunity to explore the dynamic between the Doctor and Yazmin Khan in an all-female TARDIS – but going into her final season, two new male characters have been added to her crew. Simultaneously, her final season has been cut from the usual ten episodes down to just six, further reducing the amount of time Whittaker will have to define her version of the character before she leaves the role.

The BBC is making a big deal out of how Whittaker’s final appearance as the Doctor will coincide with their centenary anniversary in 2022, but even that doesn’t sit right with me. Doctor Who’s own sixtieth anniversary is just a year later in 2023 – they couldn’t have waited one more year? It seems like a small thing, but it would have been a great way for the BBC to support Whittaker’s casting. Instead, her successor will get the huge marketing campaign and media coverage that Doctor Who‘s sixtieth anniversary will entail. I’m not mad at whoever will take her place, because this is a coveted role and it was always going to pass on eventually, but I am mad at the BBC for undermining Whittaker’s legitimacy as the Doctor in this way.

At the same time, though, I’m happy for Whittaker. I hope that, like most of her male predecessors in the role (at least during the modern era of Doctor Who), she gets plenty of work coming off of the show. Tennant’s got Good Omens, Smith’s about to star in House Of The Dragon, Capaldi’s about to have a prominent role in The Suicide Squad – what will Whittaker’s next move be? Whether it’s a big franchise or something smaller, I’m excited to support her no matter what.

And I hope that whoever takes over as the Doctor builds on her performance just as Whittaker built on those who came before her. Countless Regenerations from now, Whittaker will still be an important part of the Doctor’s story, and that’s something the show should acknowledge – even if it’s just through little references and callbacks to her incredible performance. But regardless of whatever happens next with the show, Whittaker is my Doctor, and she always will be.

Doctor Who
The Thirteenth Doctor | irishnews.com

So what kind of emotions are you feeling, fam? Who do you hope will become the Fourteenth Doctor? Share your own thoughts, theories, and opinions, in the comments below!