[HATED] Adaptations done intentionally without help from the source

[u/Chill0000]

Halo TV show: Before the show came out, the writers were praising their decision to not look to the games for inspiration when making the show

God Of War TV show: Chris Judge, the actor of Kratos in the games from 2018-Now, spoke up about his dislike on the show not hiring anyone who worked on any of the previous games. One of the original creators of Kratos also spoke up about them not having faith in the adaptation.

Supergirl 2026 film: the director for the film not only said he decided to not read Woman Of Tomorrow, the comic the film is adapting, because he wanted to do his own thing, he also didn’t look at comic art for inspiration to design Lobo and instead used an AI image generator to design Lobo’s look for the film

[u/OldForestDweller]

Whatever you're quoting is actually incorrect. In fact, Amazon had already purchased the rights from the Tolkien Estate before they decided to depict the Second Age stories. Amazon has essentially the same rights for TV that Embracer owns for movies, which are for two books: The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. It is not constrained by a fictional time period within the story.

[u/Z0idberg_MD → u/OldForestDweller]

I literally provided sources. You could probably do the same if you’re going to dispute them.

Here’s another:

Tolkien scholar Tom Shippey, who is supervising the show’s development, told German fansite Deutsche Tolkien that the estate has refused to allow the series to be set during any period other than the Second Age of Middle-earth. This means Amazon’s adaptation will not cross over at all with events from the Third Age, which were dramatised in Peter Jackson’s Oscar-winning trilogy in which the hobbit Frodo Baggins journeys to destroy the One Ring.

You are just straight up wrong. I mean it’s kind of understandable as it might be confusing reading that they have the license to the main novels, but the details of the agreement itself prevents them from covering events in that particular age.

So basically any details in the main novels that relate to the second age they can use. But frodo, Sam and the fellowship? Nope.

[u/OldForestDweller → u/Z0idberg_MD]

This has been known for many years. You are misunderstanding, though Tolkien adaptation rights has been confusing to many, as you originally pointed out. From the showrunners' interview with Variety in 2022:

So what did Amazon buy? “We have the rights solely to The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King, the appendices, and The Hobbit,” Payne says. “And that is it. We do not have the rights to The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, The History of Middle-earth, or any of those other books.” That takes a huge chunk of lore off the table and has left Tolkien fans wondering how this duo plans to tell a Second Age story without access to those materials. “There’s a version of everything we need for the Second Age in the books we have the rights to,” McKay says. “As long as we’re painting within those lines and not egregiously contradicting something we don’t have the rights to, there’s a lot of leeway and room to dramatize and tell some of the best stories that [Tolkien] ever came up with.”

Shippey was speaking about the First Age in the original interview that the article you linked to was pulling from. Though he started by saying "third" in his answer, perhaps a mistake and the reason Empire got that wrong. As Shippey explained in that answer, the Estate still controls rights to all First Age stories, so they cannot be adapted. Another element here is that Warner Bros./HBO proposed to the Estate another adaptation of the main story from LotR, which they did not like, and they do not want Amazon to do that either. However, Amazon still owns rights to the entire book (as well as The Hobbit), which is why they have adapted elements from the prologue and even some small parts of the main story into the show. And, of course, this includes the Appendices in LotR, but not exclusively. There are a lot of wrong ideas about these rights, and "Amazon only owns rights to the LotR Appendices" or "Amazon only owns rights to the Second Age" are actually both incorrect as well.

[u/Z0idberg_MD → u/OldForestDweller]

I respect your gumption, but ignoring how NOTHING in the variety article rebuts the idea that while they have the rights to the novels, there is an “age” restriction”, the hilarious thing is the full interview you listed absolutely contradicts your argument:

> The First and Third Ages are “off-limits”, you can’t have the First Age. Events could be mentioned at the most if they explain the events of the Second Age

With a description below this direct quote section:

> The Tolkien Estate holds the rights to events in the First Age. The rights to the events in The** **Hobbit and in The Lord of the Rings, i.e. in the Third Age, lie with Middle-earth Enterprises and not with Amazon Studios. Whether and to what extent Amazon is conducting or has conducted negotiations with Middle-earth Enterprises is not known.

[u/OldForestDweller → u/Z0idberg_MD]

There is something here that we are getting stuck on. Amazon does have the rights to the entirety of the two books (LotR and The Hobbit), as I said, but they intentionally did not want to tell the main stories from them, which is why the Estate went with their bid. For example, the bid from Warner Bros. proposed an adaptation of the main story from LotR (just like the PJ movies). This is permitted under the rights that the Estate sold. However, the Estate preferred not to do that, which is one of the reasons they chose Amazon instead. (Another reason is that Amazon agreed to give the Estate some control over the project.) Also, that second part you quoted above is plain wrong. Middle-earth Enterprises (which is now owned by Embracer) owns movie rights. What the Estate licensed to Amazon are the same rights, but for TV. (Embracer also owns rights for games and merchandise that Amazon does not own.)