Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

LoTR Fan Film — The Hunt For Gollum

Posted by timothy on from the is-gollum-even-in-season? dept.

stevedcc writes "This weekend sees the release of The Hunt for Gollum, a Lord of the Rings fan-film. It'll be available on the web for free. The BBC are running an article about the making of the film, with a budget of £3,000 (spent mostly on costumes and make-up). There were 160 contributors involved, many over the internet." I hope it lives up to the trailer (linked from the BBC story); the finished film is approximately 40 minutes. memoryhole supplies links to YouTube for both the full trailer and a second trailer. Reader jowifi adds a link to NPR's story on the film, writing, "NPR discussed the legality of this type of creation with EFF lawyer Fred Von Lohman, who said it's not clear if such a production violates the copyright for Tolkien's work."

43 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. Skeptical by heyitsjon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm a bit skeptical of the movie. I guess the reason I loved the movie series was the basis on the books (given it wasn't 100% accurately followed). With no great input from J.R.R., it will be interesting to see what direction this goes in.

    1. Re:Skeptical by stonedcat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The cool thing about fan films and fan series is that you don't have to like them or even watch them if you don't wish.

      --
      You can't take the sky from me.
    2. Re:Skeptical by ushering05401 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm a bit skeptical of the movie. I guess the reason I loved the movie series was the basis on the books (given it wasn't 100% accurately followed). With no great input from J.R.R., it will be interesting to see what direction this goes in.

      Do you realize the Peter Jackson movies were made without input from JRR, as he has been dead for some time?

      Hopefully the fan films will be made by people who have actually read the books they are translating to film.

      I read the trilogy + pretty much everything released by Tolkien's estate through the years. I am still trying to figure out what books the Peter Jackson movies were based on.

    3. Re:Skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The cool thing about fan films and fan series is that you don't have to like them or even watch them if you don't wish.

      As opposed to big budget Hollywood films where you better watch 'em, and you better like 'em, or else some guy comes for your knee caps?

    4. Re:Skeptical by emarkp · · Score: 4, Informative

      And thus you expose your ignorance. /sarcasm

      The Lord of the Rings was not a trilogy. That is all.

      (Oh, and I don't have any trouble seeing what Jackson's films were based on. Perhaps you need glasses?)

    5. Re:Skeptical by Bobb9000 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, I think the GP meant that the story of the Lord of the Rings is pretty well delineated in canon, so Jackson knew pretty well what the story was, even if he elected to change some things.

      This movie is based on a few lines in the appendix of LOTR that discuss Gandalf and Aragorn pursuing Gollum between the events of The Hobbit and Fellowship of the Ring. That's much less to go on than a whole narrative hundreds of pages long.

      Doesn't mean it's going to be bad, just means that they don't have as much canon to work with.

      --
      Bobb9000 - raised by the wolves,
      Oxford education as phrased by the wolves.
    6. Re:Skeptical by sakdoctor · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just to let you know, I read your post in comic book guy's voice.

    7. Re:Skeptical by melikamp · · Score: 3, Funny

      Impossible. Comic Book Guy's voice does not implement /sarcasm.

    8. Re:Skeptical by RobertM1968 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Very true...

      I've actually been waiting for this to come out for quite some time - one of my friends did a bunch of the promotional stuff for them - the amazingly talented Jeff Hayes (check his "One Sheet Design" pages), whom I work with on Star Trek New Voyages. Hope this episode is as well done as his promotional graphics for it.

      --
      StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
    9. Re:Skeptical by Repton · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's more detail on the hunt for gollum in Unfinished Tales. Still not a lot, to be honest.

      The most interesting thing is the explanation of how Gollum escapes from Thranduil. Basically, Sauron had been unable to completely break Gollum - perhaps because of Gollum's hobbit heritage. So Sauron had let Gollum go, in the hope that Gollum would find his way to the Shire or Baggins - both names Sauron had got out of him, but both things Gollum didn't know the location of. So Sauron let Gollum go, but kept an eye on him.

      Then Aragorn captured Gollum, just outside Mordor. Now, Sauron knew (from Gollum) that the One had been found, but he did not realise anyone else knew this. So he was now worried that Gollum's new captors would discover this information, and thus Sauron would lose an advantage. Hence he arranged for an orc-raid to capture or kill Gollum. However, Gollum escaped. There were also Nazgul in the area, searching for the Shire in the guise of black riders, so in terror of the orcs and the black riders, Gollum hid in Moria./p.

      --
      Repton.
      They say that only an experienced wizard can do the tengu shuffle.
    10. Re:Skeptical by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 4, Funny

      Worst. Thread. Ever.

    11. Re:Skeptical by Captain+Electrode · · Score: 5, Funny

      ... but kept an eye on him.

      That's Eye, you insensitive clod!

    12. Re:Skeptical by stephenhawking · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The reason the differences from the Jackson films vs the books don't bother me, is that these are tales from a legendarium as Tolkien called it. To be told and retold, as legends are. He retold many of the stories in various formats, and with variations in the stories. So for me the movies are just a variation on the war of the ring legend, and for the most part damn good.

    13. Re:Skeptical by triceice · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They do this anyway whether or not you do watch the movies they make. Even when downloading the film actually help box office sales.

  2. Release date by Dan+East · · Score: 4, Informative

    Release date is May 3 2009 at 16:00 GMT.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
  3. Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by FlyingBishop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We got in touch with Tolkien Enterprises and reached an understanding with them that as long as we are completely non-profit then we're okay. We have to be careful not to disrespect their ownership of the intellectual property. They are supportive of the way fans wish to express their enthusiasm.

    Looks like tim is trolling just a bit.

    Though, in general, LotR should be public domain. It's a definite part of our cultural heritage, and these sort of copyright issues are about as insulting as someone claiming copyright on the Shakespeare Canon.

    1. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by nausea_malvarma · · Score: 4, Funny

      I happen to be the owner of Shakespeare's Cannons Inc. and your infringing on my trademark, you insensitive clod!

    2. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Though, in general, LotR should be public domain.

      It is not a matter of opinion. Copyright is Life + 70 in the USA. Tolkien passed in 1973. In 2043, his work will enter public domain.

    3. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by westlake · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Though, in general, LotR should be public domain. It's a definite part of our cultural heritage

      It is a part of our cultural heritage only because Tolkien chose to create it and to publish it --- on his own terms.

    4. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by Ren.Tamek · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Indeed. When Tolkein set about writing LotR his specific aim was to write an english folklore of our very own, since what we had was very disjointed compared to the strength of norse and roman myths. I think he would find the idea of one company 'owning' his work to be totally against the central idea behind his work. Myths are there to be told and retold.

      Unfortunately, we can't ask him as he has been dead 36 years now. The idea that anyone might own the sole rights to something written by a man long dead is definitely a strange one to get your head around.

      --
      "If you want a vision of the future, Winston, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever." - George Orwell, 1984
    5. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by Opyros · · Score: 4, Interesting

      OTOH Tolkien was very protective of his copyrights during his own lifetime; he once complained that he couldn't copyright the name "Shadowfax", to keep it from being used as the name of a hydrofoil! (For anyone who has the published volume of his letters, the relevant one is #258.) And of course, there was his outrage at the Ace pirate edition ("Dealings one might expect of Saruman in his decay rather than from the defenders of the West".) But as you say, it's anyone's guess what he'd think about violation of his copyrights today, now that even "courtesy (at least) to living authors" is no longer at issue.

    6. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Interesting
      It is a part of our cultural heritage only because Tolkien chose to create it and to publish it --- on his own terms.

      Then again, its position as a major part of our cultural heritage is in quite some part because pirate publishers in the US printed it without Tolkien's permission, following a tradition of American respect for copyrights going back at least to Dickens; the first paperback edition was entirely unauthorised. And cheap.

      As a result it became hugely popular over there in the 1960s - the reason for a generation of hippie children called things like Pippin Galadriel Moonchild, and graffiti all over the place saying FRODO LIVES. Without that it would likely be a much more obscure work to this day.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    7. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by flyingsquid · · Score: 5, Funny

      Nasty, nasty fanses! The fanses violates the preciouss.... the preciousss copyrightses!

    8. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by Eil · · Score: 2

      Shakespeare's work is hundreds of years old, Tolkien's is not. I believe that copyright on a particular work should expire upon an author's death (or very shortly thereafter... 7 rather than 70 years) but my beliefs are completely irrelevant. Tolkien's work is still copyrighted under current law.

      Under your logic, it could be argued that pretty much any work with a household name would fall into the public domain (The Simpsons, Harry Potter, Windows XP...)

    9. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by ben0207 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As a Cornishman, I can definitely say you're wrong there! :)

      At least geographically and culturally, large bits of Middle Earth appear to spring directly from Britain. The Shire, for example, well, it IS the Westcountry.

      --
      cmd-q.co.uk - some sort of stupid fucking internet bullshit
    10. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I live in Birmingham(UK) and since tolkien was a local lad it seems that several local places gave the inspirations Eg i think that Moseley marsh inspired fangorn and there are a couple of large chimneys from the industrial revolution around there that were supposedly the origin of the Two Towers. Places were near where he lived for a time.
      Not quite the same, but I am sort of glad we arent over run by Orkses, Urok-Hai and Nazgul here in the sunny (at least for the last 15 minutes) Midlands.

    11. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, you can bank money over time, and call it an investment, but you can't bank hours at the keyboard writing something, and call it an investment? And what if an author spends ten years writing a work that he knows is going to take a while to be picked up and appreciated by a wide audience, but which indeed has lots of commercial potential to reward him for his hard work. And he and his wife have been arranging their finances around that deferring of income while he finishes the project. It gets published! Yay! Things are looking great. And then he gets hit by a bus that week. Too bad, family that supported the author for ten years. You lose! The writer's desire and actions to have the proceeds from that work support you are history, because Anonymouse Coward thinks that his getting hit by a bus the day his book gets published means all of his work is now public domain. Why shouldn't all of your parents' cash investments have become public domain the moment they died, if a writer's TIME investments should be? Oh, I know. Because by holding that position, it makes it easier to feel less guilty about ripping off music and videos using P2P.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    12. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by Zordak · · Score: 2, Informative

      Was he using the name in commerce as a source identifier for goods and services? No? Then it's not a trademark. And even if it was, he couldn't assert it against a boat unless he was selling Shadowfax-branded boats. Trademark doesn't give you "ownership" of a name or word. It gives you the right to prevent others from using it as a confusingly-similar source identifier for goods and/or services.

      Bottom line, there's pretty much nothing Tolkein could do to stop somebody from naming his hydrofoil "Shadowfax." He doesn't own the word just because he made it up.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    13. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by Kagura · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Same here... with the southern dark lands being Africa.

    14. Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice. by DinDaddy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why exactly should he be able to keep it from being used as the name of a hydrofoil?

      "I was going to buy a copy of Lord of the Rings to read, but I got this cool hydrofoil called Shadowfax, so now I don't need to."

  4. Say what? by westlake · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "NPR discussed the legality of this type of creation with EFF lawyer Fred Von Lohman, who said it's not clear if such a production violates the copyright for Tolkien's work."

    It's as clear as a pane of glass.

    The character is recognizably Tolkien's creation.

    The universe he inhabits. The voices. The dialog. The languages.

    The maps. The character designs.

    The story.

    The film can't honestly be described as anything other than a derivative work.

  5. It is clear by MojoRilla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That the technology revolution has almost overtaken feature films. The trailer looks almost as good as the real thing. Pretty soon it will be hard to tell fan fiction from the real thing. Hell, some of the fan fiction might end up being better than the real thing.

    Than won't Hollywood and the RIAA be in a bind.

    1. Re:It is clear by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 3, Funny

      If YouTube is any indication, Hollywood will be safe for years to come.

    2. Re:It is clear by biovoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And if "Dude, Where's My Car?" is any indication, Hollywood is screwed.

    3. Re:It is clear by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And if "Dude, Where's My Car?" is any indication, Hollywood is screwed.

      That is actually why Hollywood is screwed. Their idea of how to make films to fill in all the gaps involve the like of "Dude, Where's My Car." The thing is - a reasonably talented YouTube hack could probably do something just as good - even better. For less. And get the full rewards. With no Studio cut.

  6. Not so clear. by pavon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The character is recognizably Tolkien's creation.
    The universe he inhabits. The voices. The languages.
    ...The character designs.

    The film can't honestly be described as anything other than a derivative work.

    None of those things are covered by copyright, and thus cannot be a derivative work. Some of them could be covered by trademark, but that is an entirely different matter.

    The dialog. The maps. The story.

    These are covered by copyright, but they are not being used (maybe the maps are I don't know). It is a fan-flick: a new story with new dialog based on the characters and word created by Tolkien.

    1. Re:Not so clear. by Bobb9000 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, the characters are protected by copyright too. It's pretty clearly a derivative work. The question is whether it's fair use and/or not enforceable. In any case, the filmmakers talked to the Tolkien estate and got permission, so long as the film was non-profit.

      --
      Bobb9000 - raised by the wolves,
      Oxford education as phrased by the wolves.
    2. Re:Not so clear. by Bobb9000 · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, characters can be subject to copyright.

      Try using google, if nothing else:

      Protection of Fictional Characters
      How can I tell if a character I have used is copyright protected?

      And yes, aspects of them can be trademarked, too.

      --
      Bobb9000 - raised by the wolves,
      Oxford education as phrased by the wolves.
    3. Re:Not so clear. by Nazlfrag · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well that shouldn't be too hard. According to New Line Cinema, none of the original movies made a profit either.

  7. They can save some money on effects... by sootman · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... if they hire Lindsay Lohan.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  8. Re:Additionally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Cool, I'll bet I can turn you into the next big Fark meme: http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/1598/sd3v.jpg

  9. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  10. Re:downloading "stuff" by geordie_loz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah but they also use the fact that no-one is consuming their crappy drivel as a means of proving that their low sales are about piracy.