LoTR Fan Film — The Hunt For Gollum

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."

Comments

Skeptical

[heyitsjon]

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.

Re:Skeptical

[ushering05401]

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.

Re:Skeptical

[Anonymous Coward]

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?

Re:Skeptical

[emarkp]

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?)

Re:Skeptical

[Bobb9000]

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.

Re:Skeptical

[sakdoctor]

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

Re:Skeptical

[Repton]

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.

Re:Skeptical

[An ominous Cow art]

Worst. Thread. Ever.

Re:Skeptical

[Captain Electrode]

... but kept an eye on him.

That's Eye, you insensitive clod!

Release date

[Dan East]

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

Seems like Tolkien is playing nice.

[FlyingBishop]

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.

Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice.

[nausea_malvarma]

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

Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice.

[Ren.Tamek]

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.

Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice.

[Opyros]

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.

Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice.

[meringuoid]

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.

Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice.

[flyingsquid]

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

Re:Seems like Tolkien is playing nice.

[ben0207]

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.

Say what?

[westlake]

"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.

It is clear

[MojoRilla]

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.

Re:Not so clear.

[Bobb9000]

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.

Re:Not so clear.

[Bobb9000]

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.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion