What if Studio Ghibli directed Lord of the Rings?

[BrokenTwin]

I'm torn on this, I love seeing art in the Studio Ghibli style, but I'm also not fond of the current iteration and implementation of "AI", for a few different reasons.

Having said that, given Studio Ghibli's track record with adapting Western media, I'm sure in the hypothetical scenario of them adapting LotR it would be both a great watch as its own thing and a travesty to any fans of the original material.

 

[Bohandas]

So that's a 'no', you won't go look up why it's illegal or how it costs/damages the true IP holder? OK, weird position to take when arguing a position, but I suppose I can't make you. I'm not talking about morality, I'm talking about damages and costs to an IP holder which you claimed either don't exist or are ridiculously negligible.

Have a good day.

I don't care how much it damages the IP holder. You're not entitled to be able to make a living as a content creator. You're entitled to be abke to try - just like you're entitled to try to make a living as a blacksmith or a lamplighter or an elevator operator - but you're not entitled to have the march or progress held back just so that your chosen profession can remain viable.

I would actually not mind if it were made illegal to sell content in a for profit commercial type setting, and if forced to take a side would support such a measure knowing full well that would mean the end of every commercial movie studio, record label, publishing house, and tv studio in the world

Which brings me to another point. there is no art anymore, only content. For the past decade or so it seems like even the independent artists have been producing mass-market homegenized soulless corporate-style commercial slop. I remember a time - a brief time, it now seems to have come and gone very quickly, but it was a time that existed nonetheless - when people produced art on the internet simply for the love of expressing themselves and the love of art. Now that time has ended and everything is commercial and it makes me extremely sad.

 

[GreyLord]

Please don't do this again.

One of my personal pet peeves is that it's so difficult to have an actual conversation about AI art that critiques the art because ~80% of the comments in every thread is just people grandstanding about AI, making it difficult to actually discuss the product. If you want to choose the alternative of derailing this thread into yet another "What Would J.R.R. Tolkien Do?" thread instead of discussing the art in the OP, I can't stop you; many threads have ended that way before, and many will again. But I am going to insist that you do it with your own thoughts and opinions, rather than inventing a (inaccurate) fantasy version of me.

Didn't invent anything. The thing is, if you want to complain about what others do, there are almost always 4 fingers pointing back at you.

I am a massive fan of the books. I remember people disregarding every complaint we had towards the live action movies in almost exactly the same way you disregarded the thoughts people had towards the studio ghibli AI workover in the trailer.

The comparisons were so insanely similar that...well...yep.

What I hated was that everyone was okay with what the Live Action films did and ignored what we, the Tolkien estate, and Christopher Tolkien said about them.

What's crazier, is that Tolkien himself did not like the Cartoon creations of his works, but okay'd them (as tuition for his children basically was paid for by those deals) in cartoon form...by the very people who eventually would become part of the Studio Ghibli!

Which means, a Studio Ghibli rendtion would be far closer to what the Tolkiens would approve (but probably still dislike) than the Live Action remakes!

I've learned to love the Live Action remakes for what they are (in their own artform they are classics), but I always remember the dislike Christopher Tolkien had of them, his comments and commentary, and how he was basically ignored (or worse, at times, ridiculed) by those who loved them at the time.

I find that a certain type of person loves the movies, but hates what the older Tolkiens thoughts and ideas actually were, and they are normally the first to hop on defending the Live Action movies or holding them sacred or holy in relation to anything else.

This Studio Ghibli AI workover is far more respectful of them than anything PJ did with his Live Action movies towards Tolkien's works, and that started with the LotR trilogy, not just the Hobbit.

Paying for the rights to use something is far more respectful than plagiarism.

Edit note: in my opinion.

I agree with this.

The original rights were utilized to make something that wasn't exactly loved by the Tolkien estate, but wasn't criticized as harshly. The Live Action movies were made despite the Tolkien estates protests.

I feel that makes it a little bit more debatable, but I will concede, it's better to have the rights paid for than not, and if they did a complete workover of the Live Action movies in Ghibli Format it would be better to have the Tolkien estate on board (more than the rights holders...I care more for what the Tolkien estate thinks than any rights holders, but that's normally par for course for what I hold as Canon vs. Non-Canon debates as well, where I hold the original creators and their heirs as more representative than whoever holds the rights, inclusive of Star Wars and other properties).

That said, to be truly legal they should have the rights holder's approval if they ever went ahead and made a full rendition of this with the Ghibli AI creation.

Best would be to not just have the rights holder's go ahead, but also Studio Ghibli's approval (which will never happen, even if the Studio isn't against it, they idea that hand drawn animation is the better way to go will never let them approve of something like this, plus, they would want to do it themselves because $$$, regardless of whether the Tolkien estates approve or not).

 

[Mistwell]

There is NO moral entitlement to be able to monetize things. Never!

Yes, there is when you yourself create something for sale under agreement, and then someone else copies that something without consent or attribution and resells it. There is 100% a moral entitlement to consent to that re-sale, or be compensated for it. IT'S LITERALLY CALLED MORALE RIGHTS TO COPYRIGHT IN INTERNATIONAL LAW.

I mean, this goes all the way back to the Berne Convention in 1886, "...the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation."

At the absolute most there is a moral entitlement to not be forcibly prevented from monetizing.

EDIT:
If I stand outside the venue where a rock concert is being held and listen to the music, do you think that that is immoral? What if I sit on my roof on independence day and watch the fireworks from the next town over that isn't the town where I pay taxes in? Must I avert my eyes? What if I buy enough food for me znd a couple of friends and somehow 5000 people end up getting fed? Do I own the baker for the extra people?

It applies specifically to visual arts. Don't change the subject. Moral rights to copyright exist for visual arts. It also pertains to you RESELLING it and altering it, particularly without attribution, and none of your examples involve that.

 

[Mistwell]

I don't care how much it damages the IP holder.

I don't care that you don't care if it damages the IP holder. They literally, directly, in black and white international law, have a right to not be damaged by the unauthorized alteration of their IP. You not caring doesn't change that fact.

 

[GreyLord]

While we are at it, 7 pages in, it should be remarked that this trailer the OP posted is merely a thought. The real thing has already been made, and yes, it was a copycat of the Ghibli style.

This trailer has been posted in this forum before, but as it pertains directly to what this thread is about, it probably can be posted here as well.


I have not seen this movie yet, but, from the trailer it should be obvious who's style they were being a copycat of, and how a LotR movie was already made in this style, just not a remake of the Original Live Action movies.

The OP was obviously not alone in thinking about a LotR movie or remakes in the Ghibli style would be an interesting thing to see. (as someone has already made a movie in that style in that universe of the Live Action TV show/movies already).

 

[Older Beholder]

That's not even remotely similar. Identity theft entails both fraud and depriving someone of money and assets that they already had, whereas IP violation entails neither.

How silly of me, maybe we should go back to your more realistic example of watching fireworks in a town where you didn't pay taxes? Or, how about the crime of eating a meal, a succulent Chinese meal!

I'm sorry, what were talking about again?

 

[Bohandas]

I don't care that you don't care if it damages the IP holder. They literally, directly, in black and white international law, have a right to not be damaged by the unauthorized alteration of their IP. You not caring doesn't change that fact.

The law is immoral.

You've fallen victim to the fallacy of argumentum ad legem

If anything, Studio Ghibli could save money if they used AI.

Why would anyone possibly need their studio, or any other, now that this technology exists. Every movie studio is now obsolete

 

[Bohandas]

Criticism of copyright - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Mistwell]

The law is immoral.

You've fallen victim to the fallacy of argumentum ad legem

You've fallen victim to "replacing actual argumentation to linking to random argumentation definitions and pretending you made a cogent point."

You need to make an argument yourself. The law isn't immoral. Indeed, it has a longstanding basis in humanist philosophy, including those which the US Founders valued.