NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 8799463" data-attributes="member: 59082">Again, they are different for a variety of reasons, some of which I mentioned above. But another key difference: the Peter Jackson films are adaptations of literary works; Rings of Power is one step further removed, as not only adaptations, but new creations.And furthermore, the creators of SW and ST licensed their work for further development. JRR Tolkien did not.Again, I'm not suggesting that people shouldn't create new stories set in Middle-earth, but that they can never really be anything other than "extended universe" (at most) and fan-fiction.Yes, but you're comparing Tolkien's work to stuff that is hundreds--even thousands--of years old, some with no clear original author. But the same applies to the Iliad - there is an original version, and then re-tellings. Nothing wrong with that, but I don't see why there's an issue with pointing out that A) There's a difference between the original and re-tellings/re-creations, and B) When discussing the work of a distinct, singular--and known--author, anything written or created by anyone else, unless it is with the approval of the original author, is "fan-fiction" to some degree or another.I mean, let me put it this way. It is one thing for von Eschenbach to imagine the Grail--which was not created by anyone, nor originated from any known singular author--as a jewel, quite another for some new author or show-runner to re-imagine the Silmarils as cell-phones left by the Valar, who are actually ETs, and then see that scifi as equally valid or canonical as Tolkien.</blockquote>

Verification