I doubt anything interesting will came out from that expensive series. They're doing it for the money, not for the product. And that as always be a clear indicator of a low quality product.
[deleted]
Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Rings series
51–60 of 605 posts
Re: Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Rings series
#52I’m not so sure the LOTR series is ideal for expansion. It feels like Peter Jackson has already tackled all the really interesting parts of the LOTR world.
Silmarillion has some very interesting stories, though. Much more potential than in Hobbit, really. Potential can be squandered though.
I agree on the Silmarillion although every time I reread it I grind my teeth about how stupid the elves were to give in to some empty envy towards other elves when they literally had ZERO problems in their lives.
Hits too close to home and it hurts, I guess. Because I've seen the same many times -- people literally seeking for problems because their lives are so careless and leisurely.
Re: Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Rings series
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Silmarillion has some very interesting stories, though. Much more potential than in Hobbit, really. Potential can be squandered though.
As much as I would like to see live action Silmarillion, it would probably be the most expensive tv show of all time. Many epic scenes can't possibly be shot for real so the show would require odious amounts of CGI. Heck at this point, hire a studio that makes video game trailers and turn the whole thing into a 50+ hours CGI tv show.
Yep, imagine the Valar and Melkor raising and leveling mountains on screen (the very early periods of Arda). Brrrr, that would be epic.
Re: Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Rings series
#54Tangential — I wish they or someone else serializes Dune. It’s so tailor made for a tv series. Also looking forward to Three Body Problem from nflx
>I wish they or someone else serializes Dune
Re: Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Rings series
#55They should have taken 100M of that and fund the remaining three seasons of The Expanse.
This would have been great! Allthough, as far as I heard, one of the reasons for stopping was the time jump in the books (full disclosure: I didn't read the books).
Re: Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Rings series
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a huge ASOIAF fan, I had the same concerns after Game of Thrones was announced and first details were shared. The crucial difference, though, is that GRRM himself was involved in the series.
Sean Bean wasn't an unknown. He wasn't a star either, but he was the villain in one of better Bond movies and also was in the first Lord of the Rings.
Perhaps a gimmick — known name, killed off. Buzz!
Re: Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Rings series
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Even with the rebate, how can they hope to recoup the investment? Merch? DVD Sales? Increasing sign ups to Prime? I have a doubt the profits from that will help them earn money to cover up the remaining 300 million or so they have still invested. Probably all of the above plus it's a long term move. Amazon needs to build up a strong catalog and marquee TV shows are long term attractions. As an example, Mad Men, esp…
I don't know. 465 million seems still steep for 8 episodes TV show. I am all for it cause Disney has seemingly skimped on their CG budget for their newer shows. So more competition means more TV shows will have film quality production. But it is a concern, if their show costs more than something like Avengers: Endgame which had some of the biggest actors in Hollywood involved in addition to the probably insane VFX bu…
Presumably some amount of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting is at play. Since New Zealand is footing a fixed percentage of the budget, it would only make sense to artificially inflate the costs.
Re: Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Rings series
#58The last hurrah for web money profligacy maybe. Investors aren't going to be too happy to see so much money spent without a commensurately large return in this economic climate.
Re: Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Rings series
#59So much money for something that I can already tell will flop...
I really don't understand why they put people who have no connection with the IP in charge of this. It's really quite sad to see such a beloved world getting an adaptation that is destroyed by poor writing and design by committee
Re: Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Rings series
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keep in mind that Amazon needs to get only ~0.2M incremental Amazon Prime subscribers to recoup the investment. The lifetime value (LTV) of a Prime subscriber has been estimated at ~$2,300.[a] You can play around with the figure, but given that every LOTR fan is going to want to watch this series even if it sucks , I wouldn't be surprised is Amazon ends up getting far more than ~0.2M new Prime subscribers because of…
Isn't the growth for Amazon Prime kind of stagnating in the US? I don't think they can get 1-2 million sign ups from the US alone. Plus, there would be folks who would subscribe for two months that the shows runs and then they may even quit. In India, I am paying 1000 rupees for my yearly subscription to Prime Video although the only thing I watch on it is The Boys. I don't what the numbers for Prime Video are in Ind…
More like ~0.2M. I updated the figures to use the LTV of a Prime customer :-)