Late night host Stephen Colbert has long been a vocal fan of the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. He has an almost encyclopedic command of deep-cut lore. He can speak — or at least recite — Elvish, wrangled a cameo in The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, moderated San Diego Comic-Con panels, and even made a Middle-earth short film with the original cast called “Darrylgorn”. There’s not much further for his fandom to go at this point, unless he made a The Lord of the Rings movie of his own. Which, as it turns out, is exactly what he’s planning to do.
Warner Bros. and director Peter Jackson have announced that Colbert is currently developing a new live-action film set in the Lord of the Rings universe. The film, which will be called The Lord of the Rings: Shadows of the Past, will be similar to the forthcoming The Lord of the Rings: The Hunt for Gollum in that it depicts events from The Fellowship of the Ring that never made it to the screen in Peter Jackson’s movies. The Hunt for Gollum will be set in the gap between Bilbo’s 111th birthday and Gandalf’s return to Bag End, following Gandalf and Aragorn as they search for the missing Ring-bearer after he is interrogated by Sauron.
The main events of Shadows of the Past will reportedly cover about six chapters of the novel, from Chapter III, “Three is Company,” to Chapter VIII, “Fog on the Barrow-downs.” While some of these events do make it into The Fellowship of the Ring, including Frodo and Sam’s reunion with Merry and Pippin, the first appearance of the Black Riders, and the race to Bucklebury Ferry, the 2001 film skips past several fan favorite moments, including the attack by Old Man Willow, the introduction of Tom Bombadil, the hobbits’ visit to his house, and their subsequent capture by Barrow-wights. Undoubtedly, several of Tom’s extremely weird songs will feature.
Shadows of the Past will have to serve multiple masters, however, as it’s not just a flashback standalone about the happy, weird immortal who likes to sing (awful) songs. It’s also a look at what happens after the War of the Ring, and the Shire that Frodo has left behind.
An Unexpected Framing Device
Per the film’s official logline, the movie is set 14 years after Frodo, Gandalf, and the rest of the Ring-bearers depart from the Grey Havens. Sam, Merry, and Pippin will — for some as yet undisclosed reason — set out to retrace the first steps of their adventure. Maybe this is a pub crawl, who knows? But, elsewhere, Sam’s daughter, Elanor, “has discovered a long-buried secret and is determined to uncover why the War of the Ring was very nearly lost before it even began.”
What all of that means is something we’ll all likely be debating right until the film is released. Is Elanor going to follow after her father and his friends and discover something scary in the Barrow-downs? Is she going to the library to do research, Hermione Granger-style? How much does she even know about her father’s role in the War of the Ring?
Tom Bombadil on the Big Screen
The Elanor question, at least initially, seems to be of less interest to Tolkien fans than what appears to be confirmation that we’re finally getting a big-screen take on what is arguably the author’s weirdest and most divisive character, Tom Bombadil. On some level, this makes sense, as a whole bunch of the most hardcore Lord of the Rings enthusiasts are obsessed with him, even though his presence in the book’s larger story is minimal and, admittedly, pretty weird. A mythical figure who lives in complete harmony with nature, is immune to the power of the One Ring, and generally keeps himself well out of the larger affairs of Middle-earth, Bombadil recently made his onscreen debut in the second season of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power. Because that series is a prequel, he was reimagined as a kind of magical mentor to a younger Gandalf who hadn’t yet realized his true identity. (Seriously, don’t ask.)
But other than Tom repeatedly rescuing the hobbits and having a cool river-goddess wife, he doesn’t necessarily offer much in the way of story, at least not in terms of whatever this film is doing with Elanor’s plot. The easiest answer is possibly that she’s looking for some piece of the Barrow-wights’ stolen treasure hoard — the brooch Bombadil meant for Goldberry, maybe? — but that’s a completely wild guess.
Does The Lord of the Rings Need a Sequel?
But the more important question here has nothing to do with Colbert’s enthusiasm for deep cut Tolkien lore or expansive fan service — it’s whether The Lord of the Rings even needs a sequel at all. The author himself famously didn’t want one. And part of the power of Tolkien’s original ending is in knowing that it’s the conclusion of a story — of Frodo’s story specifically.
What makes the ending of The Return of the King so satisfying is how bittersweet it is. Frodo has done what he set out to do. He has saved Middle-earth, protected the Shire, and brought his friends back home. But he has done so by making himself a stranger to it, now too damaged by the trauma of his journey to find the peace he craved there. Some wounds cannot be healed in this life, and it is in that spirit that Frodo passes on to the next, to the Undying Lands and whatever lies beyond.
It’s a beautiful, if heartrending conclusion, and there’s something to be said for remembering the Shire as Frodo would, shining and beautiful and at peace. Do more adventures after his departure sully that memory? Maybe. We don’t know. None has ever existed before. Of course, if there’s anyone who might be capable of proving that idea wrong, it’s the nerds who love the LOTR franchise as much as Peter Jackson and Stephen Colbert do. Oft hope is born when all is forlorn, and all that. We’ll have to wait and see.
The post What Will Stephen Colbert’s Lord of the Rings Movie Be About? appeared first on Den of Geek.
0 Commentaires