Khamûl - good idea to split the thread, done.

onthetrail wrote

I doubt the reason is political but rather down to labour benefits = cost. Disney have just committed to long term leases in the UK and other big studios are looking at deals too, BREXIT has not stopped films being made here. In fact the next decade will see the UK become a powerhouse in film and TV.

I'm just basing my statement from what was in the news at the time the decision was made. https://www.thenational.scot/news/1774 ... d-misses-prequel-filming/

Those decisions are made all the time, and a lot of factors go into them - a primary one being cost, of course. I definitely agree that Brexit is not shutting down the UK film industry, but it does seem to have played a part for this particular decision at the time.

I'm not sure if The National is really the paper to be gathering quality information from, Urulókë...

I think BREXIT is a convenient out for losing out to be honest. I have a friend who works in local government in Scotland and he joked not long ago that Scotland are happy to blame BREXIT for everything, including the weather. Which as a 'remainer' I feel much the same to be fair.

It's polarising, I'll give you that.

It is all down to the backroom deals, and which government will sweeten the deal the most. With Amazon, like any studio, it will just be a financial decision.

Not to be one of those "I don't care, but look at me!" types; but I could really care less about this project at this time in time.

Peter Jackson's extended editions definitely are quite frankly hard to beat (going by adaptations), and, I hold Tolkien's writings too close to heart to care about "another version" - whether or not it's stuff we've seen before or not. Because of that, I'm more interested in The Wheel of Time adaptation, and Netflix's Narnia. Because I'm not as invested in the source material, I'll less likely to be bothered any alterations.

It is comforting to know that the Amazon series can't contradict Tolkien's writings. As much as I enjoyed PJ's extended editions, one thing that bothers me - with any adaptation - are changes. I get leaving stuff out (Tom Bombadil), but changing stuff drstically (Elves at Helm's Deep, the Osgiliath detour in The Two Towers, etc... though I was fine Saruman's fate at Isengard because they didn't The Scouring of the Shire)I merely ask: "why?". especially since The Fellowship of the Ring was so near-perfect an adaptations.

I'll monitor the related merchandise though: the soundtracks (lots of bad movies and video games have great music), possible books that'll come out around then, etc.

Stu wrote:
It is all down to the backroom deals, and which government will sweeten the deal the most. With Amazon, like any studio, it will just be a financial decision.

If anyone is interested, here is some discussion on the financials around the Amazon deal with New Zealand.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/me ... fdi-for-ireland-1.4027990

"The upshot is that Jeff Bezos’s company is in line for a subsidy of at least 20 per cent on every cent it spends there on Lord of the Rings, or a possible NZ $300 million (€172 million), according to the New Zealand Herald. It’s easy to see how taxpayers might be unhappy with this “corporate welfare”."

As a Kiwi Taxpayer this makes me angry, but exactly what I'd expect from the current administration.

Stu wrote:
As a Kiwi Taxpayer this makes me angry, but exactly what I'd expect from the current administration.

Without trying to say you are wrong and they are right... supposedly they have run the numbers and think the net benefit is positive. Amazon gets a subsidy, but then the tens of thousands of people they hire have to pay rent, food, travel, and those are all taxed, and large numbers of tourists come to see sets and actors and tours and...

Urulókë wrote:

Stu wrote:
As a Kiwi Taxpayer this makes me angry, but exactly what I'd expect from the current administration.

Without trying to say you are wrong and they are right... supposedly they have run the numbers and think the net benefit is positive. Amazon gets a subsidy, but then the tens of thousands of people they hire have to pay rent, food, travel, and those are all taxed, and large numbers of tourists come to see sets and actors and tours and...

If you believe that palms don't get greased to make the numbers justify the decision in these cases, I have a bridge to sell you. This particular government has a strong track record of very slippery numbers.

It is like holding the Olympics. Everyone claims it will make money for the host country, and it does enrich a few, but overall the taxpayer ends up out of pocket on the deal.