Remembering That Time JRR Tolkien Absolutely Hated A Lord Of The Rings Movie Pitch

Hobbit Day took place on September 22, celebrating the joyous joint birthdays of Bilbo and Frodo Baggins. With The Lord of the Rings on our minds, we're looking back at the time when author J.R.R. Tolkien described in great detail why a film treatment for The Lord of the Rings, sent to him in 1958, was a bad adaptation that made little sense and would simply not work.

The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, edited by Humphrey Carpenter, is a treasure trove of tantalizing tales that includes hundreds of letters Tolkien wrote to various people throughout his life. The book is essential reading for any Lord of the Rings fan, as it provides a window into Tolkien's mind beyond the words he wrote on the page for The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. These letters inform us of Tolkien's daily life. The letters touch upon minutiae, like efforts to translate The Lord of the Rings into Swedish and Icelandic, all the way up to a letter he sent to his youngest child and only daughter, Priscilla, just four days before he died in 1972.

In these letters, Tolkien also corresponds with various people about his thoughts on a potential film adaptation of The Lord of the Rings. And that's what we will focus on here. Tolkien had a lot to say, and much of it may surprise you in terms of his candor, especially given how many film adaptations have been released--and with more to come.

"Grave Anxiety"

In a letter dated April 8, 1958, Tolkien wrote to his publisher Rayner Unwin, asking for his input on a rough outline of the story for a potential The Lord of the Rings film from amateur writer Morton Grady Zimmerman. At the time, negotiations were underway to make a movie based on The Lord of the Rings, the first volume of which, The Fellowship of the Ring, was published in 1954. In his letter to Unwin, Tolkien admitted he is "entirely ignorant" about the script process. "Could you let me know exactly what is a 'story-line,' and its function in the process?" Tolkien wrote, elucidating his lack of experience with the scripting process for a feature film.

Tolkien said Zimmerman's synopsis of the story gave him "grave anxiety," in particular regarding the dialogue that would be in the film. He said Zimmerman is "quite incapable of excerpting or adapting the 'spoken words' of the book." He further stated that Zimmerman is "hasty, insensitive, and impertinent."

Tolkien stirred the pot further, saying Zimmerman "does not read books," but instead only skimmed The Lord of the Rings at "a great pace" and then constructed his film synopsis "from partly confused memories." He said Zimmerman's work only had "the minimum of references" to his book series, and pointed out that Zimmerman made basic mistakes like misspelling Boromir's name or the introduction of characters like Tom Bombadil.

"I feel very unhappy about the extreme silliness and incompetence of Zimmerman and his complete lack of respect for the origins (it seems wilfully wrong without discernible technical reasons at nearly every point)," Tolkien wrote.

Tolkien goes on to write that he was entertaining the idea of selling the movie rights to The Lord of the Rings for a reason anyone could understand. "But I need, and shall soon need very much indeed, money…" he wrote. (More on the money matter later).

Concluding his letter to Unwin, Tolkien said he would venture to "avoid all avoidable offence" in his criticisms of the storyline, further noting that he hoped his comments would not be passed along to the film company's agent, Forrest J. Ackerman, except if Unwin agreed.

"Art or Cash"

In an earlier letter to Christopher Tolkien and his first wife, Faith, dated September 1957, Tolkien said Ackerman came to visit him in London and give him an update on how a potential Lord of the Rings film could be made. He said Ackerman and his team have "toured America shooting mountain and desert scenes that seem to fit the story." He noted he was impressed by pictures that Ackerman showed him. However, even then, Tolkien questioned the story, saying it was on "a lower level. In fact, bad." To be fair, it appears what Tolkien was reading and critiquing was a film treatment, which is longer and more thorough than a mere outline, but short of an actual screenplay that has much more detail and specifics on how a film will be made.

That being said, Tolkien remained interested in getting a deal done. Also unclear at the time was if this was planned as a purely animated film or if it could have been a film that incorporated various filmmaking techniques and styles. The letters do not fully illuminate these details.

Tolkien and his other publisher, Stanley Unwin, said they agreed on a policy as it related to movie rights, and they summed it up in a frank and honest way: "Art or Cash."

In essence, it seems Tolkien was saying he would be agreeable to a licensing deal if it came with a truckload of money or if he had creative control. In his own words, "Either very profitable terms indeed; or absolute author's veto on objectionable features or alterations."

"Murdered" the heart of the story

In a letter to Ackerman dated June 1958, Tolkien shared his uncompromising and harsh-sounding critique of Zimmerman's script--and Tolkien did not hold back. Across hundreds of words and 34 specific positions, Tolkien broke down everything he deemed wrong with it. To be clear, the Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien notes that what's listed in the book only represents "some extracts from Tolkien's lengthy commentary" on the matter.

Tolkien knew his critique might be tough to stomach, admitting that Zimmerman and others in the creative process might be "irritated or aggrieved by the tone of my criticisms."

"If so, I am sorry (though not surprised)," he wrote, before going on to basically say Zimmerman did a bad job at his attempt to adapt The Lord of the Rings into a film--he didn't mince words.

He asked Zimmerman and his team to try to put themselves in Tolkien's shoes and understand how they might feel if their life's work was "recklessly" adapted, as he put it.

"I would ask them to make an effort of imagination sufficient to understand the irritation (and on occasion the resentment) of an author, who finds, increasingly as he proceeds, his work treated as it would seem careless in general, in places recklessly, and with no evidence signs of any appreciation of what it is all about…"

As mentioned, Tolkien had numerous and serious issues with Zimmerman's story outline, but he summed up his thoughts on what was wrong with it thusly:

"He has cut the parts of the story upon which its characteristic and peculiar tone principally depends, showing a preference for fights; and he has made no serious attempt to represent the heart of the tale adequately: the journey of the Ringbearers. The last and most important part of this has, and it is not too strong a word, simply been murdered."

Tolkien's detailed criticisms

Tolkien provided pages upon pages of what he perceived to be critical issues with Zimmerman's work--there are too many to reprint here. But the ensuing slides go into details on the issues Tolkien called out.

Gandalf should not 'splutter': Apparently, Zimmerman's draft contained language for the wise wizard where he came across as too testy and intense. Tolkien responded by saying Gandalf has a sense of humor and has an avuncular attitude toward hobbits. However, Tolkien remarked that Gandalf is, at his core, a "person of high and noble authority" with great dignity and should be presented as such in a film.

Tom Bombadil: Tolkien had several issues with how Zimmerman included Bombadil in his film treatment. For starters, Tolkien said Bombadil is not the owner of the woods and "he would never make any such threat." Tolkien also took issue with Zimmerman's description of Bombadil as an "old scamp." He said the use of this language is indicative of Zimmerman's general tendency to "reduce and lower the tone towards that of a more childish fairy-tale."

Geographic issues: Tolkien blasted Zimmerman for calling Rivendell a "shimmering forest" and that it is literally impossible to see from Weathertop, which was 200 miles away and hidden in a ravine. "I can see no pictorial or story-making gain in needlessly contracting the geography."

The eagles: The eagles in The Lord of the Rings were a contentious issue even back in the 1950s, it seems. Tolkien said Zimmerman's liberal use of the eagles is a "wholly unacceptable tampering with the tale." When Peter Jackson's movies came out, many quickly wondered and joked about why the eagles didn't just fly Frodo and company to Mount Doom to destroy the One Ring right away. Tolkien, in his 1958 letter to Zimmerman, said he intentionally only featured the eagles "sparingly, and that is the absolute limit of their credibility or usefulness." So, understandably, he was upset when Zimmerman incorporated the eagles again and again in his treatment.

Orcs with feathers: Zimmerman's script had Orcs with feathers and beaks, and Tolkien wanted none of it. Instead, Tolkien wrote that Orcs are "squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes" and should be presented as such.

Balrogs don't talk: Zimmerman's script had the Balrog speaking, but Tolkien put his foot down: "The Balrog never speaks or makes any vocal sound at all." Tolkien added, "Zimmerman may think that he knows more about Balrogs than I do, but he cannot expect me to agree with him."

Galadriel and her castle: Zimmerman's treatment mentioned that Galadriel is an "Elvenqueen," although Tolkien says she is not, and that Galadriel's home, Lorien, is a castle. Also, no. "I think this is deplorable in itself, and in places impertinent. Will Zimmerman please pay my text some respect, at least in descriptions that are obviously central to the general tone and style of the book!" Zimmerman's writing also left out the part when Galadriel is tempted by the ring, and you can bet Tolkien hated this, too. "Practically everything having moral import has vanished from the synopsis," he wrote.

It only gets worse: The majority of Tolkien's notes pertain to the adaptation of the first book, but Tolkien didn't like Zimmerman's take on the two others, either. He said Part II "exemplifies all the faults of Part I; but it is far more unsatisfactory, and still more so Part III, in more serious respects." Tolkien concluded, "It almost seems as if Zimmerman, having spent much time and work on Part I, now found himself short not only of space but of patience to deal with the two more difficult volumes in which the action becomes more fast and complicated." Summing up his thoughts, the author wrote,, "He has in any case elected to treat them in a way that produces a confusion that mounts at last almost to a delirium."

Treebeard: In the chapter pertaining to Treebeard, Tolkien noted that Zimmerman must not be interested in trees, something he said was "unfortunate, since the story is so largely concerned with them."

"Ridiculously long sandwiches": In one of the more humorous notes, Tolkien took issue with Zimmerman's choice to have the hobbits eat big sandwiches. "Why on earth should Zimmerman say that the hobbits 'were munching ridiculously long sandwiches?' Ridiculous indeed. I do not see how any author could be expected to be 'pleased' by such silly alterations."

Orthanc issues: Tolkien said Zimmerman took too much creative liberty with the description of Orthanc, the tower where Saruman lives. In the treatment, Zimmerman presented the tower as having a spiral staircase weaving around it. But Tolkien said he prefers his own take on it, which is that the tower is 500 feet tall with a flight of 27 steps precisely leading to a great door, above which was a window and a balcony.

Saruman issues: Tolkien said Zimmerman made a mistake in making Saruman come across as being "hypnotic" with his speech instead of persuasive as he is in the books. "Those who listened to him were not in danger of falling into a trance, but of agreeing with his arguments, while fully awake." Tolkien also ripped Zimmerman for his choice to have Saruman commit suicide. "Saruman would have never committed suicide: To cling to life to its basest dregs is the way of the sort of person he had become," he wrote.

Part III: Tolkien didn't even give Zimmerman the time of day for his adaptation of the third book. "Part III is totally unacceptable to me, as a whole and in detail," he wrote of the treatment. "If it is meant to represent only a kind of short finale, then all I can say is: The Lord of the Rings cannot be garbled like that."

So what happened next?

Clearly, Tolkien was not prepared to sign off on Zimmerman's treatment. This project, like other pitches and concepts from Walt Disney and others, never materialized. But in 1969, Tolkien sold the movie rights to United Artists for a fee said to be quite small and for tax purposes.

In 1976, film producer Saul Zaentz bought the rights from United Artists and hired Ralph Bakshi to make an animated Lord of the Rings movie that came out in 1978. Today, The Lord of the Rings movie rights are owned by the gaming giant Embracer Group through its purchase of Middle-earth Enterprises for hundreds of millions of dollars.

While the early attempts to adapt The Lord of the Rings did not succeed in a meaningful way, that wasn't the case forever. Jackson's The Lord of the Rings film series was a huge success, and he followed it up with a trilogy of Hobbit films. We can never know what Tolkien himself would have thought of Jackson's films, but Jackson said he attempted to capture the spirit and tone of Tolkien's work. Many believed he succeeded in that right, but not everyone agrees.

Tolkien's own son, Christopher, had his reasons for hating Jackson's adaptations. The films left out Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire, among numerous other parts. In one of J.R.R. Tolkien's notes about the Black Riders, he explained that they are constantly silent and never scream. Well, anyone who's seen the films knows very well how loudly and eerily they scream. Adapting a giant tome like The Lord of the Rings is a herculean task, and any take on it--from Jackson or anyone else--would undoubtedly need to leave things out or change them to suit the medium.

One thing that cannot be argued is that Jackson's Lord of the Rings and Hobbit films were a gigantic success, even if The Hobbit trilogy felt stretched like butter scraped over too much bread, banking billions of dollars at the box office. It's also no surprise that, given the ongoing popularity of the fantasy series, Warner Bros. is moving ahead with more films. The first of these is the animated movie The War of the Rohirrim, which debuts this December. After that, Andy Serkis is returning to direct and star in The Hunt for Gollum (working title; release aiming for 2026), which could bring Ian McKellen back as Gandalf as well. This is just the first of what WBD CEO David Zaslav hopes is a steady stream of additional Lord of the Rings movies to come, as part of the company's effort to focus on franchises in the future.

Outside of film, Prime Video's The Rings of Power is now in its second of five planned seasons, though that show is set in an entirely different, much earlier time period. And in video games, there are multiple new games in the works, including a Lord of the Rings MMO and the cozy-looking Tales of the Shire.

Remembering That Time JRR Tolkien Absolutely Hated A Lord Of The Rings Movie Pitch

Remembering That Time JRR Tolkien Absolutely Hated A Lord Of The Rings Movie Pitch

Remembering That Time JRR Tolkien Absolutely Hated A Lord Of The Rings Movie Pitch

Remembering That Time JRR Tolkien Absolutely Hated A Lord Of The Rings Movie Pitch

Remembering That Time JRR Tolkien Absolutely Hated A Lord Of The Rings Movie Pitch