The Shannara Chronicles -- Series Thread
12-06-13, 12:02 PM
#1
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
The Shannara Chronicles -- Series Thread
http://www.deadline.com/2013/12/mtv-...illar-writing/
YAY Shannara!
BOO MTV
In one of MTV‘s most ambitious moves on the scripted side since Susanne Daniels became president, the network has given a script-to-series commitment to Shannara, a drama series based on Terry Brooks’ popular fantasy books. The project, from Sonar Entertainment and Farah Films, has Iron Man helmer Jon Favreau on board to direct and will be written by Smallville creators Al Gough and Miles Millar. The trio will executive produce with Brooks and Dan Farah (The Crow remake). If MTV likes the script, it is expected to give the project a straight-to-series order. favreauShannara reunites Gough and Millar with Daniels, who developed and put Smallville on the air while she was entertainment president at the WB. “I am thrilled to be working with the Smallville creators Al and Miles again along with the amazingly talented Jon Favreau,” Daniels said. “We feel that the Shannara novels are a perfect fit for MTV as this type of fantasy genre has continuously proved to resonate with our audience.” Shannara is set in our world, thousands of years after the destruction of our civilization. The story is centered on the Shannara millargoughfamily, whose descendants are empowered with ancient magic and whose adventures continuously reshape the future of the world. The first season of the potential series will be based on The Elfstones Of Shannara, the second title in the series — a fan favorite accredited with cementing the series place in the fantasy world. The book series features plenty of young-adult adventure and romance to suite MTV’s target demographic. Shannara also would be compatible with MTV’s only successful drama series so far, Teen Wolf, which also has supernatural elements.
BOO MTV
12-06-13, 12:07 PM
#3
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
If this would have been on Showtime or something similiar would have been great I think
12-06-13, 07:51 PM
#4
DVD Talk Hero
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
Jersey Shore meets Game of Thrones?
12-06-13, 10:26 PM
#5
Banned
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
Oh geez I can hear it now, "Hey, let's watch that LotR show on VH1!"
Last edited by Eric F; 12-06-13 at 11:06 PM.
12-19-13, 03:42 PM
#6
DVD Talk Limited Edition
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
And why the hell are they starting with Elfstones? You think Sword would be the natural start. Maybe they couldn't think of a way to make the plot twist at the end make sense.
12-19-13, 06:29 PM
#8
DVD Talk Legend
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
I read these probably 25 years ago and while I vaguely remember liking them I remember next to nothing about them, which at first makes me think I should look forward to this. But yeah, MTV...really? I foresee failure on an epic fantasy trilogy level.
12-20-13, 12:34 AM
#9
DVD Talk Hero
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
Smallville creators Al Gough and Miles Millar
I will never watch another show from that pair, ever again.
I will never watch another show from that pair, ever again.
07-11-14, 02:04 PM
#10
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
MTV orders 10 episodes:
http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/07/11/mt...antasy-series/
http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/07/11/mt...antasy-series/
MTV is moving forward with its ambitious high fantasy show. In a quest to find its own Game of Thrones, the cable network has greenlit to series Shannara, based on a series of popular novels by Terry Brooks. Ten episode have been ordered.
The story is set in our world, but thousands of years after the destruction of civilization. The tale is centered on the Shannara family, whose descendants are empowered with ancient magic and whose adventures continuously reshape the future of the world.
The Shannara saga was launched in 1977 with The Sword of Shannara. With about 25 books in the saga, it’s estimated to be the most popular fantasy book series in the world that hasn’t yet been adapted for film or television (Warner Bros. previously got the rights to develop a film based on the books in 2007). Producers plan to base the show’s first season on The Elfstones of Shannara, the second novel in Brooks’ series, a title the network describes as “a fan favorite which spent 16 weeks on the New York Times Bestseller list and is accredited with cementing the series place in the fantasy world.”
Yet behind the scenes, there’s a change in the project from its previous announcement when it was merely in development last year. Jon Favreau (Iron Man) was originally set to direct and executive produce the series. While Favreau will retain an executive producer credit, MTV says Favreau has a scheduling conflict, and now Jonathan Liebesman (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) will direct the first two epiosdes and executive produce the series. Previously announced writer-producers Al Gough and Miles Millar (Smallville) will remain on board. Terry Brooks and Dan Farah will also executive produce.
The story is set in our world, but thousands of years after the destruction of civilization. The tale is centered on the Shannara family, whose descendants are empowered with ancient magic and whose adventures continuously reshape the future of the world.
The Shannara saga was launched in 1977 with The Sword of Shannara. With about 25 books in the saga, it’s estimated to be the most popular fantasy book series in the world that hasn’t yet been adapted for film or television (Warner Bros. previously got the rights to develop a film based on the books in 2007). Producers plan to base the show’s first season on The Elfstones of Shannara, the second novel in Brooks’ series, a title the network describes as “a fan favorite which spent 16 weeks on the New York Times Bestseller list and is accredited with cementing the series place in the fantasy world.”
Yet behind the scenes, there’s a change in the project from its previous announcement when it was merely in development last year. Jon Favreau (Iron Man) was originally set to direct and executive produce the series. While Favreau will retain an executive producer credit, MTV says Favreau has a scheduling conflict, and now Jonathan Liebesman (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) will direct the first two epiosdes and executive produce the series. Previously announced writer-producers Al Gough and Miles Millar (Smallville) will remain on board. Terry Brooks and Dan Farah will also executive produce.
07-11-14, 05:15 PM
#11
DVD Talk Special Edition
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
I've been hoping for a Shannara series/movie ever since I read The Sword of Shannara years ago... but not that MTV would produce it 
better them than no one, tho. I've read all the Shannara books. In fact, another in the series released just this week. I really hope MTV doesn't screw this up too badly. Keeping 
that MTV surprises us all.
The pic in the latest article is the original cover from Elfstones.
better them than no one, tho. I've read all the Shannara books. In fact, another in the series released just this week. I really hope MTV doesn't screw this up too badly. Keeping that MTV surprises us all.The pic in the latest article is the original cover from Elfstones.
07-08-15, 12:23 PM
#12
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
For author Terry Brooks, it’s been a long road to seeing his Shannara fantasy books brought to life. But 38 years after the original book hit shelves, MTV is debuting a series based on the magical realm.
Ahead of the San Diego Comic-Con, EW spoke with Brooks about Shannara finally coming to TV screens, and what fans of the books can expect from the new series.
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: How did this project came about?
TERRY BROOKS: The Shannara canon has been under option, on and off, for years, always with the idea that it would be a movie. About 10 years ago, I had this guy come up to me at a signing. He said, “I’d really like to represent you.” I said, “Fine. Go ahead and do something. Then report back.” So he did. This is Dan Farah. He basically put all of the pieces together over the years, particularly in the last couple of years with MTV and before that with Sonar Entertainment and with Al and Miles as writers. It’s going to be a TV show.
EW: Was it always going to be a TV show in your mind?
TB: This is something I always thought was a good idea because I think it needs more space. You’re talking about a 600-page-plus book. You really need a lot of space to sprawl all over and make it come in under three hours when you’re doing that.
EW: Did any of the other iterations come close to production?
TB: Lots of promises. Many people said how much they love those books, but it never got launched in any direction that mattered.
EW: What was behind the decision to start with your second book in the series?
TB: I’ve always thought Elfstones was the right choice. It’s the second book in the series. It’s probably the single most popular book. It’s the one I hear about most of the time, when readers are talking about the different books. The demographic is real strong. It’s good strong female characters, strong male characters. It’s got a love story. It just felt to me from the beginning that this was the one that should be the starting point. Luckily, everyone agreed with me, so that went along just fine.
EW: Were you able to visit the set at all?
TB: My wife and I were over there for about a week in February of this year. It gave us a chance to see how overwhelming huge this project was. I expecting a handheld camera, a couple of grips and a few trucks. When I saw how massive the project was, I thought, “Well, MTV is serious about this.” They really want to do something with this. That was very encouraging.
EW: What was it like seeing these characters you created come to life?
TB: I think you always have the fear that somehow it will be terrible. It was not. It was wonderful. It was great watching them. I watched them shoot several scenes … repeatedly. I think the adaptation is working out just as well as I could have hoped it would. You try not to get your expectations up too high, but I have to say, I’m pretty hopeful about this whole thing. I think it’s really good.
EW: Is the series a straight adaptation of Elfstones, similar to how Game of Thrones is adapted?
TB: Don’t mention Game of Thrones to me. We were saying, “We don’t want to go that route.” That’s not what the Shannara books are. They’re a family-oriented fantasy and always have been. That’s been one of the strong selling points. Anyone from 10 years of age up that has the reading skills can read these books. We’ve always talked about it as a family drama that anyone can watch. I thought of it as a straight adaptation. I told Al and Miles early on, “I know you’re going to have to make changes. Just hold the bones of the story together.”
EW: Was there ever any concern that this was an odd fit for MTV?
TB: This is the question that virtually every reader is asking. “MTV? Have you lost your mind?” I kind of like the idea of being first with something. I appreciated the strong pitch that MTV made for this and how willing they were to get behind it and support it, and that’s really what I was looking for, more than anything else. A commitment to the project. That was very persuasive to me, deciding that MTV was the right place for it. MTV is known for reinventing itself.
07-09-15, 12:38 AM
#13
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
Rather skillful sidestep there by Terry. "The Sword of Shanarra" was skipped because it was a blatant LOTR ripoff. At least with Elfstones he had an original idea.
07-09-15, 09:06 AM
#14
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 1,107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
I am getting pretty sick of hearing how Shanarra was a "blatant" ripoff of LOTR. Lets talk about LOTR a little. Was there never a "quest" story before LOTR? Was there never a wizard story before LOTR? Was there never an elf story before LOTR? Was there never a dragon, evil empire, magic, orc, lost kingdoms, won kingdoms, good against evil story before LOTR?
Get over it people, it isn't the story, it is how it is told. There are no original stories anymore. They are all just rehashes of stories that already exist, told different ways.
Elfstones is no more original than LOTR is. They are both quest stories. One to destroy a ring, the other to find magical stones. Just because you cant get over your dislike of Shanarra doesn't mean that Tolkin came up with an original idea. He didn't. He just told many old stories in a new way. If you cant see the difference, then the problem is you, not the story.
To criticize the one because you prefer how another author wrote it kind of defeats the purpose of having a genre to begin with. "oh, LOTR is the best way to tell this story so no one else should even try to write another fantasy story" is just not thinking right.
LOTR is fine story and I enjoy it but Shanarra is also a fine story and I enjoy it too. IMO there are MANY differences in the stories and I enjoy the differences as much as the similarities. I like the genre.
But then again, I like westerns too and as almost anyone that enjoys then can tell you, they are pretty formulaic. One man/small group of men against nearly unbeatable odds somehow beating those odds. Which come to think of it pretty much sums up LOTR. Oh no, what a blatant ripoff.
Get over it people, it isn't the story, it is how it is told. There are no original stories anymore. They are all just rehashes of stories that already exist, told different ways.
Elfstones is no more original than LOTR is. They are both quest stories. One to destroy a ring, the other to find magical stones. Just because you cant get over your dislike of Shanarra doesn't mean that Tolkin came up with an original idea. He didn't. He just told many old stories in a new way. If you cant see the difference, then the problem is you, not the story.
To criticize the one because you prefer how another author wrote it kind of defeats the purpose of having a genre to begin with. "oh, LOTR is the best way to tell this story so no one else should even try to write another fantasy story" is just not thinking right.
LOTR is fine story and I enjoy it but Shanarra is also a fine story and I enjoy it too. IMO there are MANY differences in the stories and I enjoy the differences as much as the similarities. I like the genre.
But then again, I like westerns too and as almost anyone that enjoys then can tell you, they are pretty formulaic. One man/small group of men against nearly unbeatable odds somehow beating those odds. Which come to think of it pretty much sums up LOTR. Oh no, what a blatant ripoff.
07-09-15, 10:56 AM
#15
Political Exile
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: America
Posts: 957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
I am getting pretty sick of hearing how Shanarra was a "blatant" ripoff of LOTR. Lets talk about LOTR a little. Was there never a "quest" story before LOTR? Was there never a wizard story before LOTR? Was there never an elf story before LOTR? Was there never a dragon, evil empire, magic, orc, lost kingdoms, won kingdoms, good against evil story before LOTR?
Get over it people, it isn't the story, it is how it is told. There are no original stories anymore. They are all just rehashes of stories that already exist, told different ways.
Elfstones is no more original than LOTR is. They are both quest stories. One to destroy a ring, the other to find magical stones. Just because you cant get over your dislike of Shanarra doesn't mean that Tolkin came up with an original idea. He didn't. He just told many old stories in a new way. If you cant see the difference, then the problem is you, not the story.
To criticize the one because you prefer how another author wrote it kind of defeats the purpose of having a genre to begin with. "oh, LOTR is the best way to tell this story so no one else should even try to write another fantasy story" is just not thinking right.
LOTR is fine story and I enjoy it but Shanarra is also a fine story and I enjoy it too. IMO there are MANY differences in the stories and I enjoy the differences as much as the similarities. I like the genre.
But then again, I like westerns too and as almost anyone that enjoys then can tell you, they are pretty formulaic. One man/small group of men against nearly unbeatable odds somehow beating those odds. Which come to think of it pretty much sums up LOTR. Oh no, what a blatant ripoff.
Get over it people, it isn't the story, it is how it is told. There are no original stories anymore. They are all just rehashes of stories that already exist, told different ways.
Elfstones is no more original than LOTR is. They are both quest stories. One to destroy a ring, the other to find magical stones. Just because you cant get over your dislike of Shanarra doesn't mean that Tolkin came up with an original idea. He didn't. He just told many old stories in a new way. If you cant see the difference, then the problem is you, not the story.
To criticize the one because you prefer how another author wrote it kind of defeats the purpose of having a genre to begin with. "oh, LOTR is the best way to tell this story so no one else should even try to write another fantasy story" is just not thinking right.
LOTR is fine story and I enjoy it but Shanarra is also a fine story and I enjoy it too. IMO there are MANY differences in the stories and I enjoy the differences as much as the similarities. I like the genre.
But then again, I like westerns too and as almost anyone that enjoys then can tell you, they are pretty formulaic. One man/small group of men against nearly unbeatable odds somehow beating those odds. Which come to think of it pretty much sums up LOTR. Oh no, what a blatant ripoff.
07-09-15, 11:24 AM
#16
DVD Talk Legend
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
I am getting pretty sick of hearing how Shanarra was a "blatant" ripoff of LOTR. Lets talk about LOTR a little. Was there never a "quest" story before LOTR? Was there never a wizard story before LOTR? Was there never an elf story before LOTR? Was there never a dragon, evil empire, magic, orc, lost kingdoms, won kingdoms, good against evil story before LOTR?
Get over it people, it isn't the story, it is how it is told. There are no original stories anymore. They are all just rehashes of stories that already exist, told different ways.
Elfstones is no more original than LOTR is. They are both quest stories. One to destroy a ring, the other to find magical stones. Just because you cant get over your dislike of Shanarra doesn't mean that Tolkin came up with an original idea. He didn't. He just told many old stories in a new way. If you cant see the difference, then the problem is you, not the story.
To criticize the one because you prefer how another author wrote it kind of defeats the purpose of having a genre to begin with. "oh, LOTR is the best way to tell this story so no one else should even try to write another fantasy story" is just not thinking right.
LOTR is fine story and I enjoy it but Shanarra is also a fine story and I enjoy it too. IMO there are MANY differences in the stories and I enjoy the differences as much as the similarities. I like the genre.
But then again, I like westerns too and as almost anyone that enjoys then can tell you, they are pretty formulaic. One man/small group of men against nearly unbeatable odds somehow beating those odds. Which come to think of it pretty much sums up LOTR. Oh no, what a blatant ripoff.
Get over it people, it isn't the story, it is how it is told. There are no original stories anymore. They are all just rehashes of stories that already exist, told different ways.
Elfstones is no more original than LOTR is. They are both quest stories. One to destroy a ring, the other to find magical stones. Just because you cant get over your dislike of Shanarra doesn't mean that Tolkin came up with an original idea. He didn't. He just told many old stories in a new way. If you cant see the difference, then the problem is you, not the story.
To criticize the one because you prefer how another author wrote it kind of defeats the purpose of having a genre to begin with. "oh, LOTR is the best way to tell this story so no one else should even try to write another fantasy story" is just not thinking right.
LOTR is fine story and I enjoy it but Shanarra is also a fine story and I enjoy it too. IMO there are MANY differences in the stories and I enjoy the differences as much as the similarities. I like the genre.
But then again, I like westerns too and as almost anyone that enjoys then can tell you, they are pretty formulaic. One man/small group of men against nearly unbeatable odds somehow beating those odds. Which come to think of it pretty much sums up LOTR. Oh no, what a blatant ripoff.
07-09-15, 09:10 PM
#18
DVD Talk Hero
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
I am getting pretty sick of hearing how Shanarra was a "blatant" ripoff of LOTR. Lets talk about LOTR a little. Was there never a "quest" story before LOTR? Was there never a wizard story before LOTR? Was there never an elf story before LOTR? Was there never a dragon, evil empire, magic, orc, lost kingdoms, won kingdoms, good against evil story before LOTR?
Get over it people, it isn't the story, it is how it is told. There are no original stories anymore. They are all just rehashes of stories that already exist, told different ways.
Elfstones is no more original than LOTR is. They are both quest stories. One to destroy a ring, the other to find magical stones. Just because you cant get over your dislike of Shanarra doesn't mean that Tolkin came up with an original idea. He didn't. He just told many old stories in a new way. If you cant see the difference, then the problem is you, not the story.
To criticize the one because you prefer how another author wrote it kind of defeats the purpose of having a genre to begin with. "oh, LOTR is the best way to tell this story so no one else should even try to write another fantasy story" is just not thinking right.
LOTR is fine story and I enjoy it but Shanarra is also a fine story and I enjoy it too. IMO there are MANY differences in the stories and I enjoy the differences as much as the similarities. I like the genre.
But then again, I like westerns too and as almost anyone that enjoys then can tell you, they are pretty formulaic. One man/small group of men against nearly unbeatable odds somehow beating those odds. Which come to think of it pretty much sums up LOTR. Oh no, what a blatant ripoff.
Get over it people, it isn't the story, it is how it is told. There are no original stories anymore. They are all just rehashes of stories that already exist, told different ways.
Elfstones is no more original than LOTR is. They are both quest stories. One to destroy a ring, the other to find magical stones. Just because you cant get over your dislike of Shanarra doesn't mean that Tolkin came up with an original idea. He didn't. He just told many old stories in a new way. If you cant see the difference, then the problem is you, not the story.
To criticize the one because you prefer how another author wrote it kind of defeats the purpose of having a genre to begin with. "oh, LOTR is the best way to tell this story so no one else should even try to write another fantasy story" is just not thinking right.
LOTR is fine story and I enjoy it but Shanarra is also a fine story and I enjoy it too. IMO there are MANY differences in the stories and I enjoy the differences as much as the similarities. I like the genre.
But then again, I like westerns too and as almost anyone that enjoys then can tell you, they are pretty formulaic. One man/small group of men against nearly unbeatable odds somehow beating those odds. Which come to think of it pretty much sums up LOTR. Oh no, what a blatant ripoff.
The enormous popularity of Tolkien's epic saga greatly expanded the demand for fantasy fiction. Largely thanks to The Lord of the Rings, the genre flowered throughout the 1960s, and enjoys popularity to the present day. The opus has spawned many imitators, such as The Sword of Shannara, which Lin Carter called "the single most cold-blooded, complete rip-off of another book that I have ever read".
And Lin Carter would know! He was an expert at rip-offs.
07-09-15, 11:03 PM
#19
DVD Talk Limited Edition
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
I am getting pretty sick of hearing how Shanarra was a "blatant" ripoff of LOTR. Lets talk about LOTR a little. Was there never a "quest" story before LOTR? Was there never a wizard story before LOTR? Was there never an elf story before LOTR? Was there never a dragon, evil empire, magic, orc, lost kingdoms, won kingdoms, good against evil story before LOTR?
Get over it people, it isn't the story, it is how it is told. There are no original stories anymore. They are all just rehashes of stories that already exist, told different ways.
Elfstones is no more original than LOTR is. They are both quest stories. One to destroy a ring, the other to find magical stones. Just because you cant get over your dislike of Shanarra doesn't mean that Tolkin came up with an original idea. He didn't. He just told many old stories in a new way. If you cant see the difference, then the problem is you, not the story.
Get over it people, it isn't the story, it is how it is told. There are no original stories anymore. They are all just rehashes of stories that already exist, told different ways.
Elfstones is no more original than LOTR is. They are both quest stories. One to destroy a ring, the other to find magical stones. Just because you cant get over your dislike of Shanarra doesn't mean that Tolkin came up with an original idea. He didn't. He just told many old stories in a new way. If you cant see the difference, then the problem is you, not the story.
But Sword is VERY Lord of the Rings -ish. Pretending it isn't is kind of laughable. The rustic valeman are basically hobbits. Allanon is a ridiculously long-lived wizard like Gandalf (although I like him as a character - very sneaky / mysterious). There's even a gollum-like character who covets the sword. Menion Leah sorta fits the Ranger role, albeit in a different way than Aragorn, and there's basically a Fellowship. And an undying Dark Lord hiding in his kingdom full of orcs (or whatever) rebuilding his power.
It's not the only book to be a Lord of the Rings-ish clone, but it's definitely the biggest / most popular.
07-10-15, 01:00 AM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
On another note, I must admit my suspicions were/are somewhat aroused as to said poster's relationship to said author. I raise this due to doing a search, where what do I find diving no deeper than the first page? Another post, from *less* than a month ago (yet long before this thread was resurrected) in the book section. What I see...? What else, other than said poster going off about said issue: Ranting anew about this title not being a ripoff of LOTR.
You almost wish you could say you were making this stuff up. I mean, I get it if we're talking about some behemoth (and *hot*) property here where some hardcore fan(atic) trolled every topic all the live long day; like a GoT or Hunger Games. This... ain't that. Obscurity is underselling it, IMO - I mean, it's a frickin fantasy show on MTV just now. Headed by the dudes from Smallville!
And I *really* loved the defense/rant on that other thread: Comparing Star Wars to LOTR, and how Star Wars/Lucas ripped off Tolkien just as much (if not far more) than Brooks did here. I mean, for realz? I mean... huh?! Star Wars might be many, *many* things - a Tolkien knockoff ain't one of them. Aside from the "young upstart hero and ragtag questy crew try to... err... knock off big bad villain(s)" - yeah, I'm just not seeing it. If that's the case, every story with a good guy facing a bad guy is a LOTR ripoff.
CSI? Rips Tolkien off every week! Those courageous science types always prevailing against despotic evildoers.
Scooby Doo? Each episode, those band of "damned meddling kids... and their talking dog, too!" so totally stole Tolkien's legacy right out from under him. Heck, I think God Himself might have ripped Tolkien off with that whole Bible book - Satan? Saruman? Even starts with the same letter!
On topic: Not exactly holding high hopes for this. It's... MTV. And the guys who brought you that modern classic Smallville. This has disaster written all over it.
Last edited by Coladar1; 07-10-15 at 01:07 AM.
07-10-15, 10:51 AM
#22
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 1,107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
I will give it one more shot to try to get it thru the thick headed people here.
First, I am not associated with Terry Brooks in any manner. I did have the pleasure of meeting him once at a book signing many years ago in Tampa Fl. Take that for what it is worth and believe anything you want to about that statement. You cant convince people that don't want to be convinced.
Secondly, I am not saying that there are not elements in the Shanarra story that are not extremely similar to elements in LOTR. What I am saying is, so what. Brooks took elements that Tolkien had used and so there are similarities. Not ripoffs, similarities.
Lets try something else here. Being a 49 year old I am going to refer to a tv show from my youth that may be familiar to some. Who thinks that Gilligan's Island is really just the story of the Swiss Family Robinsons? Was Gilligan's a blatant ripoff of Swiss Family? Lets look at the similarities. A small group of people shipwrecked on a desert isle. No phones, no planes, no motor cars, not a single luxury. And we get to see how they adapted to their environment and created a society that they could live with. Obviously, since there was already a story about people being stranded on an island, then anything that came after that one story was a ripoff of it, right?
Throw away - Remember the 1998 shot-for-shot remake of Psycho? That was the Sword of Shannara.
Other than them both having people and words in them I don't see the similarities. But I am willing to look over any list of similarities you want to point out.
Throw away - And Lin Carter would know! He was an expert at rip-offs. I don't rely on other people forming my opinions for me. I can think and come to conclusions on my own. And if he really thinks that Shanarra is"the single most cold-blooded, complete rip-off of another book that I have ever read". Then I think he must not be very well read. They are literally hundreds of stories out there that are more similar to each other than LOTR and Shanarra are. Perhaps he should be reading more books.
Lets get back to the comparisons that some have made above, "rustic valemen are basically hobbits" and (let me tie this in to the mentioned Star War above) which is basically what Luke (the bumpkin farmer) Skywalker was.
"Allanon is a ridiculously long-lived wizard like Gandalf." Both magic users. Both mentors of the lead characters. Lets see, Obi Wan Kenobi was a "force" user. Fairly long lived (Yoda being extremely long lived). Mentor to Luke.
"Menion Leah sorta fits the Ranger role, albeit in a different way than Aragorn." And Han/Leia can fit in that role in Star Wars. Han as the charismatic rogue fighter that is a good guy at heart. Leah as the displaced leader fighting to gain back her rightful "kingdom".
"basically a Fellowship." Obi Wan, Luke, Han, Chewey, Leia, C3P0, R2D2.
"And an undying Dark Lord hiding in his kingdom full of orcs (or whatever) rebuilding his power." Palpatine, Vader as his right hand man = Saruman. Kingdom of orcs = storm troopers.
How, oh how could I see any similarities in those two stories. They are so blatantly different. I mean one happens in the times of swords-light sabers. And the other happens in space. So different.
"If that's the case, every story with a good guy facing a bad guy is a LOTR ripoff." Maybe you are on to something there. Maybe you are starting to get the POINT I was making. There are only so many basic stories in the world. But there are multiple ways to tell those stories. Swiss Family , Gilligan, Robinson Cursoe. All tell the same story. All of them about getting stranded alone on an island with few resources. That story has been told THOUSANDS of time and probably will be thousands more. Hell, The Martian is just that story. We can compare them. We can dissect them. We can choose our favorite examples of them. But which ones are the "Blatant ripoffs?" Obviously the first was the original, right. So we go back to that one and I guarantee you that that story came from another one before that one was published.
Lets talk genres. What is a genre? Its is basically a group of stories that are similar to each other in either general or specific ways. All murder mysteries have a murder and a mystery. All westerns are set up in a western style location. All Fantasies have certain basic elements.
So you sit down to write a fantasy book. Where do you start. The Hero. Who do you want as a hero. I want the King of the land to be a hero, everyone already likes and wants to be him. Everyone can relate
to what it is like to be a king and have all your wishes filled and all of your commands followed.....wait. Maybe I should start with an unassuming hero. Someone that is just going thru life and has no real expectations of greatness. Someone like the average person that will be reading my books. Yeah, lets go with that. One country bumpkin coming up. Someone that isn't a fool. Someone that maybe is very good at what they do but what they do isn't really considered important in general. Check. Average guy/gal.
Well they have to get in a situation that is far outside of what they would normally encounter. So we have to provide a wise counsel/mentor that is much more worldly and wise to help them out in the beginning and to help smooth out the rough spots for them. Its a fantasy story so what should they be like?????/huuuummmmm.... How about we use a "magic" user. What do you call male magic users....oh, that's right, wizards. Wait, wait, wait, I read a story once that had one of those wizards in it. Won't we get into trouble if our story has a wizard. Won't it confuse the poor souls reading the story. They will think that we blatantly ripped off that other story. Hhhhhmmmmm..... what to do. Well lets give it a shot, maybe people can get over that logic hump and realize that two different stories can have some similatities and still be different stories. Okay, we have the every man hero, and we have the "wizard". but what are the wizard's characteristics. I mean is he a bumbling "Mr Magoo" type of wizard or is he a real mean mother that you wouldn't want to piss off? Well, the story is going to be about a quest, the hero is going to go thru some real life or death situations. I can't see Mr Magoo being really handy in that situation. I mean lets face it, If you are fighting for your life and the enemy is surrounding you and Mr Magoo says, trust me, I have a plan the average guy is going to high tail is out of there. Lets go with the bad ass... but lets give him a heart. Okay, how about age. Well it would be cool if he could be a younger 20 year old and could kick ass sort of Jason Bourne style. But then, he would probably get the girl and the hero should be getting the girls. Also, if he was that young and badass, why would he need to get the young hero to help on the adventure. Not to mention that this magic stuff is supposed to be difficult to learn and is supposed to take years of training to perfect. Lets let him be old, and you know what, since this is fantasy, and since he uses magic, lets make him really old. We can say that the magic keeps him alive and able to move (Yeah, screw arthritis we have magic). Lets make him One Hundred Billions years old. Calm down Dr Evil, lets make him reasonably old say like 200 - 300 years old. Lots of living and learning in that amount of time. Oh, okay. But lets make him a chatter box. The man cant keep a secret and never met a stranger. Talks to everyone about everything. Hhhhmmmmm..... No I think we will go the opposite direction. Wizarding is about magic. Not a lot of people will be able to use magic. Learning magic takes time and is dangerous. People that learn magic stuff might want to keep it secret because it might one day save their life. Lets make our wizard an old man, secretive, on a quest, needing help from an every day man with a special skill/talent/destiny. Wow this is sounding better all of the time. I am so glad we are the only people in the world that have thought out this kind of story. Can you imagine a world where there are two or even more stories with this theme. I am so glad that can't happen.
I hope that paints a picture for some of you that cant get around that idea that Tolkien isnt the first AND last word in fantasy. That Tolkien wasnt the first person that EVER came up with the ideas that he put in his stories. That Tolkien isnt the ORIGINAL Fantasy writer and that every other person that writes fantasy after Tolkien isnt blatantly ripping him off.
The stories are all the same. The telling of then is the difference.
And now, back on topic.
I am looking forward to the show. Not real enthused about the network it will be on but I do want to see how they play the story out on the small screen.
I am much more hopeful about Brooks' Landover series making it to a screen. I personally like those stories better.
First, I am not associated with Terry Brooks in any manner. I did have the pleasure of meeting him once at a book signing many years ago in Tampa Fl. Take that for what it is worth and believe anything you want to about that statement. You cant convince people that don't want to be convinced.
Secondly, I am not saying that there are not elements in the Shanarra story that are not extremely similar to elements in LOTR. What I am saying is, so what. Brooks took elements that Tolkien had used and so there are similarities. Not ripoffs, similarities.
Lets try something else here. Being a 49 year old I am going to refer to a tv show from my youth that may be familiar to some. Who thinks that Gilligan's Island is really just the story of the Swiss Family Robinsons? Was Gilligan's a blatant ripoff of Swiss Family? Lets look at the similarities. A small group of people shipwrecked on a desert isle. No phones, no planes, no motor cars, not a single luxury. And we get to see how they adapted to their environment and created a society that they could live with. Obviously, since there was already a story about people being stranded on an island, then anything that came after that one story was a ripoff of it, right?
Throw away - Remember the 1998 shot-for-shot remake of Psycho? That was the Sword of Shannara.
Other than them both having people and words in them I don't see the similarities. But I am willing to look over any list of similarities you want to point out.
Throw away - And Lin Carter would know! He was an expert at rip-offs. I don't rely on other people forming my opinions for me. I can think and come to conclusions on my own. And if he really thinks that Shanarra is"the single most cold-blooded, complete rip-off of another book that I have ever read". Then I think he must not be very well read. They are literally hundreds of stories out there that are more similar to each other than LOTR and Shanarra are. Perhaps he should be reading more books.
Lets get back to the comparisons that some have made above, "rustic valemen are basically hobbits" and (let me tie this in to the mentioned Star War above) which is basically what Luke (the bumpkin farmer) Skywalker was.
"Allanon is a ridiculously long-lived wizard like Gandalf." Both magic users. Both mentors of the lead characters. Lets see, Obi Wan Kenobi was a "force" user. Fairly long lived (Yoda being extremely long lived). Mentor to Luke.
"Menion Leah sorta fits the Ranger role, albeit in a different way than Aragorn." And Han/Leia can fit in that role in Star Wars. Han as the charismatic rogue fighter that is a good guy at heart. Leah as the displaced leader fighting to gain back her rightful "kingdom".
"basically a Fellowship." Obi Wan, Luke, Han, Chewey, Leia, C3P0, R2D2.
"And an undying Dark Lord hiding in his kingdom full of orcs (or whatever) rebuilding his power." Palpatine, Vader as his right hand man = Saruman. Kingdom of orcs = storm troopers.
How, oh how could I see any similarities in those two stories. They are so blatantly different. I mean one happens in the times of swords-light sabers. And the other happens in space. So different.
"If that's the case, every story with a good guy facing a bad guy is a LOTR ripoff." Maybe you are on to something there. Maybe you are starting to get the POINT I was making. There are only so many basic stories in the world. But there are multiple ways to tell those stories. Swiss Family , Gilligan, Robinson Cursoe. All tell the same story. All of them about getting stranded alone on an island with few resources. That story has been told THOUSANDS of time and probably will be thousands more. Hell, The Martian is just that story. We can compare them. We can dissect them. We can choose our favorite examples of them. But which ones are the "Blatant ripoffs?" Obviously the first was the original, right. So we go back to that one and I guarantee you that that story came from another one before that one was published.
Lets talk genres. What is a genre? Its is basically a group of stories that are similar to each other in either general or specific ways. All murder mysteries have a murder and a mystery. All westerns are set up in a western style location. All Fantasies have certain basic elements.
So you sit down to write a fantasy book. Where do you start. The Hero. Who do you want as a hero. I want the King of the land to be a hero, everyone already likes and wants to be him. Everyone can relate
to what it is like to be a king and have all your wishes filled and all of your commands followed.....wait. Maybe I should start with an unassuming hero. Someone that is just going thru life and has no real expectations of greatness. Someone like the average person that will be reading my books. Yeah, lets go with that. One country bumpkin coming up. Someone that isn't a fool. Someone that maybe is very good at what they do but what they do isn't really considered important in general. Check. Average guy/gal.
Well they have to get in a situation that is far outside of what they would normally encounter. So we have to provide a wise counsel/mentor that is much more worldly and wise to help them out in the beginning and to help smooth out the rough spots for them. Its a fantasy story so what should they be like?????/huuuummmmm.... How about we use a "magic" user. What do you call male magic users....oh, that's right, wizards. Wait, wait, wait, I read a story once that had one of those wizards in it. Won't we get into trouble if our story has a wizard. Won't it confuse the poor souls reading the story. They will think that we blatantly ripped off that other story. Hhhhhmmmmm..... what to do. Well lets give it a shot, maybe people can get over that logic hump and realize that two different stories can have some similatities and still be different stories. Okay, we have the every man hero, and we have the "wizard". but what are the wizard's characteristics. I mean is he a bumbling "Mr Magoo" type of wizard or is he a real mean mother that you wouldn't want to piss off? Well, the story is going to be about a quest, the hero is going to go thru some real life or death situations. I can't see Mr Magoo being really handy in that situation. I mean lets face it, If you are fighting for your life and the enemy is surrounding you and Mr Magoo says, trust me, I have a plan the average guy is going to high tail is out of there. Lets go with the bad ass... but lets give him a heart. Okay, how about age. Well it would be cool if he could be a younger 20 year old and could kick ass sort of Jason Bourne style. But then, he would probably get the girl and the hero should be getting the girls. Also, if he was that young and badass, why would he need to get the young hero to help on the adventure. Not to mention that this magic stuff is supposed to be difficult to learn and is supposed to take years of training to perfect. Lets let him be old, and you know what, since this is fantasy, and since he uses magic, lets make him really old. We can say that the magic keeps him alive and able to move (Yeah, screw arthritis we have magic). Lets make him One Hundred Billions years old. Calm down Dr Evil, lets make him reasonably old say like 200 - 300 years old. Lots of living and learning in that amount of time. Oh, okay. But lets make him a chatter box. The man cant keep a secret and never met a stranger. Talks to everyone about everything. Hhhhmmmmm..... No I think we will go the opposite direction. Wizarding is about magic. Not a lot of people will be able to use magic. Learning magic takes time and is dangerous. People that learn magic stuff might want to keep it secret because it might one day save their life. Lets make our wizard an old man, secretive, on a quest, needing help from an every day man with a special skill/talent/destiny. Wow this is sounding better all of the time. I am so glad we are the only people in the world that have thought out this kind of story. Can you imagine a world where there are two or even more stories with this theme. I am so glad that can't happen.
I hope that paints a picture for some of you that cant get around that idea that Tolkien isnt the first AND last word in fantasy. That Tolkien wasnt the first person that EVER came up with the ideas that he put in his stories. That Tolkien isnt the ORIGINAL Fantasy writer and that every other person that writes fantasy after Tolkien isnt blatantly ripping him off.
The stories are all the same. The telling of then is the difference.
And now, back on topic.
I am looking forward to the show. Not real enthused about the network it will be on but I do want to see how they play the story out on the small screen.
I am much more hopeful about Brooks' Landover series making it to a screen. I personally like those stories better.
Last edited by MScottM; 07-10-15 at 01:58 PM.
07-10-15, 01:51 PM
#23
DVD Talk Hero
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
Will the guys from Smallville even bother to read the books? They are usually brought in as hired guns by network executives looking to develop a property. I think they watched a few episodes of Lois & Clark as their research for Smallville.
They are usually brought in as hired guns by network executives looking to develop a property. I think they watched a few episodes of Lois & Clark as their research for Smallville.
07-10-15, 09:27 PM
#25
DVD Talk Limited Edition
re: The Shannara Chronciles (MTV) - Series Thread - premieres 1/5/16
I've probably read a thousand fantasy books (if not more) in the last 20 years (I'm estimating starting on the couple hundred I read a year as a teen).
I'm no fantasy elitist. I like Shannara, and for that matter, I still like Weis & Hickman's Dragonlance.
I can't name a book that clones LOTR more. I'm leaving it at that (I don't want to argue with anyone that will post that long of a rant about something so insignificant).
Now onto more important things. Trailer / first look released today via comic-con.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crjkQHnDYu0