I know this question sounds either ignorant or sacrilegious but Peter Jackson clearly added a lot of material and characters that don't exist in the original Hobbit book, either from other Tolkien material or simply out of thin air.

Are there any plans to re-novelize the films the way they were actually made?

If not, what are the reasons? (Legal problems, fan-backlash, etc.)

  • 18
    I can't imagine that the Tolkien estate would allow the Jacksonverse Hobbit/Lord of the Rings to be novelised, though I have no evidence to support that assumption. Commented Dec 26, 2014 at 16:58
  • 2
    @DavidThomas: I agree with the assumption, of course, but three books, not one == $$$$ Commented Dec 26, 2014 at 17:00
  • 20
    I'm fairly sure there's already a book version of The Hobbit.
    – Valorum
    Commented Dec 26, 2014 at 17:32
  • 8
    I know this question sounds either ignorant or sacrilegious. You are wrong. It sounds both. Now seriously (and apart from the answer), it is not unheard that in the process of adaptation to film changes are made to the original narrative, but that those changes are enough to consider the result a different piece of art would be quite exceptional (and would require just than copy&paste of some characters from LoTR).
    – SJuan76
    Commented Dec 26, 2014 at 18:01
  • 4
    @SJuan76: Dude, that was totally uncalled for. I'm not going to read the books if they make them. I'm not advocating them getting written. I'm asking if there are plans, which would totally not surprise me given the commercial nature of Hollywood, as I stated in my previous comment. If not, it could be due to the potential reasons I gave -- which is why I'm legitimately asking the question. Commented Dec 26, 2014 at 20:01

1 Answer 1


From Wikipedia:

"In November 2012, the Tolkien Estate, trustee and publishers sued Middle-earth Enterprises (in addition to Warner Brothers and New Line Cinema) for infringing Tolkien's copyrights by producing casino and video games using his characters. The original license to Tolkien's works was limited to the right to sell "tangible" products such as "figurines, tableware, stationery items, clothing, and the like", but did not cover "electronic or digital rights, rights in media yet to be devised or other intangibles such as rights in services".[10] Tolkien's estate claimed that the defendants' actions had caused "irreparable harm to Tolkien's legacy"."

Details in this article:


This makes it clear that the rights for the film and limited derivative products only were sold by Tolkien and that the estate won't allow more than that.

Which is really good in my opinion.

  • 2
    My guess is that for the right money, they'd be willing to license almost anything, as long as it was "done tastefully" (e.g. the more distasteful, the more money required).
    – Valorum
    Commented Dec 27, 2014 at 16:27
  • 3
    Yes, it could be, even though I'm not so sure about that. But, it could be argued that when Christopher Tolkien dies, things may change. Christopher Tolkien is more than estate, he was a big part of the creation of the books, by his critics and maps drawing while his father was alive and after his death, by his editing of unpublished work, he became a kind of author himself. He has a strong sense of belonging... But he's quite old now, is own estate may not be that sensible.
    – Joel
    Commented Dec 27, 2014 at 16:45
  • 1
    You'd be astounded what horrors people are willing to unleash upon the world when Hollywood execs turn up with a dumper-truck full of cash; imdb.com/title/tt1155076 / deadline.com/2014/03/…
    – Valorum
    Commented Dec 27, 2014 at 17:09
  • lol... no, I wouldn't be, that's why I agree with you that it could be. But I still hold some respect and confidence in Christopher Tolkien.
    – Joel
    Commented Dec 27, 2014 at 17:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.