tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post3412559884949608151..comments2010-02-26T15:21:49.816-05:00Jeffrey Pepperhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00990997892044489714noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post-68761737045887745222010-02-26T15:35:01.171-05:002010-02-26T15:35:01.171-05:00Walt&#39;s tie sports the logo of the Smoke Tree Ranch in Palm Springs, where he had a proper tie ... I mean, a property!<br /><br />It&#39;s a pure coïncidence if it ressembles Mr Tolien&#39;s &quot;signature&quot;!<br /><br />http://smoketreeranch.comFrenchDisneyFanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11407438226406200294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post-50581008517267451322009-12-25T13:42:33.555-05:002009-12-25T13:42:33.555-05:00Has anyone commented on the odd fact that the tie that Walt Disney is wearing in the picture on your web site, and in the famous photograph Karsh took of Disney in the mid-1950&#39;s . . . the tie has the .sig graphic that J.R.R.Tolkien used as his initials. In the mid-1950&#39;s this wasn&#39;t widely published. How did it wind up on a tie that Disney chose to wear for a portrait that would be published world-wide (as most photos by Karsh were at that time)?Andrew Hannahnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post-9918695602234244612009-03-26T11:55:00.000-04:002009-03-26T11:55:00.000-04:00Check out my related post, I did it<BR/>this very week and someone send me your link after they saw mine.<BR/><BR/>http://juanmanimation.blogspot.com/<BR/><BR/>Great Story ,great research.Juanmahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07664747898763872503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post-80229687361708635782009-03-26T10:03:00.000-04:002009-03-26T10:03:00.000-04:00There is a funny FAKE manuscript that discusses a story about dwarfs that Tolkien was working on which Walt Disney allegedly stole.<BR/><BR/>The manuscript is prefaced:<BR/><BR/>"I don't believe that anyone outside the publishers has yet read the following excerpt from the forthcoming History of Middle-earth Vol. XIII: The Legends of Middle-earth, which Christopher kindly sent to me in response to a letter."<BR/><BR/>After the existing 'story' there is an editorial comment and 'note' by Tolkien which states:<BR/><BR/>"The manuscript A breaks off at this point, at the bottom of the page. If it went any farther, the remainder had been lost by the time the typescript B was made, since it ends in the same place. That B was typed no later than 1937 is supported by the penciled note Lent to Walt 2/13/37. The identity of Walt is unknown, but a loose slip found among my father's papers, torn from an Oxford lecture list for Trinity term 1939, reads (in a large and hasty scrawl) Cut Walt out of will!!!!!! Nothing more can at present be said of this matter."<BR/><BR/>The story is on the Tolkien Crackpot Theories section of a fan site (Flying Moose of Nargothrond)<BR/><BR/>http://flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/theories/lossiel.htm<BR/><BR/>Enjoy.<BR/>MikeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post-12534990140973578652009-03-26T00:15:00.000-04:002009-03-26T00:15:00.000-04:00"This time frame loosely parallels Tolkien's own Middle Earth publishing history; The Hobbit was first published in 1937 and The Lord of the Rings followed two decades later."<BR/><BR/>I feel like it should be noted that Tolkien spent over a decade writing it, and that the publishing wasn't entirely a slow process.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post-22313043589814992442009-03-19T19:22:00.000-04:002009-03-19T19:22:00.000-04:00Disney may never have produced a Tolkien film but its Disneyland and Buena Vista record labels released six audio products based on the Rankin/Bass "Hobbit" and two based on R/B's "Return of the King."Greg Ehrbarhttp://www.mousetracksonline.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post-43504108054312079732009-02-14T17:06:00.000-05:002009-02-14T17:06:00.000-05:00From the post--<BR/><BR/>"But, it could be said that the Disney Company in fact had the last laugh in the matter, albeit briefly, when the film rights to The Lord of the Rings were held by Disney subsidiary Miramax for a short period of time in the 1990s."Jeff Pepperhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00990997892044489714noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post-73049409820659839232009-02-14T17:01:00.000-05:002009-02-14T17:01:00.000-05:00Didn't Miramax (aka Disney) actually did hold the rights to LotR but passed on it to New Line..rest is history.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post-83072263286694294232009-02-10T11:40:00.000-05:002009-02-10T11:40:00.000-05:00One factor that may have cooled any Disney interest in the LOTR trilogy was the books' questionable copyright status. As I recall, the U.S. publisher ran afoul of the "manufacturing clause" in the old copyright law; it limited the number of copies of a book that could be imported. Exceed that limit, and your book fell into the public domain. Tolkien's U.S. publisher thought his trilogy of such limited interest that it could safely disregard the manufacturing clause. The publisher was wrong, of course, and as a result unauthorized paperbacks began to appear in the U.S. in the '60s, to accompaniment of loud protests from the author and others. Such turmoil couldn't have made the books more appealing to the Disney people, if there was any interest to begin with.Michael Barrierhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05055780103836058077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34647587.post-25143601425593384442009-02-10T10:41:00.000-05:002009-02-10T10:41:00.000-05:00Cool post Jeff, and I've never even heard that rumor, oddly. Thanks!Robnoreply@blogger.com