Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim

Third not second animated film

This article calles this the 2nd animated film based on the novel, but there's the 1980 animated Return of the King by Rankin and Bass. Making this the third animated film. Right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8001:6A02:6E7E:FDBA:C82C:8E4B:98E (talk) 09:53, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Anime or not?

I've seen many articles refer to this film as an "anime". But is that accurate? It's being produced and funded by an American studio, and written by an American staff. The only significant Japanese factor is the director himself. And while it's true the animation is being outsourced to a Japanese studio, that doesn't make it a Japanese film; The Simpsons is animated in Korea, but we don't think of it as a Korean series. So all things being equal, I think it's best to consider this an American film that just happens to have a Japanese director. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.71.166.188 (talk • contribs) 14:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

It has been reported as an anime by reliable sources, and it is being directed, produced, and animated by a team that previously made anime films/TV series, including a Japanese studio. For now I think anime is correct per what we know, but if the situation develops and we get reliable sources with a different take then we can update. - adamstom97 (talk) 15:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

It's not an anime because it's an American production. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 15:05, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source to support that claim? - adamstom97 (talk) 15:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: What claim? The series is produced by Warner and New Line, American companies. The animation is made in Japan, but that doesn't mean anything, because Avatar: The Last Airbender, Castlevania and even The Simpsons were/are animated in South Korea, but they are still American productions. The nationality of the directors, animators writers etc. is irrelevant too, as it's for films. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 15:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not include information because an editor claims it to be true at the talk page, you need a reliable source to support this position. We have very reliable sources reporting on the film's announcement listed in this article and they refer to the film as anime, so if we are going to change it we will need another reliable source with updated information. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:30, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

What we call it is besides the point. After all, there are a number of animated works that are often referred to as anime despite not being entirely Japanese in origin. However, if one is to be pedantic and restrict the term "anime" to works that are of Japanese origin, that raises further questions. I'm not suggesting we change the page. But we do need to consider how we define anime. If a work has to be both Japanese-owned and Japanese-produced to be classified as anime, then this movie wouldn't qualify. It's owned by Warner Bros., and is co-produced by Warner Bros. Animation and New Line Cinema. The director is Japanese, and so is one of the studios involved in the co-production, but the rest of the creative input is American. Regardless of what we decide to call it, that much is a fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.71.166.188 (talk • contribs) 02:19, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

how we define anime is we go with what reliable sources say. - adamstom97 (talk) 13:07, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Adamstom.97: From the "Anime" page here on Wikipedia: "Anime is hand-drawn and computer animation originating from Japan. In Japan and in Japanese, anime (a term derived from the English word animation) describes all animated works, regardless of style or origin. However, outside of Japan and in English, anime is colloquial for Japanese animation and refers specifically to animation produced in Japan. Animation produced outside of Japan with similar style to Japanese animation is referred to as anime-influenced animation."

Is this film produced by a Japanese company? No, therefore it's not an anime, it's anime-influenced animation. --Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 11:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

My previous comments still stand re: needing a source, but if this is your logic then I would reiterate that the animation for the film is being made by a Japanese studio which would satisfy the anime is colloquial for Japanese animation and refers specifically to animation produced in Japan part of our definition. This is not the case of a non-Japanese studio (US, Korean, etc.) making anime-influenced animation. In fact, the studio's website specifically states that they make anime. The fact that they have been hired by US studios to do it doesn't change the fact that they are an anime studio working in Japan. - adamstom97 (talk) 12:33, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

"Based on the novel 'The Lord of the Rings'"

The article's introduction says "[...] based on the novel The Lord of the Rings" which is very misleading and should be changed. - 195.92.38.22 (talk) 15:29, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

That is correct per the reliable sources that are in the article. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately it is both correct and misleading. Correct as it is based on the appendices to LOTR; misleading as of course it's not part of the quest to destroy the Ring. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:20, 28 November 2021 (UTC)