Ok, Melkor, that was intense
And, no, I don't think any of us will really be mad at you just because you did what this forum just exists for: expressing opinions
Nevertheless, albeit respecting your opinion, I reckon there is so much resentment towards the Hobbit trilogy from you, set aside its flaws and distorted aspects
But, given that it's a personal opinion and that a sufficient (very sufficient) number of posts has dealt with this matter in this forum (even though, I don't know why, I guess they won't ever be enough), I don't want to discuss further about it, also because the topic involves a slightly different theme.
Let's talk about, instead, how you tried to dismantle my beloved
Silmarillion Since the thread doesn't address the pure and direct characteristics of the Silmarillion as the centre of discussion, I don't want to indulge very much in the issue, as we can always move to the Lore Corner or start a new thread about it, and I will thus try to answer briefly.
I honestly never thought that the Silmarillion is really so majestic for its intrinsic superb and excellent stylistic structure (actually, it was welcomed very coldly, if not negatively, by the critics at the time it was published).
Its majestic element lies essentially in its innovative and revolutionary typology, that of a
Mythopoeia, resembling the ancient Greek cosmogony myths.
In this, the Silmarillion (seen in the holistic context of the Tolkien's production) is probably the sole, or the only successful 'experiment', mythopoeic book of the modern/contemporary era.
Its style is objectively sublime (almost 'disturbing' at times), I admit, but that is caused by the themes dealt with, resulting in a specific tone.
Like, for example (if you are acquainted with a bit of medieval Italian literature), the
Paradise of Dante's
Divina Commedia, where the matters involved make its tone far superior, higher and sublime than the one of the other two chapters (especially the fictional abominations of the
Inferno).
The Silmarillion is exactly more metaphysical and superior compared to the other texts.
In very simple words,
Mythopoeia is something different from novels, and absolutely more sublime than tales.
Basically, it's the creation of an entire mythical Universe (that's why cosmogony-like themes are very recurrent), with solid roots in fundamental aspects, characteristics and hierarchies that define the hierarchical and existential structure of the same Universe.
The most significant factor is that this mythopoeic creation gives birth to a world in which anything, from the smallest details to the most complicated aspects, is necessarily bound and loyally coherent to the foundations of this very Universe, ending up with the definition of that
common law of the Tolkien's production I usually refer to.
Everything derived from this Mythopoeia will be deeply intertwined among itself, with order and admirable rational logic.I think you should, then, look at the Silmarillion having in mind these aspects and this deep and pervasive coherence.
I'm sure you will find answers to your questions
Picking some of them.
1. The Oath was not something so simple to break since it was sworn directly to Ilúvatar, with Manwë and Varda as witnesses.
2. The Noldor don't get immediately mad for no reasons; there are some subtle elements involved that don't refer solely to Fëanor or the Silmarils themselves.
And you, Melkor, are directly involved too in the discord among them
3. Melkor is evil both by choice and by destiny.
It's a bit complicated to explain, but it's also a recurrent theme in Christianity.
Melkor chose to follow the path of the evil by his free will, but this is something Ilúvatar has always known/foreseen from the beginning with its Omniscience, and the Evil is a necessary part of the Universe just like the Good is, so that the Evil is metaphysically necessary.
Only Eru knows the final fate of all things.
Ok, it was not so brief
I hope I was clear, though.
Regarding upcoming films, it is pretty taken for granted that a possible film about the Silmarillion doesn't necessarily have to follow PJ's style.
LOTR was taken as an example due to its revolutionary and majestic aspects that made it reach legend.
It would be similarly revolutionary coming out with something suitable even for the Silmarillion, and it's pretty clear that this said
Majesty would certainly require the creation of the iconically monumental trilogies and sagas that we love so much (at least, the sole LOTR)