He mentioned it recently on his talk show: Stephen Colbert is a HUGE Tolkien fan, and he has suggested he will write a film focusing on material overlooked in the Jackson films. (I'm aware that Amazon Prime has something running to do with the stories but I've never watched to know what content they focus on).

I was disappointed that the hobbits returning to the shire and having to finally finish off Saruman was cut (they earned the right to be heroes to their own people, instead of returning home quietly.)

Will Stephen Colbert’s Lord of the Rings film be Tom Bombadil’s time to shine?
The US talkshow host’s script will focus on chapters three to eight of Tolkien’s first volume – a section Hollywood originally thought disposable but is now circling back to monetise

If you’ve ever read Tolkien’s trilogy, you will probably remember these pages for provoking a creeping worry that if the rest of the 1,000-page plus story didn’t escalate fairly rapidly beyond tales of Farmer Maggot’s mushrooms, Tom bloody Bombadil and some slightly scary trees, it was all going to be something of a letdown. It does get much better, albeit in Tolkien’s own sweet time. But there is a reason Jackson bypassed most of the above for a streamlined Nazgûl pursuit in which the hobbits fast-forward straight to the village of Bree.

On film, the Lord of the Rings gained a sense of urgency around its key narrative, yet lost the sense that Middle-earth is full of older, stranger things than Sauron, like Old Man Willow of the Old Forest, and the terrifying Barrow-wights. The whole thing became easier to follow, but less rich and verdant.