[TV] The Wheel of Time

[Katchii]

Then might as well not use the names of the same characters or try to recreate their likeness if that's the case.

100% this.

If this is a different turning of the wheel, there's no reason to even use the same characters, locations, and basic story beats.

It's not a "different turning of the wheel" it's Rafe hijacking the story, written by Robert Jordan, to tell his own version of events. That's... a lot of things, but "good" is not one of them, IMO.

If he wanted to tell his own story in the WoT universe, just fucking do it, no need to practically plagiarize Jordans work to do that.

[Triceron]

So we are told it is changed from an out of show perspective but we can't know that it is changed until the show tells us? Lmao. What is the point in discussing things if you won't accept cold hard facts about changes?

My point is that the in-universe explanation for why it is different from the books has not been unveiled in the TV series. That is what can be discussed.

But otherwise, good job confirming that the TV series is not the Book series, as I've already said day 1.

- - - Updated - - -

100% this.

If this is a different turning of the wheel, there's no reason to even use the same characters, locations, and basic story beats.

It's not a "different turning of the wheel" it's Rafe hijacking the story, written by Robert Jordan, to tell his own version of events. That's... a lot of things, but "good" is not one of them, IMO.

If he wanted to tell his own story in the WoT universe, just fucking do it, no need to practically plagiarize Jordans work to do that.

How is that exactly different from any adaptation of any fantasy series to TV or film? Peter Jackson would have 'hijacked' LOTR and Dan and David 'hijacked' Game of Thrones all the same.

And if they're telling a different version of the story, then that's not what plagiarizing means...

[Katchii]

How is that exactly different from any adaptation of any fantasy series to TV or film? Peter Jackson would have 'hijacked' LOTR and Dan and David 'hijacked' Game of Thrones all the same.

I never said it was different?

But, to be fair, I've already addressed this in a previous post. The changes made to LotR and GoT didn't change the overarching story and narrative (as far as we know with GoT, but GRR Martin gave them the thumbs up with what they did so...). The ones they are hinting at making to WoT absolutely would change the overarching story. If they make a woman the dragon, especially Egwene or Nynaeve (which are the only two candidates according to the show) who had completely separate, deep, involved and integral story lines unto themselves in the books, it completely changes the overall narrative.

And if they're telling a different version of the story, then that's not what plagiarizing means...

I don't know what the actual word is and plagiarized was the only one that came close enough. Rafe is taking all of the characters, their names, their identities, the locations for things, etc... straight out of the books Robert Jordan wrote, and using all of those things that he didn't come up with to tell his version of the story. If it's not straight up plagiarism, it's another version of stealing someone else's work.

[Triceron]

I never said it was different?

But, to be fair, I've already addressed this in a previous post. The changes made to LotR and GoT didn't change the overarching story and narrative (as far as we know with GoT, but GRR Martin gave them the thumbs up with what they did so...). The ones they are hinting at making to WoT absolutely would change the overarching story. If they make a woman the dragon, especially Egwene or Nynaeve (which are the only two candidates according to the show) who had completely separate, deep, involved and integral story lines unto themselves in the books, it completely changes the overall narrative.

But that's not what they're doing.

You admit that if the plot changed then we have a problem. But the plot isn't actually changing. The Dragon is not going to be female, even if the prophecy is changed. The overall narrative remains the same. They aren't actually changing who the Dragon is, as far as we know.

We (as book readers) know who the show is setting up to be the Dragon Reborn, and that major plot point will likely remain unchanged.

I don't know what the actual word is and plagiarized was the only one that came close enough.

The literal word you were looking for was adapted. Meaning taking something and changing it to fit a new environment. Thus the meaning of Adaptation, and why it's important to distinguish that no TV or film version will be the same as the book. Even close adaptations like the new Dune movie will forever be Villeneuve's Dune, and not Herbert's Dune. Changes are inevitable, which is why these different versions are always regarded as separate. There's literally no reason to expect it to be the same especially in the face of changes that are already existing. This is not Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time even if the prophecy and the character backstories and the races and genders of the characters remained exact as they were in the book. It would still be the show creator's vision of how to adapt the story to a new medium.

If you consider it stealing the works of others, then you're blatantly wrong since the IP was properly liscenced, legally, with creative liberties given to the creators as they please. And they aren't using the story without credit, they're creating their own version of the story, which is effectively creating something new. That is the opposite of stealing.

---

Taking a look at your statements again, it sounds like you want to say that they've bastardized the story. And that I would agree, if that was what you were trying to actually say.

[Biomega]

But the plot isn't actually changing. The Dragon is not going to be female, even if the prophecy is changed. The overall narrative remains the same. They aren't actually changing who the Dragon is, as far as we know.

That, to me, would already be reason enough to give them the biggest middle finger of all time. Changing major plot points is bad enough, changing them FOR NO REASON is worse. Not to mention how incredibly misogynistic it is to pretend a woman could be the chosen one when you know it'll really be the man all along. That's not just tone-deaf, it's downright insulting.

I'd hate it if they changed the Dragon Reborn to be Egwene; but pretending it could be her when they know there is really no chance of it actually happening is even worse.

[Triceron]

That, to me, would already be reason enough to give them the biggest middle finger of all time. Changing major plot points is bad enough, changing them FOR NO REASON is worse

They have reasons to change it, it's just not reasons that you agree with. That's all there is to say here.

And I've been clear that I've not been in agreement with the show runners on changing it either, but that's a whole different thing than saying 'there's no reason for the change!' when there absolutely is a reason for it. We don't have to agree with the changes, but the reasons for them existing are pretty apparent considering the platform it's on and the nature of modern TV shows made to be more appealing to wider demographics.

[Biomega]

They have reasons to change it, it's just not reasons that you agree with. That's all there is to say here.

I'm glad we have you to point out opinions are subjective, otherwise there'd be chaos. That's all there is to say here.

[Triceron]

I'm glad we have you to point out opinions are subjective, otherwise there'd be chaos. That's all there is to say here.

You're welcome

[Katchii]

But that's not what they're doing.

You admit that if the plot changed then we have a problem. But the plot isn't actually changing. The Dragon is not going to be female, even if the prophecy is changed. The overall narrative remains the same. They aren't actually changing who the Dragon is, as far as we know.

We (as book readers) know who the show is setting up to be the Dragon Reborn, and that major plot point will likely remain unchanged.

We don't know whether they're changing it or not, yet. To that extent. They're certainly hinting at it with the latest episode.

The literal word you were looking for was adapted.

No it's not, I meant the stealing part, at least in principal if not actually legally (just because it's legal doesn't make it OK or acceptable, IMO). Riding the coattails of someone else' success, etc...But that really only applies if they change the story significantly, which is what Rafe seems to be implying they're doing whrn he says "this is another turning of the wheel."

If the overarching narrative and plot stay the same, yes, I'll call it an adaptation. Even if it's a poor one.

This is not Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time even if the prophecy and the character backstories and the races and genders of the characters remained exact as they were in the book. It would still be the show creator's vision of how to adapt the story to a new medium.

Yes, it is. They call it out at the start of every episode. This isn't the Wheel of Time story by Rafe Judkins. It's the Wheel of Time story, written by Robert Jordan, produced by Rafe Judkins.

If you consider it stealing the works of others, then you're blatantly wrong since the IP was properly liscenced, legally, with creative liberties given to the creators as they please. And they aren't using the story without credit, they're creating their own version of the story, which is effectively creating something new. That is the opposite of stealing.
---
Taking a look at your statements again, it sounds like you want to say that they've bastardized the story. And that I would agree, if that was what you were trying to actually say.

You know what I mean by those statements. I am not speaking about the legality of it.

[Triceron]

No it's not, I meant the stealing part, at least in principal if not actually legally (just because it's legal doesn't make it OK or acceptable, IMO). Riding the coattails of someone else' success, etc...But that really only applies if they change the story significantly, which is what Rafe seems to be implying they're doing whrn he says "this is another turning of the wheel."

If the overarching narrative and plot stay the same, yes, I'll call it an adaptation.

It's an adaptation whether you choose to call it that or not.

Just as Blade Runner does not follow the plot of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, but is still considered an adaptation regardless. This isn't something that is subjectively defined. What you can do is choose to define it as being a true, loose, good or poor adaptation, but it remains an adaptation no matter what.

As I said, the word you seem to be looking for is bastardization.

Yes, it is. They call it out at the start of every episode. This isn't the Wheel of Time story by Rafe Judkins. It's the Wheel of Time TV story, written by Robert Jordan, produced by Rafe Judkins.

Based on the Wheel of Time series written by Robert Jordan. Developed by Rafe Judkins. Written for TV by *insert writer of the episode*

If you're going to choose to be ignorant, at least don't display it publicly for it to be easily called out. There's no bait and switch here when it's clear and plain fucking English. The TV series isn't written by Robert Jordan.

You know what I mean by those statements. I am not speaking about the legality of it.

You're not speaking of anything when you're literally using the wrong words and seem to stick to wanting to continue to use the wrong words to describe what you actually want to say...

[Kharadin]

Show's pretty solid so far. I want the next 4 episodes now please.

[Xath]

Show's pretty solid so far. I want the next 4 episodes now please.

I suppose if you like terrible color grading ren fair level costumes and butchering of good works of literature it's decent.

[Katchii]

It's an adaptation whether you choose to call it that or not.

Just as Blade Runner does not follow the plot of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, but is still considered an adaptation regardless. This isn't something that is subjectively defined. What you can do is choose to define it as being a true, loose, good or poor adaptation, but it remains an adaptation no matter what.

As I said, the word you seem to be looking for is bastardization.

Sure, whatever. Mince words. That doesn't make you smart, it makes you tiresome and pedantic.

Based on the Wheel of Time series written by Robert Jordan. Developed by Rafe Judkins. Written for TV by *insert writer of the episode*

If you're going to choose to be ignorant, at least don't display it publicly for it to be easily called out. There's no bait and switch here when it's clear and plain fucking English. The TV series isn't written by Robert Jordan.

Here you go again, mincing words. That's not as much of a "gotcha" as you seem to think it is. It say right there that it's based on the series written by Robert Jordan. Not Rafe Judkins.

You're not speaking of anything when you're literally using the wrong words and seem to stick to wanting to continue to use the wrong words to describe what you actually want to say...

You can go away now. I'm done listening to you do this crap.

[Rennadrel]

How is that exactly different from any adaptation of any fantasy series to TV or film? Peter Jackson would have 'hijacked' LOTR and Dan and David 'hijacked' Game of Thrones all the same.

And if they're telling a different version of the story, then that's not what plagiarizing means...

Holy christ I didn't think people could be so willfully dishonest. See, what Peter Jackson did was remain extremely faithful to J.R.R Tolkien's books. Sure, The Hobbit movies were not completely faithful to the book and were a bit over dramatized in order to be better on the big screen, but LotR is extremely faithful to the books and I think he did an exceptional job at presenting Tolkien's vision on the big screen. GoT would also be exceptionally terrible if it were completely faithful to the source material, but at least it also didn't try to change the narrative or even misrepresent what the writer intended for much of the shows seasons. And up until they started running out of source material, the show was pretty good and even fans of the books generally liked it.

The difference? It's called living up to expectations. All of these stories are driven by quality story telling and good characters, flaws and all. What's that line I've heard numerous times from shit show runners, directors and writers in Hollywood over the last few years? Oh yeah, something about subverting expectations? Every time that phrase has been used, the end result has been a complete and utter bastardization of beloved characters and franchises. People don't want their expectations subverted, they want to see the characters they know and love represented with respect. Know why Kevin Smith keeps getting his ass reamed out on Twitter for that pile of shit He-man show? Because it disrespects the protagonist, ruins the character of his main companion in Teela and makes her into a psychotic bitch with a Twitter activist haircut and completely lacks any form of nuanced writing that could actually tell a good story that focuses on her. That's exactly what I expect WoT to be because fuckheads like Rafe have zero fucking concept of nuance and none of those dumb fucks even passed Creative Writing 101. Pretty sure my characters in my 5th grade creative writing classes had more emotional depth and personality than anything these writers are trying to pass off as entertainment these days are capable of.

Also, the whole narrative of WoT could have been stuck to entirely and it could have been great, especially with all the crappy scenes that Jordan wrote that made men and women collectively look like a bunch of stubborn and idiotic people, especially the constant arguing that happened between characters. There's also tons of great character moments for the women in the series if that's the angle they wanted to go for, without neutering the entirety of the narrative. There isn't even really a true protagonist focus in the books, it's split so evenly and if anything, there's tons of writing time given to the women more than Rand, Mat and Perrin in a lot of books

[rhorle]

My point is that the in-universe explanation for why it is different from the books has not been unveiled in the TV series. That is what can be discussed. But otherwise, good job confirming that the TV series is not the Book series, as I've already said day 1.

I don't know why you are still on this thing that people are claiming it is the same. That is the entire point of the complaints that they are making core changes between the two. You are stuck in some weird argument land and keep bringing up stuff that no one is claiming for whatever reason. The show gave us the in-universe explanation with the trivia/facts on the "pause" screen. It doesn't matter if it showed up on screen because it was deliberate "additional info" given about the universe of the show.

Continuing to deny it because it doesn't meet your arbitrary burden is just silly.

[Triceron]

I don't know why you are still on this thing that people are claiming it is the same.

Because there are literally people here who think the TV aeries ks written by Robert Jordan. Just look two posts above yours.

[rhorle]

Because there are literally people here who think the TV aeries ks written by Robert Jordan. Just look two posts above yours.

It say right there that it's based on the series written by Robert Jordan. Not Rafe Judkins.

Yes, it is. They call it out at the start of every episode. This isn't the Wheel of Time story by Rafe Judkins. It's the Wheel of Time story, written by Robert Jordan, produced by Rafe Judkins.

I don't think it is saying what you think it does. Based on the book series written by Robert Jordan is not saying the TV show is written by Robert Jordan.

[Katchii]

I don't think it is saying what you think it does. Based on the book series written by Robert Jordan is not saying the TV show is written by Robert Jordan.

This^

Thanks rhorle

I never once stated the TV series was written by Robert Jordan.

[Triceron]

Holy christ I didn't think people could be so willfully dishonest. See, what Peter Jackson did was remain extremely faithful to J.R.R Tolkien's books. Sure, The Hobbit movies were not completely faithful to the book and were a bit over dramatized in order to be better on the big screen, but LotR is extremely faithful to the books and I think he did an exceptional job at presenting Tolkien's vision on the big screen.

Actually, they aren't.

The Rankin Bass adaptation is more faithful than PJ's version, which has MANY changes.

The reason why the PJ films were good were not because of it being faithful, but because they were well produced and had sensible changes that fit for the purpose of the movie.

The fact you think that you consider them faithful adaptations shows how you can actually accept an adaptation of LOTR that can have a lot of changes and not shit all over it for not being as faithful as the comparably more faithful animated version. It's not actually as faithful as you think or remember it to be, but that's okay how faithful the adaptation is doesn't actually matter when it's done well and what we consider to be done right.

Again, I make the point of Elves at Helms Deep and how no one seems to have a problem with this change, yet it's a HUGE world changing thing to the book versions. It's well accepted for being done well and tastefully, not because it was faithful to the books.

And same with GOT. You think that it became terrible because it strayed from the books, but I'm sure you had no problem with seasons 5 and 6 even though GRRM has personally gone on record having said those seasons strayed from his template and that he wasn't happy about it. Most beefs with GOT come from season 7 and 8. So yeah, it isn't just about faithful or not, it's more about being done well or not, cuz even non-book readers HATED the last season regardless of how the book would actually end. These actually have little to do with being faithful or not.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think it is saying what you think it does. Based on the book series written by Robert Jordan is not saying the TV show is written by Robert Jordan.

That's only because I corrected him by telling him it's only based on the book series...

Go one post earlier. He said:


Yes, it is. They call it out at the start of every episode. This isn't the Wheel of Time story by Rafe Judkins. It's the Wheel of Time TV story, written by Robert Jordan

- - - Updated - - -

I never once stated the TV series was written by Robert Jordan.

Yes you did, and I quoted above. Dude, you literally said these words last page and they are always gonna be there for everyone to see.

Why you gotta lie like that?

'Written by' and 'Based on the book written by' indicate very two different meanings, different ownerships. You were implying that the show creators were stealing the story, and I've explained how no matter how you want to personal view it, there's no way you could actually define this as stealing because credit has been appropriately given to the original author while it's clearly stated that this current show is only _based_ on the book series. The TV series is not beholden to the original author, it's just based on his works. Just like how Blade Runner is based on Philip K Dick's works, and aren't beholden to the original story or the author. Credit for the movie goes to Ridley Scott and his writers.

[Katchii]

Yes you did, and I quoted above. Dude, you literally said these words last page and they are always gonna be there for everyone to see.

Why you gotta lie like that?

I can see why you're confused (no sarcasm here, seriously). I did make a mistake and edited out almost immediately. I took the word "TV" out of that sentence as I had written it a different way and reworded it and missed taking that out before I posted. Check the post again or look at rhorles quote of it above.