Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Ausr]

All I saw was the still of the kid playing Sauron in his fair form and all I have to say they couldn't cast a more retarded looking Draco Malfoy if they tried. Holy fuck.

[Rennadrel]

If you are being totally honest the only thing you really need to see to know what the creators intention are with the show(and how faithful they aim to be) is the "super fan" thing they made.

Those people where carefully picked out and quite obviously none of them where actual fans of lotr. It was literally antirely politically motivated :/

That whole "influencer" fiasco was stupid because literally all those vapid idiots talked about for 15 minutes was diversity and not about anything of substance like whether the story is interesting enough to be engaging. I swear that people who only give a damn about the most inconsequential aspect of a characters existence (aka skin colour) are some of the most boring and sad individuals ever because literally there's nothing tangible about whether a character is white, black or brown that makes them interesting. We've gone decades where characters that were predominantly white were appreciated equally by people of colour and then all of a sudden you get these idiot zoomers and some millennials who think it's wrong to like them because they can't associate with them due to their skin colour.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Catwoman is not more cared about than FF lol. Also there is a year 1 incarnation who was black as well as Eartha Kitt. Selina has had a lot more different looks than most mainline characters.

Catwoman isn't the only major Batman character that was race swapped.

[Khaza-R]

The only thing I cannot stand are the buzzcuts on some of the male actors. It doesn't even make sense for the time period and is just a careless decision.

[InfiniteCharger]

Technically it isn’t adapting a story because there is no story. Lore isn’t narrative, and alone it doesn’t make for a good story. If not for the fleshed out narratives that are The Hobbit and LotR, no one would really care about Tolkien’s legendarium.

You aren't really addressing the issue and in fact contradicting yourself. The lore is world of Arda, Middle Earth, its history, the cultures and populations in it and within that there are various key events that took place which shaped that world. Tolkien was not satisfied with simply writing the Lord of the Rings, he wanted to flesh out the history of the cultures, languages, creatures and other key historic events of the world of LOTR. And in so doing there is more then enough to create new fictional narratives within that world that adhere to the overarching lore that was established. Meaning if certain characters did certain things at certain times, regardless if he wrote a comprehensive story about it, that should be respected.

The loosely connected set of events they had to work with doesn’t make for a good story. The show is still based on those events, but it NEEDS to be tied together by dialogue and character arcs/interaction which Tolkien didn’t leave behind in the appendices to LotR. That’s also why condensing the timeline is a good thing; it allows more characters to interact across the events which forms the narrative glue of the story.

As for Galadriel, her depiction is perfectly in line with how Tolkien was rewriting her before he died. It doesn’t matter whether you like it or not.

Those events are the LORE and building blocks of everything that happens in Middle Earth and no matter what new story being told, if you are adapting the world of Arda, then that lore should be respected. And these people are deliberately going against those events that have been described because they want to make their own lore set in Arda which means it is no longer Tolkien's world that he spent his life crafting. That is the distinction. And there is more than enough room for these people to tell a story about the crafting of the Rings of Power without needing to change the lore.

[Corvus]

The only elf older than Galadriel at this stage was Cirdan the Shipwright, but he was a Sindar who had never been to Valinor.

She was the oldest remaining of the named Noldor that had returned from Valinor, the rest having died or returned to Valinor.

Gil-galad, the High King, and Elrond had both been born during the first age after the exile. Celeborn's age is uncertain as he wasn't Noldor either, but was a relative of Thingol and it was in his court that he and Galadriel met in the first age.

Oh, and canonically it was Gil-galad who was the first to mistrust Annatar (aka Sauron), not Galadriel.

[Djaye]

latest trailer is epic.
trying to read the trailer is pointless. there is obvious misdirection.
im just hoping they dont overload it with too much side story/pointless drama. its a series, yes, but if they dont keep it focused and clean story telling and maintain a solid pace throughout, it will get panned for it.

interested to see how they explain and show Morgoth, which ive read is part of the prologue (which they showed at comicon apparently). who is key to the rise of sauron.
I think the kid in the trailer was just one of the human characters in flashback getting warnings of Sauron, who was rumored to survive the fall of morgoth.
just over a month away...

[InfiniteCharger]

That whole "influencer" fiasco was stupid because literally all those vapid idiots talked about for 15 minutes was diversity and not about anything of substance like whether the story is interesting enough to be engaging. I swear that people who only give a damn about the most inconsequential aspect of a characters existence (aka skin colour) are some of the most boring and sad individuals ever because literally there's nothing tangible about whether a character is white, black or brown that makes them interesting. We've gone decades where characters that were predominantly white were appreciated equally by people of colour and then all of a sudden you get these idiot zoomers and some millennials who think it's wrong to like them because they can't associate with them due to their skin colour.

They were talking from a script because Amazon has to promote their diversity and inclusion agenda and make it seem relevant to Tolkien. And a bunch of leftist academic weirdos are totally on board with this mess and promote it, including getting consulting gigs at these companies. But it has nothing to do with the average Joe who knows Tolkien and never had a problem with it as is. It is amazing how far some of these folks will go to make that nonsense seem important.

https://ew.com/tv/latasha-gillespie-...ity-inclusion/

[Jastall]

I really hope androgynous Eminem here is not supposed to be Sauron.

His form as the Lord of Gifts was supposed to be fair to elven eyes, so that's not out of the realm of possibility.

[Adamas102]

You aren't really addressing the issue and in fact contradicting yourself. The lore is world of Arda, Middle Earth, its history, the cultures and populations in it and within that there are various key events that took place which shaped that world. Tolkien was not satisfied with simply writing the Lord of the Rings, he wanted to flesh out the history of the cultures, languages, creatures and other key historic events of the world of LOTR. And in so doing there is more then enough to create new fictional narratives within that world that adhere to the overarching lore that was established. Meaning if certain characters did certain things at certain times, regardless if he wrote a comprehensive story about it, that should be respected.


Those events are the LORE and building blocks of everything that happens in Middle Earth and no matter what new story being told, if you are adapting the world of Arda, then that lore should be respected. And these people are deliberately going against those events that have been described because they want to make their own lore set in Arda which means it is no longer Tolkien's world that he spent his life crafting. That is the distinction. And there is more than enough room for these people to tell a story about the crafting of the Rings of Power without needing to change the lore.

This is all predicated on the idea that lore must be adhered to 100% when making an adaptation. Even most of the detractors in this thread have agreed at one point or another that 100% adherence to the source material isn’t necessary, so it basically just comes down to seemingly arbitrary ideas of what is important to tell a story in this fictional world.

I don’t think the length of the timeline is THAT important (note, not “unimportant”). But tell me, which do you think is more important; a lore accurate number of years between events or the events themselves? As long as A is followed by B and then C then what is the major issue with the time between the events changing?

If the events are there, and the characters are there, are either of them ruined by having overlap that wasn’t in the original source material? Is the narrative broken or is it just your desire for the source material to remain completely unchanged?

WHY is it important for these characters to not interact? WHY is it necessary for X number of years to pass between events? If you can’t give a good answer beyond “it’s the lore” then it really isn’t as important to the narrative as you seem to think it is.

Tolkien specifically said that much of his creation was sketched out to leave room for other creators to expand and adapt, so the idea that he wanted to flesh out his entire legendarium the way he did with The Hobbit and LotR is simply false. Even he himself made drastic changes to the lore over the course of his life so the idea that everything noted down is sacred and cannot be changed is kind of silly. There is nothing “disrespectful” about what this show is doing (based on what we have seen thus far).

[PACOX]

I'm not some kind of LOTR purist but I just hope the showrunners read the material. I'm about done with there's adaptions from people who can't even be bothered to read what they are making a show about.

On that same note I don't think showrunners have to stick 1:1 to the original content, just that they respect it and the spirit of the content. I'm looking forward to the series, at least episode 1.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Catwoman isn't the only major Batman character that was race swapped.

https://www.indiewire.com/wp-content...825.jpeg?w=780

Man I can’t believe I forgot about Gordon it was such a great performance.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Man I can’t believe I forgot about Gordon it was such a great performance.

I think the fact that you did proves your point even better.

[Zodiark]

Man I can’t believe I forgot about Gordon it was such a great performance.

Gordon was great because in that time period which batman exists ANY good actor of ANY race could pull off the part of the police commissioner. That said, Jeffrey Wright, is definitely a good actor because he portrays the part he is cast.

[InfiniteCharger]

This is all predicated on the idea that lore must be adhered to 100% when making an adaptation. Even most of the detractors in this thread have agreed at one point or another that 100% adherence to the source material isn’t necessary, so it basically just comes down to seemingly arbitrary ideas of what is important to tell a story in this fictional world.

If this isn't a literal adaptation because there is no narrative story for these events in the 2nd age from Tolkien then being 100% is irrelevant.
The fact is there is a huge span of thousands of years for people to tell the story within that era without altering the characters and lore.
It is hilarious to say thousands of years without a narrative but then claim that you can't stick to something that doesn't exist.
What you really mean is they should be able to do whatever they want regardless of how much or how little was written by Tolkien.
At that point Tolkien is no longer relevant as the only thing that counts is the story these people want to tell regardless if it fits or not.

I don’t think the length of the timeline is THAT important (note, not “unimportant”). But tell me, which do you think is more important; a lore accurate number of years between events or the events themselves? As long as A is followed by B and then C then what is the major issue with the time between the events changing?

It depends on the story being told. Basically these people are trying to tell their own variation of the key events of the second age.
They aren't really simply "fleshing out" the narrative Tolkien never wrote, they are just ignoring what he wrote and making up their own stuff.
I don't see how that is not obvious at this point. They changed the timeline because that was the only way to tell the story they wanted to tell.
And that story has nothing to do with Tolkien because he established the 2nd age and its thousands of years because that is the story he wanted.

If the events are there, and the characters are there, are either of them ruined by having overlap that wasn’t in the original source material? Is the narrative broken or is it just your desire for the source material to remain completely unchanged?

WHY is it important for these characters to not interact? WHY is it necessary for X number of years to pass between events? If you can’t give a good answer beyond “it’s the lore” then it really isn’t as important to the narrative as you seem to think it is.

Tolkien specifically said that much of his creation was sketched out to leave room for other creators to expand and adapt, so the idea that he wanted to flesh out his entire legendarium the way he did with The Hobbit and LotR is simply false. Even he himself made drastic changes to the lore over the course of his life so the idea that everything noted down is sacred and cannot be changed is kind of silly. There is nothing “disrespectful” about what this show is doing (based on what we have seen thus far).

If the events, characters and timeline don't match what Tolkien wrote then it is broken. But technically it isn't broken because it isn't Tolkien. And since it isn't a literal adaptation it cannot be considered to be consistent with any lore written by Tolkien. What I don't understand is why people see the obvious inconsistencies and changes but argue that it is still consistent with Tolkien when it isn't. What is disrespectful is to argue that these changes are what Tolkien intended and wanted when they are not. This isn't Tolkien and that is fine, but stop trying to pretend that it is.

[VMSmith]

Gordon was great because in that time period which batman exists ANY good actor of ANY race could pull off the part of the police commissioner. That said, Jeffrey Wright, is definitely a good actor because he portrays the part he is cast.

Exactly. There's nothing about Commissioner Gordon's character and background that requires him to be a white-haired, bearded, old white man. Or even a man. Casting diverse actors to play the character opens up the possibility of interesting stories, even, that couldn't be told if he were portrayed in his traditional style. A black Gordon is believable, so there's nothing wrong with it.

A black Batman, however, would make little sense given the background of the character. From the privileged status of Bruce Wayne to the reality of public perception of a black vigilante, race-swapping the character of Batman would leave you with a character that was decidedly not Batman. An alternate universe version of Batman who was black would be a different story, of course, because the reality of race in that alternate universe could be written to be very different than the reality of race that we are familiar with.

I think this is what people miss, because of those that insist that any usage of minorities is "pandering" and those that insist that diversity is always the right approach. It's all much more nuanced than that and it's the extremists on either side that are driving the narrative rather than the normal people that just want good stories that make sense.

I understand why black dwarves and elves in a Tolkien story bother some people. What we know of these stories places dark-skinned characters in specific places. These new characters are an incongruity in the stories we know, as we know them. Unless their skin color really matters in the story that is told then this serves no purpose other than to, as some would say, virtue signal. I'm willing to wait and see if there's some special story to be told by having a black elf. But if the only purpose in having a black elf is to just say "look, we cast a black person as an elf in this wholly-too-white story!" then those who are turned off by this will be justified in their dislike.

Too many people view this topic, ironically, in only blacks and whites. There is a lot of grey to the topic.

[Tentim]

This feels a lot like wheel of time series to be honest. I don't have high hopes for it and how hush hush they are being about any details beyond a few cherry picked cgi scenes feels damning to me.

I might give it an episode I might just wait to hear about it but right now I have no expectations of this being good so it can only surprise me.

[Adamas102]

If the events, characters and timeline don't match what Tolkien wrote then it is broken. But technically it isn't broken because it isn't Tolkien. And since it isn't a literal adaptation it cannot be considered to be consistent with any lore written by Tolkien.

That’s just idiotic…

No one with any sense would say that the Peter Jackson LotR movies were broken because events, characters, timelines, and dialogue didn’t match the source material 100%. They are very clearly adaptations of Tolkien’s works that translated all those aforementioned qualities to a different medium.

The show is more or less the same. Though they don’t have a narrative to adapt, it’s still very clearly Tolkien’s events, characters, and timeline translated to a different medium.

Every single book-to-screen adaptation has changes and inconsistencies compared to the source material. Every. Single. One.

There is also this prevailing notion that Tolkien’s work is perfect and as a result adaptations SHOULD strictly adhere to his word with no deviation. Hate to break it to you, but Tolkien’s writing wasn’t perfect (should be obvious given that he was actively updating, retconning, and editing his works up until his death). On top of that, he wasn’t writing screenplays so his work by design MUST be changed in order to mold a cohesive narrative that fits within a multi-episode/multi-season format. That’s just how it works when adapting a work from one medium to another.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Gordon was great because in that time period which batman exists ANY good actor of ANY race could pull off the part of the police commissioner. That said, Jeffrey Wright, is definitely a good actor because he portrays the part he is cast.

When a movie with a race changed character fails...you guys will say "Get woke Go Broke".

But when a movie with a race changed character succeeds you'll always try to find some other reason for that.

It's like the people on this very site that will still claim that Captain Marvel was only successful because Disney bought out empty theaters.

A black Batman, however, would make little sense given the background of the character. From the privileged status of Bruce Wayne to the reality of public perception of a black vigilante, race-swapping the character of Batman would leave you with a character that was decidedly not Batman.

"A black batman doesn't make sense because a black man with power, money, and social status isn't believeable"

An alternate universe version of Batman who was black would be a different story, of course, because the reality of race in that alternate universe could be written to be very different than the reality of race that we are familiar with.

Batman lives in a reality where the most popular being on earth isn't even a human.... it's fair to say that the "reality of race" is very different than what we are familiar with.

I understand why black dwarves and elves in a Tolkien story bother some people. What we know of these stories places dark-skinned characters in specific places. These new characters are an incongruity in the stories we know, as we know them. Unless their skin color really matters in the story that is told then this serves no purpose other than to, as some would say, virtue signal. I'm willing to wait and see if there's some special story to be told by having a black elf. But if the only purpose in having a black elf is to just say "look, we cast a black person as an elf in this wholly-too-white story!" then those who are turned off by this will be justified in their dislike.

"They need to justify hiring black people if the story doesn't explicitly require black people".

[Lady Atia]

Now that is by far the best promo they've done for the show. Actually fucking epic. Please, just let the writing be good.

Yeah! The trailer is soooooooooo good, kinda bummed they waited so long to show it haha. Especially the post credit teaser hehe.