Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[shise]

TBH, it's a tough watch. Ignoring all the talk of lore, and all the talk of "wokeness" or whatever... it just really isn't very good.

The writing it just really bad and boring and, outside of Durin and Elrond's friendship, there just aren't any likeable characters.

The writers aren't smart enough to out-Tolkien Tolkien (Some pretty mad audacity that they think they are lol), so whenever they try and come up with some quotable wisdom it comes across as cringey fortune-cookie dialogue.

Perfect thing to sum up this series is a song in the latest episode that goes "Not all who wonder or wander are lost".
There's a lot to unpack on this one line -

• They're relying entirely on memberberries
• they've needlessly extended it with some wordplay because they think they're clever, but it makes no fucking sense now - why would people wondering be lost?
• It's messing with lore to try to have a cool moment - Bilbo wrote the original line in a poem. Did he just rip off a song from thousands of years before?
• & it's worse sin... It's just a bland boring song, trying so hard to be something more than it is.

This is all your opinion.

I don´t understand all the arguing going on?

A - It is not LotR related, it simply uses the names. Period.

B- It is a created story which pretends to be the origin of the rings. Bear that in mind and move on.

C- Either you like it, or you do not. Tastes are like colors...

D- Integration is done in a rather silly way .Yes, but since it is not real LotR.. who cares.



That´s all, really...

I personally find the show to be good, far better than I expected. 8/10 so far for me (being aware of A-B-C-D)

[Kumorii]

So, is it any good atm? Heard some talk after the first 2 episodes, but has the series changed for the better or worse since then?

Neither... arguably worse. But the first 2 episodes, especially first were bad for me. The episodes after are more tolerable, however since the pacing is so slow they seem meaningless and thus probably at the same tier as the first episodes, but for other reasons.

There's an hour of material but maybe around 10-15 minutes of it actually progress the show forward. And some of those moments feel rushed because so little time is spent on it that's wasted on fluff.
People describing this show as going to slow and too fast at the same time is kinda apt imo.

The show also keeps writing dialogue a bit too poetic for their own good. They can't pull it off imo so it just comes across badly.

- - - Updated - - -

This is all your opinion.

Why do people waste time stating this?
Yes, him stating his opinion is his opinion and the person he answered asked a question that can only be responded with ones opinion.

Talking about a show or movie is mostly based on opinions and people talk about it because they want to share and hear others opinion and hopefully discuss it, though that one is difficult to achieve here.

[shise]

Neither... arguably worse. But the first 2 episodes, especially first were bad for me. The episodes after are more tolerable, however since the pacing is so slow they seem meaningless and thus probably at the same tier as the first episodes, but for other reasons.

There's an hour of material but maybe around 10-15 minutes of it actually progress the show forward. And some of those moments feel rushed because so little time is spent on it that's wasted on fluff.
People describing this show as going to slow and too fast at the same time is kinda apt imo.

The show also keeps writing dialogue a bit too poetic for their own good. They can't pull it off imo so it just comes across badly.

- - - Updated - - -



Why do people waste time stating this?
Yes, him stating his opinion is his opinion and the person he answered asked a question that can only be responded with ones opinion.

Talking about a show or movie is mostly based on opinions and people talk about it because they want to share and hear others opinion and hopefully discuss it, though that one is difficult to achieve here.

I didn´t. That was 1/10th of my whole reply, which is general anyway.

[Yossarian]

So, is it any good atm? Heard some talk after the first 2 episodes, but has the series changed for the better or worse since then?

it's a giant missed opportunity
at this point is nothing more than fan fiction, it has NOTHING of Tolkien's works but the names of the characters and places
timeline is totally messed up (the elven rings were forged much earlier than Isildur's birth), and no character or race is coherent with Tolkien's original characterization and spirit

and once you accept the fact that this has nothing to do with Tolkien canon, you think you can enjoy an one billion show?
no, and that's the worst part!
this show just sucks on every levels because of terrible writing and terrible acting, specially Galadriel being played by an inconceivably awful actress
everybody does stupid things, nothing is coherent, the plot is non-sense, and you end up wondering how is it possible to waste such an opportunity for a great show

music and visuals are wonderful, but that's it, this is one of the most disappointing shows ever made

[rogueMatthias]

This is all your opinion.

I don´t understand all the arguing going on?

A - It is not LotR related, it simply uses the names. Period.

B- It is a created story which pretends to be the origin of the rings. Bear that in mind and move on.

C- Either you like it, or you do not. Tastes are like colors...

D- Integration is done in a rather silly way .Yes, but since it is not real LotR.. who cares.


That´s all, really...

I personally find the show to be good, far better than I expected. 8/10 so far for me (being aware of A-B-C-D)

I'm not sure your "It has nothing to do with Lord of the Rings and isn't related to it at all" argument really cuts it. Not only is it CLEARLY meant to be related to LOTR, but most of the timeline and characters are drawn directly from appendices in Tolkiens work.

I'm glad for you that you're enjoying it. In regards to point C though, while everyone definitely has different tastes, there are also basic tenets to story, theme and character building that are ignored by this series. It's an "executive led" series rather than "creative led" series and it shows.

[Kumorii]

I'm not sure your "It has nothing to do with Lord of the Rings and isn't related to it at all" argument really cuts it. Not only is it CLEARLY meant to be related to LOTR, but most of the timeline and characters are drawn directly from appendices in Tolkiens work.

The argument that it isn't related to previous works etc etc would be fine if it wasn't for the fact that they marketed it as being faithful to tolkien.
The marketing made people think this would've been faithful. It isn't. And people are upset about it. If they didn't market it as being faithful then the arguments of it not being tolkien would still be made, but have no grounds. Now they have grounds however. Marketing matters.

[shise]

I'm not sure your "It has nothing to do with Lord of the Rings and isn't related to it at all" argument really cuts it. Not only is it CLEARLY meant to be related to LOTR, but most of the timeline and characters are drawn directly from appendices in Tolkiens work.

I'm glad for you that you're enjoying it. In regards to point C though, while everyone definitely has different tastes, there are also basic tenets to story, theme and character building that are ignored by this series. It's an "executive led" series rather than "creative led" series and it shows.

Yeah, I can agree with you about C.
But I said this about A because it is not coming from the orginal Lore, but instead it is made up pretending to be so. Obviously with all the right and such.

[InfiniteCharger]

What? An adaptation is not required to be canon. I have never said Rings of Power is canon. Again you are inventing things in order to argue.

So what is your point? Why did you respond when I posted that it wasn't canon if you don't disagree then?

- - - Updated - - -

Says you. But as I pointed out, you do not constitute the definitive authority on how adaptations work.

They have certain rights to certain materials, and they are adapting those materials for the screen. The end.

How well they do it and how loosely they do (or do not) follow the materials is a separate discussion.


Nobody said that calling something an adaptation equals making something canon. That's a ludicrous idea.

That being said, "canon" is also loosey-goosey stuff. It's very negotiable.


No I don't and I never said so anywhere, in any way.


Canons change. Something can go against an old canon, and be new canon. Happens all the time. Heck some franchises MASSIVELY reorganized and redefined their canon (Star War, for example). I'm not saying this is happening here, I'm saying that this CAN HAPPEN in general. And those kinds of exclusive categorizations you put forward are something YOU MADE UP.

They don't have the rights to the story of the second age and they are not telling the definitive version of how the rings of power were created. So it isn't trying to "adapt" anything versus telling their own story but having the "rights" to use certain characters and names from Tolkien. You keep not understanding the difference. If there was a book called "rings of power" and they adapted it that would be one thing. They only have the rights to "adapt" the appendices, which aren't a book and that basically only gives them the rights to use "Tolkien" and "Lord of the Rings". Because the literal appendices are not the entire story of the 2nd age or a book in themselves, it is literally not an adaptation. I believe you yourself have made this point in the past. This is literally Amazon making up a story of how the 2nd age "could" have happened, including how the rings of power were created. But it is nowhere close to being an adaptation of anything because they don't have the rights to even begin to try. Literally the only "rights" they have is to use the name "Tolkien", "Rings of Power" and "Lord of the Rings" to market and sell a completely made up story that is only loosely related to the legendarium.

So if what I said is factual, there isn't a subjective opinion to be had. It isn't canon. They themselves say it is only inspired by Tolkien.
Sounds like some people here want it to be more than that when it isn't and the marketing keeps trying to have it both ways.

[Varodoc]

The show is good, the data proves you wrong if you think otherwise.

The data that is manipulated and rigged by Amazon omegalul, you didn't just say that with a straight face.

[s_bushido]

The marketing made people think this would've been faithful. It isn't. And people are upset about it.

Name some ways that it is unfaithful, and I can pretty much guarantee that any other adaptation will feature the same things.

[minteK917]

I dont think the question is when ever its a adaptation or not lol. The problem is this adaptation choose to waste its fucking time on stuff it made up for no reason like the wannabe hobbits, instead of the best part that are now never gona be shown on screen. After how they shit on numenor and we know we wont get any of their best moment in this show after 5 episodes, thats why it sucks. You can adapt things, but if you are gona remove all the best moment to make shit up, why even adapt this in the first place?

[Skayth]

After finishing the fourth episode, I can say with confidence the show is okay. Has some great scenes, and some horrible scenes (orcs shown one second being great bowman, the next being stormtroopers).

The show is growing on me, and I plan to watch the next 2 episodes this weekend. Galadriel is op, but so is legolas from the films. The issue I have is specifically that "she is always right." But whatever. Funny enough, I think the guy she is with halden or whatever, the fake aragorn, is probably sauron. Bin the beginning the elves stated that she and sauron are linked, and that if she is on middle earth, the sauron will rise. Well. She jumped ship last second, and joined halden, thus joining together.

All the other sauron wannabes seem to be there just to pull away from that little knowledge.

[Syegfryed]

Name some ways that it is unfaithful, and I can pretty much guarantee that any other adaptation will feature the same things.

This isn't a binary matter but gradient, you cannot possible make a point that "other adaptions aren't 100% faithful either so this is fine"

Other adaptions unfaithful as this one are garbage too

- - - Updated - - -

So what is your point? Why did you respond when I posted that it wasn't canon if you don't disagree then?

Defenders of the show, like the show itself, don't make sense either

[s_bushido]

After how they shit on numenor and we know we wont get any of their best moment in this show after 5 episodes, thats why it sucks.

...what?

What "best moments" do you think we should have gotten but haven't yet?

[Kumorii]

Name some ways that it is unfaithful, and I can pretty much guarantee that any other adaptation will feature the same things.

What does other shows have to do with their own marketing? If other shows did bad marketing jobs, it only shows they did bad marketing as well...

[s_bushido]

What does other shows have to do with their own marketing? If other shows did bad marketing jobs, it only shows they did bad marketing as well...

Because the complaint: "it's bad marketing because they said they'd be faithful" is essentially meaningless when the creators of basically all adaptations claim that they're staying faithful to the source material. You might as well be whining about it being bad marketing when actors talk about how good the project was in interviews for something you ended up not liking. It's asinine.

Specific issues with the show would be much more useful to talk about than vague nonsense like "it's unfaithful." Because what is or is not faithful is going to vary from person to person.

[Kumorii]

Because the complaint: "it's bad marketing because they said they'd be faithful" is essentially meaningless when the creators of basically all adaptations claim that they're staying faithful to the source material. You might as well be whining about it being bad marketing when actors talk about how good the project was in interviews for something you ended up not liking. It's asinine.

Specific issues with the show would be much more useful to talk about than vague nonsense like "it's unfaithful." Because what is or is not faithful is going to vary from person to person.

Yeah and it's bad when it happens and ofc people will be annoyed or irritated about it and judge accordingly.

I can give you an example of the Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor games.
They never went out of their way to talk about how faithful their games would be. Did people still complain at times at certain things? Yes, but there's no ground for those complaints. You heard very little of it overall.

Payne and McKay didn't. They talked about how faithful they would be and how important it was to get things right etc etc... So of course they will be under more scrutiny when it comes out to things they've changed.

They using proper marketing would lead to less backlash. That would lead to a bit less of hype though, so in another sense it's good marketing to do what they did. People will be annoyed though.

[InfiniteCharger]

Defenders of the show, like the show itself, don't make sense either

Defenders just like to make false equivalences in comparing this to the films.
This show is almost completely made up and not literally based on anything Tolkien actually wrote.
So it isn't even an adaptation. The dialog, many of the characters, events and narratives are completely made up.
By claiming it is an "adaptation" they are claiming it is taking a story with dialog, events, characters and just adapting it.
So it cannot even be compared to the movies because those are based on books with all those things.
The appendices don't have any dialog, only a summary of events and the names of some characters.
Everything else is completely made up.

[s_bushido]

I think the one thing everyone agrees on, at least, is that the dwarves are fantastic.

Cut to 50 pages of arguing about how much of a travesty and an insult to the memory of Tolkien it is that the dwarf ladies don't have beards.

Christ...what have I done?

[babalou1]

Cut to 50 pages of arguing about how much of a travesty and an insult to the memory of Tolkien it is that the dwarf ladies don't have beards.

Christ...what have I done?

I am a little disappointed lmao