[TV] The Wheel of Time

[Rennadrel]

My biggest problem with it.


I could have dealt with actors that didn't match the descriptions in the books if they were the best for the job. They weren't good actors or the best for the job. Rafe admitted he picked them for diversity, not for talent.

I could have dealt with cutting out sections of the story to make it fit for TV, but they should have given it at least 10-12 episodes. 10 could have worked, but 12 would have been better. They had the money and people would happily have watched 12. As much as I would have loved to see Rand's adventures in Caemlyn, I get why that could be cut out, but given they added Tar Valon in, Logain nonsense, and a story about a warder that only made Lan less impressive, I'm not sure what that bought them.

The thing I could not deal with was them rewriting the story to suit their own ideas. They didn't simply condence the story, they made their own fan fiction of what they thought should have happened with characters that do not match up to the ones in the books. Because of this, the deviation from the books will only get wider and the story will become totally whatever Rafe makes up, just with names you recognize from the books.

None of the story from this point makes any sense, and will keep making less and less sense, because they didn't take the subject matter seriously. They used a great story to try to make themselves look good, and it failed.

The thing is that Prime Studios has been prioritizing diversity over telling an existing story properly for a while.

In Invincible, they made the main characters girlfriend black and a social justice advocate, which she isn't in the comics.

In The Boys comics, Stormfront is a man, and he doesn't have a sexual relationship with Homelander. Yet they made Stormfront a woman for some nonsensical reason.

Those are the two most prominent ones that I am aware of. Frankly, some shows that have a diverse cast are perfectly fine, I loved The Expanse because the characters were diverse at a more than skin deep level. They keep using it as a shield to deflect from shitty creators making shitty choices when it comes to adaptations. You can do whatever you want with original works, but every successful show or film has to stand on its own merit by having good writing, whether it is original or an adaptation. If you aren't going to remain faithful to someone else's work, get the hell out of the way and let someone who will do it.

[Fabinas]

The thing is that Prime Studios has been prioritizing diversity over telling an existing story properly for a while.

In Invincible, they made the main characters girlfriend black and a social justice advocate, which she isn't in the comics.

In The Boys comics, Stormfront is a man, and he doesn't have a sexual relationship with Homelander. Yet they made Stormfront a woman for some nonsensical reason.

Those are the two most prominent ones that I am aware of. Frankly, some shows that have a diverse cast are perfectly fine, I loved The Expanse because the characters were diverse at a more than skin deep level. They keep using it as a shield to deflect from shitty creators making shitty choices when it comes to adaptations. You can do whatever you want with original works, but every successful show or film has to stand on its own merit by having good writing, whether it is original or an adaptation. If you aren't going to remain faithful to someone else's work, get the hell out of the way and let someone who will do it.

I think making Stormfront a woman in relationship with Homelander was supposed to be a reminder that conservatism and fascism/nazism are sleeping in the same bed, if you catch my drift.

It also helps the series Homelander getting another "betrayal" from a female to facilitate his personal psychological downfall and guide him to an even more terrifying figure, even publicly.

[Arikara]

And you might have a valid point, if, you know, Time wasn't a thing.

The Breaking of the World happened so long ago even Aes-sedai scholars (who can live to be hundreds of years old and have access to probably the most complete collection of records and info regarding that time period) barely even get fragments of what actually happened correctly. If I read the timeline right, it's been roughly 3500 years since the Breaking. Even conservatively marking a generation as 20 years, that's 175 generations that have passed since the world broke and new empires rose and fell. The people of Eamon's Field didn't even know they were living in the remains of the once great nation of Manetheren because the events were so old they had passed out of local living memory. Even more recently, you can see that they are so efficiently isolated their own Queen had basically forgotten they exist for all practical purposes.

When you combine that with the rather insular nature of countries / nations in medieval times, there may not be as much mixing and cosmopolitanism within the nations as you might imagine. Especially when the recent history of the setting tells us that, aside from the Boarderlands, it's basically been kingdom's at each other's throats and uncomfortable alliances across the entire continent for generations. Under those kind of circumstances, the only people really moving between countries are merchants and war refugees. Entire generations of serfs and peasants would have stayed in a single location, likely never travelling farther than the next town over unless moved by great need. While we may take it for granted now, ease of movement for "normal" people was simply not a thing in those kinds of times.

The Breaking lasted a long time and is repeatedly described as difficult to track, but counting from when someone recorded that it officially ended should be precisely 2997 years between then and the Eye of the World.

I'll add also that the guy you were replying to was coming up with nonsensical theories based only on "but it would totally make sense based on my unconfirmed theory you guys" which go directly counter to Jordan's own descriptions and intentions. Which is the part that matters.

[Surfd]

Those are the two most prominent ones that I am aware of. Frankly, some shows that have a diverse cast are perfectly fine, I loved The Expanse because the characters were diverse at a more than skin deep level.

Just curious, but how do you figure? I mean, "diversity" in the Expanse is basically non existent in terms of the context most people use the term at the moment. Nobody in the Expanse is defined by their racial characteristics, since it's a story where the dividing lines are almost entirely about "Earth people" vs "Mars people" vs "Belt Station People". In the expanse, being a Martian or an Earther or a Belter is far more important than being Asian or Black or White.

Aside from a very small handful of characters, such as Avasarala, almost none of the cast of Expanse are intrinsically defined by their racial background, and even in the cases of someone like Avasarala, her ethnicity is never really presented as an important facet of her character.

[Gumble]

I think making Stormfront a woman in relationship with Homelander was supposed to be a reminder that conservatism and fascism/nazism are sleeping in the same bed, if you catch my drift.

This simply isn't true. Neither liberalism nor conservatism has any relation to fascism/nazism, left and right can be both authoritarian or anarchist. Each side tends to believe that the other is authoritarian all of the time due to feeling persecuted WHEN the "other side" gets all up with authority.

In America, the Right was VERY authoritarian in the 1980s and in the 2000s. They have drifted more towards a much more anarchistic side of conservatism. The Left was very anarchistic in the 80s-90s and has gotten more and more authoritarian from the mid 2000s through today.

If you look back through history, each side goes through periods like that. Just remember, the Nazi's were the SOCIALIST party.

It also helps the series Homelander getting another "betrayal" from a female to facilitate his personal psychological downfall and guide him to an even more terrifying figure, even publicly.

This makes alot more sense.

[eschatological]

Just remember, the Nazi's were the SOCIALIST party.

This is a trope as old as time. The Nazis were decidedly right wing and fascist despite having the word "socialist" in their party name. Some of the worst dictatorships in the world have had supposedly "liberal democracy" terms in their titles, it's merely propaganda. No one questions whether the Democratic Republic of the Congo was a right wing authoritarian dictatorship because they have the word "democratic" in their name.

In the historical sense, there have been authoritarian governments who have supposedly espoused leftwing ideologies, most famously the USSR. But they don't follow the tenets of the leftwing ideologies - they simply say they adopt them. The USSR was communist in name only, but was really just a kleptocratic, oligarchic dictatorship. The same is true of "rightwing" ideologies, especially small government libertarianism. In ideology, they are very much anti-authoritarian. But supposed libertarians, in practice, have been very autocratic fascists in real life. You don't have to look further than Texas today.

As for Stormfront herself, I think Fabinas has it right, but it's about the specific brand of "American conservatism." The name Homelander (both in the comic and the show) is a deliberate nod not only to the Nazi-esque "Motherland" propaganda and various nationalist ideologies, but a direct reference to the Department of Homeland Security, a department created by GWB shortly after 9/11, which implemented the Patriot Act. Which of course, involved authoritarian elements of wiretapping U.S. civilians secretly in the name of "national security," extraordinary renditions, etc, etc. There's a deliberate moment in season 1 where Homelander is standing at the plane wreckage and almost word-for-word repeats what GWB said on the ruins of the World Trade Center: the speech about finding out who did this, and how they'll know our wrath.

I think Stormfront being a woman is deliberately trying to subvert expectations, specifically for non-comic people. Starlight is the "hero" of this show, and when SF first shows up, you see them somewhat aligning as Stormfront rants about not having pockets and how you can practically see up Starlight's uterus because branding requires her to wear a costume which sexualizes her. She also comes off as somewhat feminist in some of the interviews she does, and "says it like it is." For those not familiar with the comic (or the real life reference that the name Stormfront is), they're drawn into liking her initially, only to be shown she's a virulent racist and a literal Nazi from WW2.

[Gumble]

This is a trope as old as time. The Nazis were decidedly right wing and fascist despite having the word "socialist" in their party name.

Thank you for explaining my point so well. If you are on the left, the Nazis look like the right to you, and vice versa. You can't see beyong your political ideology. Alot of folks on the right do this too, but thank you for demonstrating it so well.

As for whether or not the Nazis were right or left.... you have to go back and look at what they stood for and what they did. There is no argument that they were MASSIVE authoritarians, and because of that, people on either side of the left/right spectrum associate them with "those other guys, because surely that isn't US!..... right? We couldn't be the bad guys..... right?"

But, if you look into it, they were actually a mixed party that had a bit of conservative, and alot of progressive in them.

They did believe in citizenship, strong borders, strong military, a strong work ethic, physical fitness requirements, strict religious allowances.

However, they also believed the government should provide for every citizen so that no one goes hungry, equal rights, no war profitting, nationalization of businesses, profit-sharing for workers, social security for old people, focus on building a strong middle class, public land protection, free high quality public education, government approved press, and publicly funded healthcare.


So to say that they were Right wing.......


There is quite a bit of progressive ideology in the Nazi party positions and the things they did in Germany. I wouldn't call them a progressive party, but outside of their focus on the military, which was likely in large part due to how Germany was faring post WW1, most of their positions were decidedly Left Wing Authoritarian.


They did absolutely horrible things, and believed themselves righteous and good while doing them, which is why Stormfront just felt off to me. She works as a woman vs the comics, but her attitude seems like she is happy doing horrible things that she knows are horrible. The Nazis were scary because they thought they were doing what was right.

Beware people who do horrible things because they feel right and justified.





And as for WoT. Rafe and the writers fit this description quite well. They think they are right while destroying something people loved for decades. They've been convinced that they are the "good people" and that any horror they visit on everyone else is justified because their ideology tells them so.

Maybe at some point they'll have the "wait are we the baddies?" moment.

[eschatological]

However, they also believed the government should provide for every citizen so that no one goes hungry, equal rights, no war profitting, nationalization of businesses, profit-sharing for workers, social security for old people, focus on building a strong middle class, public land protection, free high quality public education, government approved press, and publicly funded healthcare.

They believed in those things for people of the Aryan race. Not for everyone. They were strict supremacists and nationalists based on that, which is a very right wing philosophy. They wanted to create a utopia for a superior race. Believe it or not, that's not left wing. It is the definition of fascist. Franco made the trains run on time in Spain, that doesn't mean he was left wing supporting public transportation.

[Gumble]

They believed in those things for people of the Aryan race. Not for everyone. They were strict supremacists and nationalists based on that, which is a very right wing philosophy. They wanted to create a utopia for a superior race. Believe it or not, that's not left wing. It is the definition of fascist. Franco made the trains run on time in Spain, that doesn't mean he was left wing supporting public transportation.

Again, thanks for proving my point.

Racism is not left wing or right wing, both sides share in it equally and just express it in slightly different ways. Saying "fascist" doesn't equate to "right wing". Both the left and right can be fascist quite often when it suits them. Fascist is just a way of saying "I want the government to enforce my will". That has no bearing on left/right.

When you say "believe it or not, that's not left wing", I can hear a guy on the right saying the exact same thing about his political ideology. Some of the most racist people I've ever met have been liberal democrats who wanted to treat me like a pet because they didn't think I could do for myself.

You want to believe that they were bad, therefore "not you", and to a degree you are partly right. But you are also alot wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, since this conversation has nothing to do with WoT, we should probably stop having it.

[bledgor]

Also, since this conversation has nothing to do with WoT, we should probably stop having it.

Naw its fine when mods want to post off topic politics, but you might want to stop responding.

Honestly the only reason I watched the first season was morbid curiosity and Brandon Sanderson mentioning that he gave them advice. Later I learned they ignored his advice, so it is what it is. Unless my buddies want to watch it and mock it, think I will pass on season 2+.

[Nymrohd]

You want to believe that they were bad, therefore "not you", and to a degree you are partly right. But you are also alot wrong.

The Nazi party did not move to nationalize industry, instead they reversed previous nationalizations with a slew of privatizations to favored party supporters. That in and of itself is enough to dispel the idea that they were in any way socialists since the crux of socialism is that capital should be under control of the state as representatives of the people. Their economic policy of autarky and the significant reduction of foreign trade in both directions also suggests that in no way was the Nazi state capitalist or mercantilist (given they did not seek to build a surplus in the trade balance). You will often see it argued that fascism is an economic system of its own.
Heck Mussolini from who the ethnosocialist term originated from also did not try to control capital. In fact he controlled LABOUR by enforcing unions whose leadership was state appointed.
On a social level you cannot compare National Socialists with the Communist and Socialist movement because the former alter the crucial historical narrative of the Left; they deny the importance of the Class struggle and fully substitute it with the Struggle of Nations (perceived as ethnically homogeneous populations)

And on the WoT issue; the main point I was making is that what was important to the narrative was that the people of Eamon's Field were INSULAR. A population can be insular and still have diversity, especially when that population is so small that everyone can identify someone foreign to the area readily. Granted, this is not how Jordan described things but that can simply be a matter of different times and different perception of what a state can be. The show can present populations as culturally homogeneous without racial restrictions by focusing on attire, architecture, language.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

In America, the Right was VERY authoritarian in the 1980s and in the 2000s. They have drifted more towards a much more anarchistic side of conservatism. The Left was very anarchistic in the 80s-90s and has gotten more and more authoritarian from the mid 2000s through today.

As a non American looking at what’s going on in America this is just so incredibly delusional, lol.

The side that ones to lock up/deny asylum seekers against there own laws, ban books and history lessons from schools, support and fund the largest prison system in the world, and ban all kinds of alternative life styles and displays is getting less authoritarian?

Come on man.

[bledgor]

And on the WoT issue; the main point I was making is that what was important to the narrative was that the people of Eamon's Field were INSULAR. A population can be insular and still have diversity, especially when that population is so small that everyone can identify someone foreign to the area readily. Granted, this is not how Jordan described things but that can simply be a matter of different times and different perception of what a state can be. The show can present populations as culturally homogeneous without racial restrictions by focusing on attire, architecture, language.

The issue is time, when you have thousands of years of isolation, even things like race get very insular/singular, homogenized. This isn't even a small trade hub you could try to strong arm into being very diverse, this is simple facts.

When a population of a few hundred are isolated they will trend towards homogenization over time, and we know they had A LOT of time.

As a non American looking at what’s going on in America this is just so incredibly delusional, lol.

The side that ones to lock up/deny asylum seekers against there own laws, ban books and history lessons from schools, support and fund the largest prison system in the world, and ban all kinds of alternative life styles and displays is getting less authoritarian?

Come on man.

It is both sides mate, they both have trended towards deeply authoritarian sadly. Not to mention the left becoming simps for corporations and war mongering, didn't see that one coming so quickly, but 2016 made every a bit crazy.

Also take the "ban books" with a grain of salt, half the time by ban they mean the teachers or librarians removed it from lesson plans/didn't stock it, which is the prerogative of said teacher/librarian. Also some of the books I have seen banned feature literal pornography so.

[Nymrohd]

The issue is time, when you have thousands of years of isolation, even things like race get very insular/singular, homogenized. This isn't even a small trade hub you could try to strong arm into being very diverse, this is simple facts.

When a population of a few hundred are isolated they will trend towards homogenization over time, and we know they had A LOT of time.

Again though, does this change alter the narrative? From what I gather they have vastly worse takes here. Why is the focus on diversity? They could do representation and STILL do the story justice. The fact that they failed to do the story justice is not really because of the diversity, it's because of so many other issues.

[bledgor]

Again though, does this change alter the narrative? From what I gather they have vastly worse takes here. Why is the focus on diversity? They could do representation and STILL do the story justice. The fact that they failed to do the story justice is not really because of the diversity, it's because of so many other issues.

It is a needless change that alters the world, one of the overriding themes of the book is people need to come together, and the world has grown very apart. Even the queen of the region doesn't know about the town it is so isolated. It also makes it hard for me to believe if this "isolated for thousands of years" village looks like a random sample of people from New York. It adds little to nothing, and actively damages the over arching themes and tones of the story. My question is why make the change? There is a fuck ton of diversity in WoT, it just isn't in Emond's Field.

Not to mention one of the overtures of the start of the story is how much Rand feels like an outsider because he has red hair, if everyone is diverse, it takes away that aspect too.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

It is both sides mate, they both have trended towards deeply authoritarian sadly. Not to mention the left becoming simps for corporations and war mongering, didn't see that one coming so quickly, but 2016 made every a bit crazy.

It might be both sides but it’s like one side is having a potato sack race while the other is in an Olympic sprint.

[bledgor]

It might be both sides but it’s like one side is having a potato sack race while the other is in an Olympic sprint.

Naw, one side is just more subtle, the other upfront. Trust me as someone who lives here, I have seen a fuck ton of racism from both sides, seen plenty of screams for locking people up from the left too. Some of the worst people have been so called "allies" of the LGBTQ+ camp, and the way they act is like a cult. Honestly has left me pretty disillusioned.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Not to mention one of the overtures of the start of the story is how much Rand feels like an outsider because he has red hair, if everyone is diverse, it takes away that aspect too.

Honestly they should have just made Rand and the Aiel Arabic or something instead of changing the whole town then they could still do the feeling of the outside story (was it even in the show?) and have the main cast be more diverse.

Though personally I like Nineveh‘s actor so keeping her would be nice where the rest are kinda meh at best.

[bledgor]

Honestly they should have just made Rand and the Aiel Arabic or something instead of changing the whole town then they could still do the feeling of the outside story (was it even in the show?) and have the main cast be more diverse.

Though personally I like Nineveh‘s actor so keeping her would be nice where the rest are kinda meh at best.

It would have made me a bit annoyed to see another ginger replaced in Hollywood, fuck do they like replacing gingers. This would have been a lot more acceptable of a change though overall. Not to mention the current casting having Rand and Aviendha look so different in the show now just mocks another plot point from the novels.

Though all things being said Min was one of the worst miscasts in the show, too old.

[Gumble]

Again though, does this change alter the narrative? From what I gather they have vastly worse takes here. Why is the focus on diversity? They could do representation and STILL do the story justice. The fact that they failed to do the story justice is not really because of the diversity, it's because of so many other issues.

This is a VERY GOOD QUESTION for Wheel of Time, but also for so many of the other properties that have been adapted rcently.

Why the focus on diversity? Why are the showrunners/writers focused on it? Why are the fans focused on it? Why does it matter?


In a perfect world, it shouldn't. Diversity that just comes about naturally because of the story, changes made to actors because of available talent, and diversity purely due to random chance are normally rolled with by most audiences and celebrated by media. It is a bit odd to celebrate something like that by the media, but they do, and as long as it doesn't detract from the story, so be it.


However, we live in a very, very unperfect world. Showrunners like Rafe (and he is FAR from alone in this) spend alot of time touting how they pick their writers and cast based on diversity, and shower in the praise they get from media outlets. Not too surprising, given those are the people they are going to deal with 90% of the time, but it does make audiences a bit leery.

Why? Because it means that the focus was on how the cast looked and the messaging from the show. Which means the focus CANNOT have been on casting good actors and producing a good show. You can't focus on both of those things, one HAS to take priority.

For Wheel of Time, Rafe came out and said early on that they were going to do a faithful adaptation and that he was a huge RJ fan who wanted to get the show right. Fans were pleased by this and were hopeful. Then he said he was casting for diversity, then he said to expect some pretty major changes, BUT he said that the people he picked were the best for the job and that people would love it.

Then the show came out. People watched, they watched alot (for Amazon...) and they stuck with it, for about the first 3-4 episodes. The characters were NOT good, the actors did a "mostly" bad job, the sets looked pathetic for the amount of money they had to work with, and the writing showed they were going in a VERY different direction.

Then the show veered HARD away from the source material, and people stopped watching. By the end of the season, they were down really far on viewers and the fans were unhappy.


But they weren't nearly this unhappy at the start..... so was it the diversity that caused it? Or was the focus on diversity simply a symptom that the person in charge wasn't serious about doing a good job? Some people knew that going in, but tried to stick with it (me). Some people learned it by watching their favorite series get turned into trash.

But time after time, show after show, movie after movie, the same trend appears. If the people in charge of it are focused on anything other than making a good product, it shows. You get what you aim at. They didn't aim at making a good show....... but it was diverse.

- - - Updated - - -

It might be both sides but it’s like one side is having a potato sack race while the other is in an Olympic sprint.

It is the media you consume. Both sides suck, but to pretend the Left isn't massively more authoritarian than they used to be is just disingenous.

- - - Updated - - -

Honestly they should have just made Rand and the Aiel Arabic or something instead of changing the whole town then they could still do the feeling of the outside story (was it even in the show?) and have the main cast be more diverse.

Though personally I like Nineveh‘s actor so keeping her would be nice where the rest are kinda meh at best.

I expected her to be bad, given she was a former Power Ranger, but her acting wasn't the worst. The scenes they put her in were terrible and her story with Lan was destroyed, but she was one of the better of the bad bunch. She looks nothing like Nynaeve, and having a bunch of braids /= having A long braid.

- - - Updated - - -

Though all things being said Min was one of the worst miscasts in the show, too old.

Boring actress who looks like she is 20 years older than Rand. I can't wait to see if they try to make her into Elmindreda. That will be laughable to an extreme.