Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Lady Atia]

What about GoT. Most actors were also unknown actors, with the exception of, there he is again, Sean Bean.

True! Or Stranger Things (besides Winona Ryder). Also Sean Bean is a great example of an "oh it's Sean Bean, when will he die?" actor. :P

[Smallfruitbat]

Diversity is an absolute cancer when it comes to fantasy. Most sagas/series have clearly defined races but the current casting trend does not want to entertain this.

As RoP is not out yet, I'll fall back to "Wheel of Time". Neither the casting directors nor Rafe Judkins had the bollocks to do it properly. They picked a hotch-potch of people for Emmons field because Rafe thought that was what society in his mind should be. I genuinely think they would have gotten far less backlash from fans had they picked one 'race' whether it be Indian, Hispanic or African origins for those characters.

What I've seen so far of the casting for RoP boils down to -we need more PoC in these roles lets have a token black dwarf and a token black elf.

[Adamas102]

not in middle earth they can't, because the author, J.R.R Tolkein, wrote his works and these races specifically to be representative of English/British peoples, and NONE of those people were of colour or were asian, meaning that by the definition of the author and his works, all of the people of these fictional races he created had explicitly defined appearances, traits, and histories, but you and the minority group of people who are actually defending this shitshow of a production dislike this and as such have on multiple occasions now pulled the 'racism' card as your main bulwark of defence because you have no actual point besides that

The idea that adaptations of a fantasy world need to stick to the racial demographics that were acceptable by a British scholar writing in the 1930's and 40's is just ridiculous. "Tolkien wrote it therefor it must be followed to the letter" isn't a good enough excuse. Tolkien created a wonderful world filled with diversity and narratives about good vs evil, power, free will, and courage, a world that wasn't rooted in the history of the real world. The idea that this world was strictly created for white people with characters that can only be portrayed by white people is without a doubt a racist ideology.

What desolate corners of the internet do you have to visit to still find the outrage concerning two of the most pivotal characters in the movies being cast with American actors? If Aragorn and Frodo were played by actors such as Chiwetel Ejiofor, Idris Elba, Riz Ahmed, or Rege-Jean Page I can only imagine the spike in blood pressure you and your merry band of racist gatekeepers would have. Obviously the implication is that being white is more British than actually being British.

Tolkien is dead, and whatever he might have thought about the great diversity in what constitutes the people of Britain nowadays is irrelevant. He wanted to make a mythology for England, and this is what England looks like now (Tolkien never specified that he just wanted to make fantasy for white English people). Just as adaptations of Shakespeare's works don't have to adhere to the strict norms and demographics of his time, neither do Tolkien's. If you want to continue to push for this idea of racial purity in works where it has no place then don't be surprised when people call you out for what you are.

not only should he not be 'black' from a lore standpoint regarding elves of middle earth in general as not a single elf in any of the written works of tolkein ever ventured east or south enough where evolution would have allowed them to become darker skinned, but the writers are so incompetent they made up a new character (which is whatever) but they tried to shoehorn him into a faction of elves that during the second age functionally didn't exist anymore, so please go on about how anybody can be anything when everything that is written contradicts that notion and that we should all be praising how 'strong' and 'brave' these writers and production staff are for casting a black guy in a role he has no business being in regardless of whether he is a brilliant actor or not.

Elves aren't humans. They didn't evolve like humans. The don't have the same physiology as humans. They don't need to adhere to the biology of real world humans. It's a non-issue in the context of a world where humanoid creatures are simply awakened into being, essentially immortal and capable of fantastical superhuman feats. Hell, even the Men of Middle Earth aren’t actually Homo sapiens given that they share no biological or evolutionary history with actual humans. So yeah, fuck off with your "but melanin" excuse.

More importantly, get your fucking Tolkien right before you spout your bullshit. The Sindar that merged with the silvan elves in the 2nd Age forming the Woodland Realm under the rule of Oropher adopted the SILVAN language and customs. On top of that, the silvan elves existed (referenced by Tolkien himself) all the way into the 4th Age. Appendix B states that after the War of the Ring, after Galadriel's passing and Celeborn settling in Imladris "In the Greenwood the Silvan Elves remained untroubled". So yeah, a wood-elf in the 2nd Age could very well refer to themselves as a silvan elf.

[Nerovar]

"Tolkien wrote it therefor it must be followed to the letter" isn't a good enough excuse.

Why not? He described the appearance and genealogy of the peoples of middle earth so it seemed important to him. Why should we discard that?

[Adamas102]

Why not? He described the appearance and genealogy of the peoples of middle earth so it seemed important to him. Why should we discard that?

It’s not about “should” or “shouldn’t”. It’s about what is necessary to maintain the narrative themes that are the pillars of Tolkien’s works.

The lore details are important to a certain extent, but not all are necessary when adapting the work and maintaining the spirit of the source material.

Let’s take a look at adaptations of Shakespeare’s works. Some of the best ones very deliberately divorce themselves from the setting and/or demographics of the original plays. They work because it’s the narratives and themes of the stories that make them classics, not every single minor detail from the source material.

Tolkien isn’t revered as an author because he was good at making lists of names and describing how characters looked. It’s the narratives he created and themes he explored within this fantastical world, narratives and themes that aren’t hamstrung by every minor detail.

As an exercise, pick any major character from LotR and boil them down to let’s say three key traits that define that character. Things like how they act and speak, their motivations, their history, their place in society, their skills, their faults and weaknesses, and so forth. Even boiled down to only three traits every character should still stand out as unique and recognizable, and you don’t even have to fall back on as meaningless a detail as their hair or skin color.

[Soulwind]

It’s not about “should” or “shouldn’t”. It’s about what is necessary to maintain the narrative themes that are the pillars of Tolkien’s works.

The lore details are important to a certain extent, but not all are necessary when adapting the work and maintaining the spirit of the source material.

Let’s take a look at adaptations of Shakespeare’s works. Some of the best ones very deliberately divorce themselves from the setting and/or demographics of the original plays. They work because it’s the narratives and themes of the stories that make them classics, not every single minor detail from the source material.

Tolkien isn’t revered as an author because he was good at making lists of names and describing how characters looked. It’s the narratives he created and themes he explored within this fantastical world, narratives and themes that aren’t hamstrung by every minor detail.

As an exercise, pick any major character from LotR and boil them down to let’s say three key traits that define that character. Things like how they act and speak, their motivations, their history, their place in society, their skills, their faults and weaknesses, and so forth. Even boiled down to only three traits every character should still stand out as unique and recognizable, and you don’t even have to fall back on as meaningless a detail as their hair or skin color.

Consistency and coherence are two pillars of every narrative work.

Where do black or asian elves come from? Are they from a different culture? How did they integrate into their current societies? These are things that the audience knows for real people, but shouldn't assume for a fantasy world. If physical appearance is completely irrelevant to a character, then why are we supposed to care that they are an elf, or a dwarf, or an orc? We have to suspend our disbelief and pay attention only to the fantasy part, while ignoring certain elements that are there only to reflect the real world. It's like keeping the people in greenscreen suits around and telling the audience that those are necessary for the VFX, they just have to ignore them.

If a writer is willing to put in the work of taking Tolkien's world and introducing entire subcultures, with their history and how they each became part of a mixed society, then by all means (though at that point, it'd be easier making it an original show), go ahead and expand on that. However, casting anyone as anyone and asking the audience to ignore inconsistencies within the universe is a sign that they don't really care about the quality of the product. It's not even that inclusive, to be honest.

[Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang]

More importantly, get your fucking Tolkien right before you spout your bullshit. The Sindar that merged with the silvan elves in the 2nd Age forming the Woodland Realm under the rule of Oropher adopted the SILVAN language and customs. On top of that, the silvan elves existed (referenced by Tolkien himself) all the way into the 4th Age. Appendix B states that after the War of the Ring, after Galadriel's passing and Celeborn settling in Imladris "In the Greenwood the Silvan Elves remained untroubled". So yeah, a wood-elf in the 2nd Age could very well refer to themselves as a silvan elf.

No, the Sindarin language is the divergent language of the Sindar, the portion of the Teleri people that never reached Valinor, and came to inhabit and rule Beleriand, with their culturally most important realm being Thingol & Melian's Doriath, of which the Silvan realm of Oropher and later Thranduil's is a clear echo.
A somewhat interesting added bit of lore that came together with Tauriel in the Hobbit Trilogy is the social hierarchy (artificially?) opposing the noble heritage of the Sindar, marked by Thranduil and Legolas fairness, to the simpler and less fair silvan elves like Tauriel, which were yet another subset of the Teleri that abandoned the journey earlier than the Sindar that came to rule them later.

There were not many groups of elves depicted as silvan beside the Greenwood and perhaps Lothlorien, but the latter even included some Noldor heritage.

My bet on them qualifying him as a silvan elf while having in mind the idea of a wild elf, which could have worked, especially given that there are not many great forests on the map of Middle Earth beside Greewood, Lorien and Fangorn...
Unless perhaps they'll go with that bit East of the sea of Rhûn? It could make sense if that is used as window to see the growing power of Mordor just South.

[Varodoc]

As an exercise, pick any major character from LotR and boil them down to let’s say three key traits that define that character. Things like how they act and speak, their motivations, their history, their place in society, their skills, their faults and weaknesses, and so forth. Even boiled down to only three traits every character should still stand out as unique and recognizable, and you don’t even have to fall back on as meaningless a detail as their hair or skin color.

Huh, I'm pretty sure that if you asked any fangirl what they remember the most about Legolas or Thranduil, it's that they have long blonde hair and very fair skin. I never knew that the design of a character is a "meaningless detail".

It's become engrained in our society and perception that elves have long flowing hair and fair skin, stop trying to pretend otherwise.

[MCMLXXXII]

This dude kinda ruined any arguments against RoP when he was super fine with Legolas' shenanigans in the LotR movies, tbh.

Why is "artistic license" ok there, but not here?

Doesn't have to do with the color of his skin, does it?

[Nerovar]

It’s not about “should” or “shouldn’t”. It’s about what is necessary to maintain the narrative themes that are the pillars of Tolkien’s works.

What narrative themes would that be in the case of the story that is being adapted here?

The lore details are important to a certain extent, but not all are necessary when adapting the work and maintaining the spirit of the source material.

Let’s take a look at adaptations of Shakespeare’s works. Some of the best ones very deliberately divorce themselves from the setting and/or demographics of the original plays. They work because it’s the narratives and themes of the stories that make them classics, not every single minor detail from the source material.

Tolkien isn’t revered as an author because he was good at making lists of names and describing how characters looked. It’s the narratives he created and themes he explored within this fantastical world, narratives and themes that aren’t hamstrung by every minor detail.

First of all, I don't think you can compare Shakespeare to Tolkien since they wrote in totally different genres. Tolkien himself described the difference rather aptly:
"Thus, if you prefer Drama to Literature (as many literary critics plainly do), or form your critical theories primarily from dramatic critics, or even from Drama, you are apt to misunderstand pure story-making, and to constrain it to the limitations of stage-plays. You are, for instance, likely to prefer characters, even the basest and dullest, to things. Very little about trees as trees can be got into a play."

Also, you do realize that this show didn't take a finished story with extensive themes and narratives? All Amazon has the rights to is effectively the skeleton of a story in the form of notes that are meant to give a historical background for the world Lord of the Rings takes place in. There's a reason why the showrunners describe it as "telling the story Tolkien never wrote". So if the point of Tolkien isn't the secondary world he created and the themes/narratives are all but nonexistent for this particular story, then what is the point of this show?

Tolkien is revered for his stories but also for the depth of the secondary world he created on the foundation of his fictional languages. His world building and his love for language are above all else what defines the Lord of the Rings as the progenitor of virtually all contemporary fantasy literature and it's also what elevates his stories to such a degree. Incidentally, it's his world that these big companies are interested in when they spend hundreds of millions for the license only for them to pick it apart, "boil it down" and rearrange it to serve their ends.

As an exercise, pick any major character from LotR and boil them down to let’s say three key traits that define that character. Things like how they act and speak, their motivations, their history, their place in society, their skills, their faults and weaknesses, and so forth. Even boiled down to only three traits every character should still stand out as unique and recognizable, and you don’t even have to fall back on as meaningless a detail as their hair or skin color.

Why don't you try that excercise with the following characters:
- Elrond
- Tar-Míriel
- Galadriel

[Orby]

To be fair surfing and flipping Legolas was one of the more dumber things of the original trilogy. I know elves are supposed to be light of foot, but I wasnt sure it was supposed to be literal.

Also soon after helms deep the art of step surfing became a national sport of Middle-Earth did you know? See, we learn things here in MMO-Champion

[Stormwolf64]

woke woke woke pass pass pass pass pass ~~~

[Biomega]

Again it leans on the super convoluted idea of the creators all agreeing behind closed doors "we did a bad job writing this, we KNOW we did a bad job writing it, we aren't going to fix it, instead we'll just put pressure on casting to cover it up by hiring a minority".

That's a gross misrepresentation, and in fact this kind of conspiratorial thinking only fosters the kind of categorical mismatch that's going on.

This isn't a conspiracy. No one is "agreeing behind closed doors" to do anything. These are subconscious, automatic processes that work their way into a production pipeline through LACK of awareness, not because everyone suddenly developed a master plan to scam the world with diversity.

Bad writing is promulgated because it's EASY. Doing a bad job is much easier than doing a good job, and the cop-out of blaming everything on diversity (or opposition to it) provides a channel that fosters bad writing - not because people WANT bad writing or conspire to deliver it, but because it makes their job easier, and creates the illusion of good writing if responsibility can be deflected whenever criticism arises.

That's the same as many forms of institutionalized racism - no hiring committee sits down on a rainy Thursday night going "well, let's discuss how we can exclude minorities from our new job opening then, shall we?". That's ludicrous conspiratorial bullshit. What ACTUALLY happens is that entrenched mechanisms of unconscious bias and systemic disadvantage kick in on their own, usually without people being really all that aware of them, and then lead to problematic results; without anyone at any point trying to actively push a racist agenda.

[bledgor]

Nice to see the same shills defending this using the shield of racism to defend bad writing/degradation of the lore that Tolkien and fans spent decades with.

The interviews from SDCC were hilarious, like when the actress fro Diza said she was the first female dwarf to appear on screen (guess more props to the bearded woman in The Hobbit, everyone forgot they were female dwarfs I guess). She was so sure I think she said it 4 times, yeesh.

[MCMLXXXII]

Ahh that brief introduction to the destruction of Erebor. Yes there were female dwarfs in there.
Ir maybe she's talking about a real character not a 5 second extra?

[Biomega]

If physical appearance is completely irrelevant to a character, then why are we supposed to care that they are an elf, or a dwarf, or an orc? We have to suspend our disbelief and pay attention only to the fantasy part, while ignoring certain elements that are there only to reflect the real world.

You're lumping together disparate things here, and also making arbitrary distinctions - somehow you're saying that someone being a different SPECIES is the same thing as them being a particular RACE, and that all of those are just "physical appearance" that always works and applies the same way. Which is ludicrous.

What you're doing is picking race specifically as something that matters over other factors. No one ever complains about hair or eye color, say; but skin color? HOLD ON, IMMERSION BREAKER! Nobody complains if someone of Germanic ancestry plays Julius Caesar in a play - even though the irony of Germanic vs. Roman is more than palpable in such a context. But have someone from North Africa or the Middle East do the same? Suddenly it's cries of HERESY that would put the Empire of Man to shame.

That's the point people are trying to make: these categories of "race" that seem so obvious to some people are just arbitrary distinctions drawn for largely arbitrary reasons, and if you dig deep enough they really truly just DO NOT MATTER for the vast majority of contexts. Especially for contexts that already require - as you admit - so much suspension of disbelief that it's very suspicious why skin color of all things should suddenly be a step too far.

"I'm fine with dwarves, orcs, and elves. Fireballs and dragons? No problemo. BUT BLACK PEOPLE?! Come on, think of our IMMERSION, where would a black dwarf even COME FROM! That's not REALISTIC!"

[Kumorii]

That's a gross misrepresentation, and in fact this kind of conspiratorial thinking only fosters the kind of categorical mismatch that's going on.

This isn't a conspiracy. No one is "agreeing behind closed doors" to do anything. These are subconscious, automatic processes that work their way into a production pipeline through LACK of awareness, not because everyone suddenly developed a master plan to scam the world with diversity.

Bad writing is promulgated because it's EASY. Doing a bad job is much easier than doing a good job, and the cop-out of blaming everything on diversity (or opposition to it) provides a channel that fosters bad writing - not because people WANT bad writing or conspire to deliver it, but because it makes their job easier, and creates the illusion of good writing if responsibility can be deflected whenever criticism arises.

That's the same as many forms of institutionalized racism - no hiring committee sits down on a rainy Thursday night going "well, let's discuss how we can exclude minorities from our new job opening then, shall we?". That's ludicrous conspiratorial bullshit. What ACTUALLY happens is that entrenched mechanisms of unconscious bias and systemic disadvantage kick in on their own, usually without people being really all that aware of them, and then lead to problematic results; without anyone at any point trying to actively push a racist agenda.

This is a good summary tbh. Been thinking it for a while that a lot criticism nowadays instantly gets pushed into ists or isms instead of facing what the criticism is pointing out.
It's using minorities and diversities as a shield for themselves... They don't do bad writing it's everyone else that are bad people.

[bledgor]

Ahh that brief introduction to the destruction of Erebor. Yes there were female dwarfs in there.
Ir maybe she's talking about a real character not a 5 second extra?

She made sure to emphasize first EVER, so guessing they just forgot. Kind of like the beards (though they did say in one panel female dwarfs have beards, so fuck if I know what they are doing, can't recall with so many different dwarfs lore, but wasn't being beardless a mark of dishonor for dwarfs in Tolkien lore?)

[MCMLXXXII]

She made sure to emphasize first EVER, so guessing they just forgot. Kind of like the beards (though they did say in one panel female dwarfs have beards, so fuck if I know what they are doing, can't recall with so many different dwarfs lore, but wasn't being beardless a mark of dishonor for dwarfs in Tolkien lore?)

Yeah, how dare they forget 3 minutes of footage.

- - - Updated - - -

It's funny though. If the series turns out to be good, all these naysayers will still say it's shit because ToLkIeN wAsN't WoKe, just like those Youtubers they watch dictate them. I can watch the series and enjoy it or after 2-3 episodes, I can say this is shit.

[bledgor]

Yeah, how dare they forget 3 minutes of footage.

- - - Updated - - -

It's funny though. If the series turns out to be good, all these naysayers will still say it's shit because ToLkIeN wAsN't WoKe, just like those Youtubers they watch dictate them. I can watch the series and enjoy it or after 2-3 episodes, I can say this is shit.

I mean if you are going to be doing a panel for a billion dollar show, should at least make sure what you are saying is correct.... Like at least put in the minimal effort, and if this was scripted questions even worse because no one involved in the process corrected it either. I have watched each of The Hobbit trilogies movies once and I still recalled it.

I mean I have said multiple times the show could be good (doubtful but possible), but considering how many things have been wrong/go against the lore it isn't/won't be a faithful/good adaptation. You can't add so many characters and change all the lore based characters and do so, that's even ignoring the massive time crunch/mismatching of characters in places they never where/things they never did.