Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Universalgirl]

Not gonna defend the actions of IMDB, but if review bombing weren't a thing they wouldn't have to purge reviews. It's shitty both ways, ruins any means of criticism for media these days.

So a rating (written review) below 6 is review bombing?

You say they have to purge all below 6, because so called review bombings?

All reviews above or 6 are good
All below 5 or 5 are erased dude

[Triceron]

So a rating (written review) below 6 is review bombing?

It'd be collateral damage to a reaction to review bombing.

All reviews above or 6 are good
All below 5 or 5 are erased dude

That's why I said it was shitty both ways and ruins any means of criticism girl

[Dald]

So a rating (written review) below 6 is review bombing?

You say they have to purge all below 6, because so called review bombings?

All reviews above or 6 are good
All below 5 or 5 are erased dude

That's so lame because in honesty, it's about a 5 or 6 out of 10. It's watchable, but it's not great.

[Ianus]

Censorship is so good buahahahah deleting bad reviews like they will succeed changing bad image .. good stuff

[Universalgirl]

It'd be collateral damage to a reaction to review bombing.

It’s manipulating the rating. Imagine being amazon with flop rings planned 5 seasons and actually the biggest and most expensive series produced will flop?

It’s about trying to save it. It’s not about review bombing.

It’s pure manipulation.

You can’t just delete every review under 6 as „bad faith“

Amazon is silencing all Reviews under 6, that’s incredible and even more concerning that they try to force us into woke topics.

Just imagine the biggest and most expensive series will flop, lmao and than add woke to spice things up.

Can’t imagine the outrage and what’s happening then in amazon woke hq

[StillMcfuu]

Just finished the 2 episodes and I think I'd rate it a 5 as of now. I'm looking at this from the standpoint that it's a new property, it's borrowing nouns from Tolkien but it's not. I actually think this could fit better in a different universe that doesn't have established lore.
From that standpoint it's very basic and unimaginative.

They need to lay off the upangle close up shots as well, it's a bit overboard, honestly a bit distracting, especially in the Khazadum scene. Speaking of which, too much CGI, they have this massive city and all the shots of dwarves are in tiny little areas. The rock breaking scene could have been fun, but they did nothing with it. You have 2 old friends that need to work something out and then have a couple of rock breaking quick cuts and then they actually start the working out on an elevator for whatever reason... (again tiny little phone booth for actors against huge cgi backdrop.)
That harfoot town was kind of cool, wish they did more of that.

That's the stuff that is really hurting the show early on, poor directing, cheesy dialog, exposition where there shouldn't be any and then no exposition or information when there should be some, poor use of setting, and so on.

[Universalgirl]

Just finished the 2 episodes and I think I'd rate it a 5 as of now. I'm looking at this from the standpoint that it's a new property, it's borrowing nouns from Tolkien but it's not. I actually think this could fit better in a different universe that doesn't have established lore.
From that standpoint it's very basic and unimaginative.

They need to lay off the upangle close up shots as well, it's a bit overboard, honestly a bit distracting, especially in the Khazadum scene. Speaking of which, too much CGI, they have this massive city and all the shots of dwarves are in tiny little areas. The rock breaking scene could have been fun, but they did nothing with it. You have 2 old friends that need to work something out and then have a couple of rock breaking quick cuts and then they actually start the working out on an elevator for whatever reason... (again tiny little phone booth for actors against huge cgi backdrop.)
That harfoot town was kind of cool, wish they did more of that.

That's the stuff that is really hurting the show early on, poor directing, cheesy dialog, exposition where there shouldn't be any and then no exposition or information when there should be some, poor use of setting, and so on.

5/10? It’s not welcomed and such reviews got removed on imdb

[infinitemeridian]

I just don't get it. The visuals are great, and not just the CGI. The production quality is top-notch. It FEELS like the original trilogy too, way more than the Hobbit films, and the characters talk and act like they belong in middle earth.

I'm not seeing any lore issues so far. If you're not super versed in the tolkien universe (which 99% of people aren't) and just watched the original trilogy / hobbit films, there's nothing wrong with this. I also don't get all the hate for Galadrial - she seems completely in character for how she's described in the books and the previous films, and she's a perfectly fine female lead who is well acted.

[Universalgirl]

Appears they still manipulate

Actually

Episode 2

https://m.imdb.com/title/tt10582302/...?ref_=tt_ov_rt

Has only „4“ written user reviews

[Biomega]

Appears they still manipulate

To the surprise of actually no one?

Neither RT nor IMBD can be trusted. No big aggregator can. Is everything rigged? No of course not. But you're deluding yourself if you think a company like Amazon who's pumped infinite millions into their project wouldn't curate the ratings outlets any way they can. What are those sites going to do, piss of Amazon and get blackballed by them at every corner? Fat chance. And there's always plausible deniability because "we're just curating review bombings" in a process that's completely opaque and entirely at their discretion.

You know WHY they're doing this? Because people think you can reduce the quality of something to a singular number, and they tie their own appreciation to that number with a level of emotional investment that boggles the mind. And let's not even begin to talk about the fact that this 10-point scale really only goes from 7 to 10 because anything 6 or below is the worst garbage ever put to film, apparently.

Fuck single-number review scores. Useless, reductive, and 100%, 5-star, AAA, 10/10 counterproductive.

[bledgor]

I just don't get it. The visuals are great, and not just the CGI. The production quality is top-notch. It FEELS like the original trilogy too, way more than the Hobbit films, and the characters talk and act like they belong in middle earth.

I'm not seeing any lore issues so far. If you're not super versed in the tolkien universe (which 99% of people aren't) and just watched the original trilogy / hobbit films, there's nothing wrong with this. I also don't get all the hate for Galadrial - she seems completely in character for how she's described in the books and the previous films, and she's a perfectly fine female lead who is well acted.

Excuse me, but what? She is nothing even remotely close to Galadriel mate, might want to brush up a bit. The lore is pretty heavily butchered. The dialogue is rough in my opinion, and it certainly doesn't feel like the OG trilogy. The costumes feel very off to me, the visuals lack the tangibility of real scenes that they had back then, and lord the elf ears are bad.

[Universalgirl]

To the surprise of actually no one?

Neither RT nor IMBD can be trusted. No big aggregator can. Is everything rigged? No of course not. But you're deluding yourself if you think a company like Amazon who's pumped infinite millions into their project wouldn't curate the ratings outlets any way they can. What are those sites going to do, piss of Amazon and get blackballed by them at every corner? Fat chance. And there's always plausible deniability because "we're just curating review bombings" in a process that's completely opaque and entirely at their discretion.

You know WHY they're doing this? Because people think you can reduce the quality of something to a singular number, and they tie their own appreciation to that number with a level of emotional investment that boggles the mind. And let's not even begin to talk about the fact that this 10-point scale really only goes from 7 to 10 because anything 6 or below is the worst garbage ever put to film, apparently.

Fuck single-number review scores. Useless, reductive, and 100%, 5-star, AAA, 10/10 counterproductive.

Lol imdb belongs to amazon.

Blame humanity that we rate in single numbers, blame humanity’s nature you can’t change that.

[Valdhammer]

Just watched the first episode. Really disappointed by how unsympathetic and unlikable all of the main characters are. Within the first 5 minutes I found my self hoping that they would quickly do away with the elf lady. But none of the other characters were any better either.

Why spend so much money on producing a show and not dedicate a substantial chunk of it to top notch writers and actors?

[infinitemeridian]

Excuse me, but what? She is nothing even remotely close to Galadriel mate, might want to brush up a bit. The lore is pretty heavily butchered. The dialogue is rough in my opinion, and it certainly doesn't feel like the OG trilogy. The costumes feel very off to me, the visuals lack the tangibility of real scenes that they had back then, and lord the elf ears are bad.

This is why I can't take the criticism of this show seriously. The elf ears are bad? They look...fine. They look like elves. Did people just forget about Hugo Weaving as Elrond? The costumes, dialog, and production / set design feel very authentic for the OT, they talk like the characters do, with a lot of the same flowery language and high-minded ideals. The Brandyfoots act like...hobbits, Galadrial is described very warrior-like in the books and the character so far seems pretty in line with Blanchett's performance, at least within the current context.

And even if she's not, the show's version is still great.

[Biomega]

The elf ears are bad? They look...fine. They look like elves.

Not according to Tolkien Never mentions pointed ears anywhere.

But yeah, I didn't find the ears done poorly. Cosplay ears those are not.

[s_bushido]

For the amount of money they threw at this, the reviews aren't great. More concerning is the critic/audience disconnect. The critics can praise it all they like but they aren't going to be the ones paying to watch it.

This is just concern trolling. Anyone can look at a chart like this and conclude that the "audience" reaction is just as disingenuous as they think the critic one is:



The most you can glean from these numbers, even assuming you drop the 10 and 1 scores (which I wouldn't be surprised if that was standard operating procedure for shit like this), is that opinions are mixed. Whether that's because of the actual quality of the show, or because of the months of the hate-brigade on the internet shitting all over it is impossible to tell from someone simply clicking a number on a scale.

[bledgor]

This is why I can't take the criticism of this show seriously. The elf ears are bad? They look...fine. They look like elves. Did people just forget about Hugo Weaving as Elrond? The costumes, dialog, and production / set design feel very authentic for the OT, they talk like the characters do, with a lot of the same flowery language and high-minded ideals. The Brandyfoots act like...hobbits, Galadrial is described very warrior-like in the books and the character so far seems pretty in line with Blanchett's performance, at least within the current context.

And even if she's not, the show's version is still great.

No they don't, they look like overly large bat ears to me, you can think otherwise, but saying you cant take criticism seriously? and I get told I gatekeep LOL.

Disagree about the authentic for the OT, the OT had the time to custom make the set/costumes, this show didn't and I can see it, and the CERTAINLY do not talk like the OG trilogy, go rewatch, you can feel the Tolkien in them, I can't here. Also no, thank you for proving you didn't read them as Galadriel (it is an E not an A) is not describe as very warrior like, it was mentioned she was amazon like once in a note, in none of the books is it so described. She was always described as etheral, beautiful, for her leadership qualities, not for warring, or fighting.

You can like the show, but don't peddle these lies it is accurate to lore/Tolkien.

[Valdhammer]

Not according to Tolkien Never mentions pointed ears anywhere.

But yeah, I didn't find the ears done poorly. Cosplay ears those are not.

I mean, who the hell cares about the ears when the whole thing is written like fan fiction that wouldn’t even stand out as decent on Reddit.

[StillMcfuu]

5/10? It’s not welcomed and such reviews got removed on imdb

2 episodes in, anything outside of 4/10 to 6/10 review wise is completely irrelevant.
There are more issues than there are highlights. Just from an acting standpoint, the show will never be a 9/10-10/10 show. And that's just from the objective technical standpoint of the show. Even if it was the most entertaining, deep, introspective story we have ever experienced, and it ticks all the subjective opinion boxes for people, it still has numerous technical problems already. And being honest with ourselves, the show isn't that interesting and the story isn't flying off the screen. It really doesn't even have an identity yet, and we are 2 episodes in. GoT established its identity in Episode 1. Hell The Wire establishes itself in the very first scene which through out the series are almost used in a tongue and cheek cold open manner. 120 minutes of screen time and Rings of Power has no identity; this isn't a 10/10 show or anywhere near what critics have been rating it, and they've been lukewarm anyway.

[eschatological]

It’s manipulating the rating. Imagine being amazon with flop rings planned 5 seasons and actually the biggest and most expensive series produced will flop?

Reviewing it as 0/10 or 1/10 in bad faith is also manipulating the rating. What would your solution to that be? They're trying to purge "fake" reviews, but obviously trying to apply an objective lens to what's a fake review vs. a genuine one is impossible, so they have to pick a number to purge from. And because this has happened before, trolls have given slightly higher scores, like a 2/10, to get past these purges. It's an arms race to try and reflect the reality of the reviews. I think purging 5 and lower is probably a bridge too far, but there's no good solution.

Or, since you agree with the deliberate tanking of the rating, do you find those valid?