Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[babalou1]

Im just mad that the Dwarven women didnt have beards. The fuck... Show is ruined.

[Dhrizzle]

With all due respect, that still would not make much sense, if you carefully think about it.

Commander Galadriel and her 9-10 elves were searching for Sauron for (I think) several years alone and unaided, they had finally reached the northern wastes of the Arctic.

If a young and relatively inexperienced Galadriel (no Ring, no Phial, no Celeborn, no White Council, no other non-elf and Wizard allies) with no powers could defeat Sauron, then the average young Elf would be roughly equal to a powerful Maia in this new Tolkien universe.

I'm not saying that Galadriel and co. Could have taken Sauron but she is canonically the greatest of the Elves in Middle-earth probably from the time Thingol dies to the return of Glorfindel, so far from being the average young Elf.

Say Galadriel and her elves found Sauron, somehow fought him to a standstill or otherwise survived / escaped. Then what? They would spend several more months returning to the other Elves, and then when they finally returned and persuaded the Elf-lords to believe their story and act, no easy feat in itself, Gil-galad would then spend several more months preparing an army.

And then they would spend ANOTHER several months going to the Arctic with that army, hoping against hope that Sauron and all his minions patiently stayed put wherever they were and didn't simply seek out a new hiding place, and that they might possibly win against him despite giving him lots of time to prepare his own forces? Either way, it seems like a really fragile, confusing and short-sighted plan with much room for failure and disaster.

If Galadriel could come back with evidence of recent Sauron activity then Gil-galad wouldn't wind down the war effort and would instead increase vigilance. It doesn't have to result in them instantly gathering a hunting party to track him down.

[Orby]

I had no idea people didn't like Galadriel till I read it in this thread. Maybe its because I know that she's right that I excuse her being so obsessed with finding Sauron.

She just seems very dull to me as a character. I am more interested in the Harfoots and Dwarfs, even Elrond showed some character in the second episode. Her scenes are not bad, just the less exciting of the other arcs going on :P

[Xath]

So people are still banging on about the heinous decision to force us to see a black person on screen. Have we decided yet how, exactly, their skin color effects the story?

Which of Arondir's scenes, specifically, would have been improved if he was played by a white guy instead? Was it the one where he was patrolling the town? The one where he got the news that they'd be finishing their duty and going home? The one where he talked with the woman from the village about his feelings? Or maybe it was the one where he was searching for the orcs/source of the corruption in the tunnels.

Since you refuse to get it, it's immersion breaking. Let's talk about a movie set in Central Africa and there is randomly one dude who is white in this landlocked area. Exact same speech patterns as everyone else and he's just randomly white the entire rest of the cast is African. No explanation of how he randomly ended up there and by all accounts was born there. That is immersion breaking and jarring I really don't get why this is so hard to get. We are talking about two isolationist groups here. I would also be annoyed if they did an episode with the Haradrim and there were random white dudes because reasons. No hair color is not equivalent to skin color in the slightest and never has been in terms of genetics.

[Dhrizzle]

I hope Amazon creates a LOTR streaming universe and shows the way Disney spams MCU shows. For no real reason but to antagonize the Tolkien fundamentalists

I think the best thing they could do is let Kevin Smith write and star in a Gimli and Legolas series with Jason Mewes.

[Adamas102]

It's still rooted in a setting where a certain level of technology places them comparably to periods of our own history.

Even if magic is involved, it's not like you could swap in a smartphone in place of the Palantir and just pretend it works in a setting where people are travelling on foot and horseback and still wield swords in combat, just because 'it's not comparable to our history'. Well, certain things absolutely are. Like catapults could be considered reasonable weapons of war in the setting even if they aren't directly mentioned in the books, because they are still comparable to our own medieval history which the world loosely draw inspiration from.

I think the issue here is that too many people in this thread (and just in general I guess) are terribly uneducated when it comes to this type of history. I'm no expert on the matter either, but even the most rudimentary amount of research debunks the idea of Middle-earth being medieval.

You mention horses, swords, and catapults as apparent indications of a certain time period when horses were domesticated in Europe about 5,000 years before the Middle Ages, and iron swords and catapults were invented hundreds of years before that period as well. To make things even more complicated, Middle-earth has things like potatoes and tobacco which weren't even introduced to Europe until AFTER the Middle Ages.

People also seem to have this view of the Middle Ages as just a period of time with knights and castles, when in reality the Middle Ages spanned 1,000 years and saw an enormous amount of change over the course of the era. In Peter Jackson's RotK, Minas Tirith has counterweight trebuchets which were invented in the late medieval period, but agriculturally Middle-earth seems to be no where near where Europe was by this period. Even plate armor, which seems to be ubiquitous in these types of fantasy settings, wasn't developed until the final decades of the Late Middle Ages and was more of a Renaissance thing.

There's also the matter of travel and trade. A lot of people in this thread seem to view Middle-earth as a place with little of both, leading to fairly isolated groups of people. If that were true then it's even farther removed from the Middle Ages which only continued building on the foundation of connectivity that the Roman Empire had introduced to the continent prior to the Middle Ages.

So no, there is no comparable period of human history where Middle-earth is set. That was by the design of the author, and any attempt to suggest otherwise is simply wrong, and based on an incredibly simplistic idea of what the medieval period actually was.

[Dhrizzle]

Since you refuse to get it, it's immersion breaking. Let's talk about a movie set in Central Africa and there is randomly one dude who is white in this landlocked area. Exact same speech patterns as everyone else and he's just randomly white the entire rest of the cast is African. No explanation of how he randomly ended up there and by all accounts was born there. That is immersion breaking and jarring I really don't get why this is so hard to get. We are talking about two isolationist groups here. I would also be annoyed if they did an episode with the Haradrim and there were random white dudes because reasons. No hair color is not equivalent to skin color in the slightest and never has been in terms of genetics.

Not really. Either he has recent white ancestry of it'd an unusual genetic coincidence or Illuvatar decided the correct hröa for this particular fëa should be lighter skinned.

[Triceron]

I think the issue here is that too many people in this thread (and just in general I guess) are terribly uneducated when it comes to this type of history. I'm no expert on the matter either, but even the most rudimentary amount of research debunks the idea of Middle-earth being medieval.

You mention horses, swords, and catapults as apparent indications of a certain time period when horses were domesticated in Europe about 5,000 years before the Middle Ages, and iron swords and catapults were invented hundreds of years before that period as well. To make things even more complicated, Middle-earth has things like potatoes and tobacco which weren't even introduced to Europe until AFTER the Middle Ages.

People also seem to have this view of the Middle Ages as just a period of time with knights and castles, when in reality the Middle Ages spanned 1,000 years and saw an enormous amount of change over the course of the era. In Peter Jackson's RotK, Minas Tirith has counterweight trebuchets which were invented in the late medieval period, but agriculturally Middle-earth seems to be no where near where Europe was by this period. Even plate armor, which seems to be ubiquitous in these types of fantasy settings, wasn't developed until the final decades of the Late Middle Ages and was more of a Renaissance thing.

There's also the matter of travel and trade. A lot of people in this thread seem to view Middle-earth as a place with little of both, leading to fairly isolated groups of people. If that were true then it's even farther removed from the Middle Ages which only continued building on the foundation of connectivity that the Roman Empire had introduced to the continent prior to the Middle Ages.

So no, there is no comparable period of human history where Middle-earth is set. That was by the design of the author, and any attempt to suggest otherwise is simply wrong, and based on an incredibly simplistic idea of what the medieval period actually was.

Yet the anachronisms are generally within reason and applied to a setting where melee combat was how warfare was fought, and there was no advanced technology as far as what could be considered modern. The range of technology is loose enough to be based on a point in time before gunpowder was widely used for hand-weapons. The anachronisms don't make the setting completely unfamiliar to history.

Like even the Warhammer fantasy setting is completely anachronistic and mixes Aztec culture with Teutonic Knights and Vikings and gunpowder-using Riflemen. Even Dwarves employ 'Tanks', but the setting wouldn't be comparable to say 1920's warfare just because they have access to tanks. It's just how the setting presents itself.

With Middle Earth, the anachronisms are less egregious.

[Orby]

I think the issue here is that too many people in this thread (and just in general I guess) are terribly uneducated when it comes to this type of history. I'm no expert on the matter either, but even the most rudimentary amount of research debunks the idea of Middle-earth being medieval.

You mention horses, swords, and catapults as apparent indications of a certain time period when horses were domesticated in Europe about 5,000 years before the Middle Ages, and iron swords and catapults were invented hundreds of years before that period as well. To make things even more complicated, Middle-earth has things like potatoes and tobacco which weren't even introduced to Europe until AFTER the Middle Ages.

People also seem to have this view of the Middle Ages as just a period of time with knights and castles, when in reality the Middle Ages spanned 1,000 years and saw an enormous amount of change over the course of the era. In Peter Jackson's RotK, Minas Tirith has counterweight trebuchets which were invented in the late medieval period, but agriculturally Middle-earth seems to be no where near where Europe was by this period. Even plate armor, which seems to be ubiquitous in these types of fantasy settings, wasn't developed until the final decades of the Late Middle Ages and was more of a Renaissance thing.

There's also the matter of travel and trade. A lot of people in this thread seem to view Middle-earth as a place with little of both, leading to fairly isolated groups of people. If that were true then it's even farther removed from the Middle Ages which only continued building on the foundation of connectivity that the Roman Empire had introduced to the continent prior to the Middle Ages.

So no, there is no comparable period of human history where Middle-earth is set. That was by the design of the author, and any attempt to suggest otherwise is simply wrong, and based on an incredibly simplistic idea of what the medieval period actually was.

Well as I said a few pages back the Númenóreans of Gondor were partly inspired by Egyptians (as one of many inspirations) and their religion was Hebrew inspired. I do get that yes there are some Anglo-Saxon inspirations draw into Middle Earth but there is so much more people are missing. I do wonder how many of those offended have even read Tolkien, I am not a Tolkien buff either, but all I had to do is do some five minute research to find these answers lol

To the people critizing Galadriel for single handed taking down a troll, need I remind you that Legolas defied the laws of gravity to take down a giant elephant in the Battle of the Pelennor Fields... If a women did that holy shit you'd all lose your shit. xD

[Biomega]

If a young and relatively inexperienced Galadriel

She is over TWO THOUSAND years old at this point of the show. That's what I meant when I criticized the actress - she makes Galadriel seem like a brat, when she really, really IS NOT.

We don't know when Finrod died in the show, but in the books, his death was also a good ONE THOUSAND years ago. So she's really been doing this for... quite a while.

Say Galadriel and her elves found Sauron, somehow fought him to a standstill or otherwise survived / escaped. Then what? They would spend several more months returning to the other Elves, and then when they finally returned and persuaded the Elf-lords to believe their story and act, no easy feat in itself, Gil-galad would then spend several more months preparing an army.

And then they would spend ANOTHER several months going to the Arctic with that army, hoping against hope that Sauron and all his minions patiently stayed put wherever they were and didn't simply seek out a new hiding place, and that they might possibly win against him despite giving him lots of time to prepare his own forces? Either way, it seems like a really fragile, confusing and short-sighted plan with much room for failure and disaster.

That's actually not unrealistic at all. That's how warfare worked back in the day.

People underestimate the sheer problem of communication - just getting messages across took forever, let alone engage in preparations. Not to mention the logistics of mobilization etc. that could take enormous lengths of time. Military campaigns could take YEARS just to get off the ground, and DECADES to finish.

And Galadriel's main concern is primarily to prove that Sauron is actually still there and still a threat. Locating him once you've gotten an army together is a different matter, which would likely have involved a lot more effort, too, once the main forces of the elves were on board. The only reason Sauron can "hide" as he does is that barely anyone is looking; most of the elves at this point consider him a past threat, and they maintain but a token guard at best (and mostly for his former followers, like humans, not for Sauron himself). If Galadriel came to Gil-galad with proof that Sauron was massing an army, things would be VERY different. There'd be a massive mobilization effort from the elves, scouts would be sent to all corners of the world, and strategies employed to corner the enemy.

That's how warfare works. First you have to prove there's a threat. Then find that threat. THEN make plans on how to defeat it. You don't go into step 1 knowing all the details of step 3. You couldn't possibly. There's nothing illogical and unrealistic about this in principle. The only thing you can argue is that Galadriel is taking things too far with her zeal - but not that she doesn't just have 50,000 soldiers standing by at all times, because no one would in that situation.

[Xath]

Not really. Either he has recent white ancestry of it'd an unusual genetic coincidence or Illuvatar decided the correct hröa for this particular fëa should be lighter skinned.

Historical drama taking place in central africa before eu made inroads yes it's immersion breaking.

[rogoth]

She is over TWO THOUSAND years old at this point of the show. That's what I meant when I criticized the actress - she makes Galadriel seem like a brat, when she really, really IS NOT.

We don't know when Finrod died in the show, but in the books, his death was also a good ONE THOUSAND years ago. So she's really been doing this for... quite a while.


That's actually not unrealistic at all. That's how warfare worked back in the day.

People underestimate the sheer problem of communication - just getting messages across took forever, let alone engage in preparations. Not to mention the logistics of mobilization etc. that could take enormous lengths of time. Military campaigns could take YEARS just to get off the ground, and DECADES to finish.

And Galadriel's main concern is primarily to prove that Sauron is actually still there and still a threat. Locating him once you've gotten an army together is a different matter, which would likely have involved a lot more effort, too, once the main forces of the elves were on board. The only reason Sauron can "hide" as he does is that barely anyone is looking; most of the elves at this point consider him a past threat, and they maintain but a token guard at best (and mostly for his former followers, like humans, not for Sauron himself). If Galadriel came to Gil-galad with proof that Sauron was massing an army, things would be VERY different. There'd be a massive mobilization effort from the elves, scouts would be sent to all corners of the world, and strategies employed to corner the enemy.

That's how warfare works. First you have to prove there's a threat. Then find that threat. THEN make plans on how to defeat it. You don't go into step 1 knowing all the details of step 3. You couldn't possibly. There's nothing illogical and unrealistic about this in principle. The only thing you can argue is that Galadriel is taking things too far with her zeal - but not that she doesn't just have 50,000 soldiers standing by at all times, because no one would in that situation.

no she's not, because the show doesn't provide any frame of reference for time, furthermore, Galadriel in this shit heap is shown to have first hand knowledge of things that she couldn't possibly have seen yet here we are, we don't know if what's being shown is from the early second age post the age of the stars and entering into the age where time is measured as 'years of the sun', because if these amateur showrunners and writers actually gave firm timeframe references it would destroy everything they have done, so they can't afford to do that.

[Dhrizzle]

Historical drama taking place in central africa before eu made inroads yes it's immersion breaking.

Ah yeah, if you ramp up degrees of specificity so it has nothing to do with this series it might be jarring.

[Triceron]

To the people critizing Galadriel for single handed taking down a troll, need I remind you that Legolas defied the laws of gravity to take down a giant elephant in the Battle of the Pelennor Fields... If a women did that holy shit you'd all lose your shit. xD

Well, that is also ignoring the fact that Legolas at that point was established as a likeable character and this feat merely roots his accomplishments, while also adding brevity with a comedic hook at the end.

But hey if you wanna make this about boobs then sure.

[Kumorii]

To the people critizing Galadriel for single handed taking down a troll, need I remind you that Legolas defied the laws of gravity to take down a giant elephant in the Battle of the Pelennor Fields... If a women did that holy shit you'd all lose your shit. xD

Can't say I've heard any praise of the elephant scene, nor the shield sliding scenes. Most ridicule them.

[Orby]

Well, that is also ignoring the fact that Legolas at that point was established as a likeable character and this feat merely roots his accomplishments, while also adding brevity with a comedic hook at the end.

But hey if you wanna make this about boobs then sure.

So you can only bring down giant beasts if you're likable... Gotta add that to me writing 101.

Also before you say I am defending the Galadriel character, I also think she is the worst part of the series, I am not entirely into her arc or the direction of her acting.

[OwenBurton]

So you can only bring down giant beasts if you're likable... Gotta add that to me writing 101.

Also before you say I am defending the Galadriel character, I also think she is the worst part of the series, I am not entirely into her arc or the direction of her acting.

I think Clark should have been kept as a human supporting character, perhaps even the main female human protagonist, but someone else was better for the role of Galadriel. I don't really dislike her specifically, her acting and portrayal just seems somehow off and out of sync and almost forced in some ways. I think it is sad that people attack her (there was a video saying that she needed therapy after the backlash), but when you are trying to be the main character in a $250 million production by a major company, that role does come with very high expectations and qualifications.

I'm not sure who, perhaps that blond British actress from The Great Gatsby? Again, I liked Arwen and Tauriel and their actresses immensely, they both seemed uniquely elven and realistic in a way that this young Galadriel isn't, really immersing you in an otherworldly setting with their performance and dialogue and interactions with fellow characters. I think the Eowyn actress, were she 20 years younger, could have made a very fine young Galadriel!

[Gumble]

So you can only bring down giant beasts if you're likable... Gotta add that to me writing 101.

Not directed at you, but just an appropriate line to toss it in on.....



For everyone here who loves it so much, I give you something to aim your vitriol at:





LOTR should have thrown a few of them into it....

[Biomega]

I think it is sad that people attack her (there was a video saying that she needed therapy after the backlash), but when you are trying to be the main character in a $250 million production by a major company, that role does come with very high expectations and qualifications.

Personal attacks are, of course, never okay. But the actress isn't the only one to blame. It's the job of the directors and producers, too, to make sure that this doesn't happen. You can't play that character like you would a random human character in some regular drama show. That's just not how it works. If you can't handle the kind of emotional complexity that comes with playing an elf who only LOOKS young but really very much isn't, then you shouldn't be picked to portray one. I'm not saying e.g. Arondir is done perfectly, but in that respect at least the actor does a far better job at it than Galadriel's actress does with her character.

Part of the problem is of course that actors are trained in a certain way, and that way is really focused on human characters. Playing non-humans is challenging; WRITING them is challenging, too, if you don't want to fall into overdrawn stereotypes or the whole "human, but with different ears" thing that persistently haunts genres like SF and Fantasy.

[Orby]

I think Clark should have been kept as a human supporting character, perhaps even the main female human protagonist, but someone else was better for the role of Galadriel. I don't really dislike her specifically, her acting and portrayal just seems somehow off and out of sync and almost forced in some ways. I think it is sad that people attack her (there was a video saying that she needed therapy after the backlash), but when you are trying to be the main character in a $250 million production by a major company, that role does come with very high expectations and qualifications.

I'm not sure who, perhaps that blond British actress from The Great Gatsby? Again, I liked Arwen and Tauriel and their actresses immensely, they both seemed uniquely elven and realistic in a way that this young Galadriel isn't, really immersing you in an otherworldly setting with their performance and dialogue and interactions with fellow characters. I think the Eowyn actress, were she 20 years younger, could have made a very fine young Galadriel!

I am not even sure its fair for me to say she is a good Galadriel, she has moments but I think that's more down to the stuff going on around her, and camera shots. Also it may be my more familiarity with the movies over the books, but she looks way too human. Personally I would have been totally fine if the role of Galadriel wasnt even Galadriel but an entirely new character.

and as much as I think the show so far is... fine... I honest feel they should have went the Shadow of Mordor route and just bring us new characters in a second age setting with maybe some cameos thrown in.

For everyone here who loves it so much, I give you something to aim your vitriol at:

You assume I 'loved' the show. That's cute. I got lots of complaints about the show, I thought the show was decent at best. I Just think most of the complaints about the show are unwarranted and dumb. I am yet to be wowed. By the end of the season I could hate the show, who knows. The biggest praise I have for the show is the musical score and the costume design for the orcs

This forum tends to be very hyperbolic, like the show can either only be good or bad and never in-between. Thankfully I am the in-between. (which feels like the Last Jedi all over again ugh)