1. #3961
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    ...I mean, do you remember the hatred the new He-Man got on this subforum? For deviating from that He-Man formula?
    Well, here lies in the conundrum - the show isn't even marketted as a 'He-Man' series. It's a 'MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE' series, and the creators misled people into thinking it's going to be about He-Man, when it ended up having very little to do with him.

    It has nothing to do with 'He-Man formula', it has to do with intentionally misleading the core audience and fanbase of the property and literally bait-and-switching what they ended up with.

    I'm a huge fan of the 80's franchise. It's unabashedly a simple power fantasy with He-man being the main feature of the series. How that translates to a modern continuation that kills off the main character and has him out of the picture for most of the series is something I'll never understand. I enjoyed what I saw of MOTU:Revelations, but it's not a He-Man series. It's something else completely different. And if the creators were intentionally trying to appeal to He-Man fans and telling them this is the He-Man show they remembered and want, then they deserve the shit they got when they presented a show that was nothing like the original show.

    Rinse and repeat with Rings of Power doing the exact same bullshit PR.

    Why are these one-note, flat character "badasses kicking ass, bent on revenge" widely loved, but when a LOTR character does it 1) in the first episode of what is planned to be a multi-season show, 2) with an endpoint we've already seen in LOTR, it's suddenly hated?
    ^ I explain above in my response to Lorgar.

    Most of those 'one-note flat character badass' movies still manage to establish something relatable about the main character. As shallow as most Schwarzenegger movies may be, his movies still tend to make his characters likeable or relatable with something that humanizes them. Either being a family man, or having a strong sense of duty, or merely being nice to an old lady. Even the characters he plays that are irrationally bent on revenge somehow have more of a relatable backstory to them than what we got in Rings of Power. It's a very simple premise that isn't hard to achieve. So by establishing Galadriel as a commander who is irrational and unsympathetic to the needs of her own troops, it seems that RoP writers intentionally wrote the show this way to.... subvert expectations. And I think this bites them in the ass, because right now she isn't anywhere close to being a character I care about in the series so far. And I think there are plenty of other people who feel the same way.

  2. #3962
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    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.
    What does being "likeable" have to do with physics?

    Also, how do you qualify "likeable"... because that seems like a very subjective thing.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  3. #3963
    The Insane Syegfryed's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    19,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    I'd be curious to see whether the problem is actually the STORY behind Galadriel being a badass warrior out for revenge, or whether it's the EXECUTION of that character by the actress and the dialogue.
    100% its the last, the execution

    Still though, the story is also a lot iffy, cause so many things changed, because "yes", like she is not married anymore, neither have a daughter, yada yada. I think they could have made a way better job in telling and showing an elf warrior

    Granted, it's been 2 episodes. Maybe she'll turn it around. Maybe she'll grow into the role more as time goes by (though I have no idea about the actual production chronology). Maybe the writing will pick up and the dialogue will leave cringe territory. I'm not hopeful, though. I think that getting a character like Galadriel so wrong demonstrates either an unwillingness or an inability to engage with the complexities of the role; neither is acceptable for a AAA production more expensive than pretty much any show in history.
    On that note, i think i only picked this after seeing a review, the map they use to find the fortress, seems like its not from middle-earth, and the writing on it is not even elvish.

    They are fighting holding their sword in the forearm, and i was like "why? just to look good?"

    The costumes also show lack of care to be more about being flashy and pretty, some armors go way high up your neck that you would prob die if you use one in real battle.

    All of those are for sure nittpicking on my part, but damn, it does not feel right somehow.

  4. #3964
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    What does being "likeable" have to do with physics?
    What does anything I said have to do with physics? It wasn't even part of Orby's point.

    "If a women did that holy shit you'd all lose your shit" - how exactly do you think that relates to physics?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    100% its the last, the execution

    Still though, the story is also a lot iffy, cause so many things changed, because "yes", like she is not married anymore, neither have a daughter, yada yada. I think they could have made a way better job in telling and showing an elf warrior
    To be very honest, they should have just made a new character.

    They already have brand new characters like Arondir, is there any reason this new warrior Elf commander lady has to be Galadriel and not a new character? It wouldn't redeem any of the plot issues, but at least it would create a real blank slate without the obvious understanding that no matter what happens in this story, there are no stakes that involve her life being at risk because they don't actually the liscence to kill her off.

    Can't really say I had any feeling of tension at all for her in the whole water scene, knowing exactly who she is.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2022-09-07 at 02:30 AM.

  5. #3965
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    is there any reason this new warrior Elf commander lady has to be Galadriel and not a new character?
    Name recognition value.

    They had to pick a "big name" from the lore to pin things on. There really aren't too many other viable choices.

  6. #3966
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    What does anything I said have to do with physics? It wasn't even part of Orby's point.

    "If a women did that holy shit you'd all lose your shit" - how exactly do you think that relates to physics?
    Orby specifically brought up the laws of gravity that Legolas completely ignored.

    need I remind you that Legolas defied the laws of gravity to take down a giant elephant in the Battle of the Pelennor Fields.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  7. #3967
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    Orby specifically brought up the laws of gravity that Legolas completely ignored.
    And followed up with:

    "If a women did that holy shit you'd all lose your shit"

    How exactly do you think that relates to physics?

  8. #3968
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    And followed up with:

    "If a women did that holy shit you'd all lose your shit"

    How exactly do you think that relates to physics?
    Do I really need to explain how gravity relates to physics?

    You don't just get to take half of what Orby said and present it as the entire argument.
    Last edited by Evil Midnight Bomber; 2022-09-07 at 03:56 AM.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  9. #3969
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    ...I mean, do you remember the hatred the new He-Man got on this subforum? For deviating from that He-Man formula?

    Why are these one-note, flat character "badasses kicking ass, bent on revenge" widely loved, but when a LOTR character does it 1) in the first episode of what is planned to be a multi-season show, 2) with an endpoint we've already seen in LOTR, it's suddenly hated?

    Imagine if GoW (2018) came out first, in the GoW series. Maybe even its upcoming sequel as well. And then, to "fill in the gaps" of this character who we meet way late in his life, someone makes the first trilogy. Are you putting the game down because of the story because Kratos is a revenge-driven madman power fantasy, and "not the Kratos you know"?

    The point of Galadriel in RoP is, if executed properly, supposed to invoke in viewers the excitement of watching her grow from what she is in episode 1, to what we see in LOTR. Now maybe that's being done clumsily or being acted poorly, but that doesn't invalidate the idea of the story beats themselves.

    - - - Updated - - -

    ETA: I'm going to offer an example of a TV show I personally love: LOST, a show that told most of its story in character flashbacks juxtaposed with what was happening presently.

    In the pilot, you have all these flawed characters, many of whom you hate, others who you don't understand, others you think might be hiding something, and much of the characters can be frustrating in that regard. Some of the most hated characters at the beginning of the show, like Sawyer and Jin, were absolutely beloved by the endpoint. Because as they went, they filled in what made these characters who they were when they crashed on this deserted island. Even supreme bitches like Shannon and Ana Lucia become compelling, much liked characters, as the story was revealed.

    But the show also did the opposite, too. The two initial heroes of the story, Jack and John Locke, are slowly given more depth from their hero-doctor and knife-hurling boar hunter personas in the initial episodes. They're shown to be flawed, and stubborn, and unable to let go of things in their flashbacks. And that depth, while perhaps making them less likeable, reinforces who they are as leaders of the survivors of Oceanic 815.

    RoP is doing the Jack/John thing - the deconstruction of the obvious hero. It's much harder than the redemption of the villainous, because we want to believe people are better than they act, and we don't want to see our authority figures besmirched. LOST did it masterfully, imo. Whether RoP does, is obviously still to be seen.
    Now just go with me here but maybe just maybe people aren't wanting the same thing out of an LoTR property as they want out of a show that was created to sell toys. One of them is expected to be mindless action.

  10. #3970
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    Do I really need to explain how gravity relates to physics?

    You don't just get to take half of what Orby said and present it as the entire argument.
    His point wasn't about physics, lol

    He was making a point of Legolas pulling off an impossible feat and making a statement that if a female character were to do the same people would complain about it.

    And here you are 'sperging over 'physics' as if it was the ever the context of the message lol.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2022-09-07 at 04:12 AM.

  11. #3971
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    His point wasn't about physics, lol

    He was making a point of Legolas pulling off an impossible feat and making a statement that if a female character were to do the same people would complain about it.

    And here you are 'sperging over 'physics' as if it was the ever the context of the message lol.
    I was using his example to ask you why "Likeability" factors into your willingness to accept a character doing the impossible. His example involved physics. Because defying gravity is against the laws of physics. Physics was in the context, bruh.

    Also I was asking how you actually measure "Likeability" as an objective fact.

    You haven't answered either question, btw, just tried to redirect.

    And really? "'sperging over"... c'mon man....be better.
    Last edited by Evil Midnight Bomber; 2022-09-07 at 04:29 AM.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  12. #3972
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    I was using his example to ask you why "Likeability" factors into your willingness to accept a character doing the impossible. His example involved physics. Because defying gravity is against the laws of physics. Physics was in the context, bruh.
    ---

    And really? "'sperging over"... c'mon man....be better.
    You tried reading what you actually write?

    There's generally a higher threshold for 'bullshit' if it's done by a fan favourite character for comedic relief. If the character isn't well liked, then it could rub off as being confusing or annoying (Jar Jar's antics taking down droid army, or kid Anakin taking out a starport)

    Legolas had 2 previous movies to establish what he is capable of. Kid Anakin didn't have that luxury. Neither does Galadriel IMO. It's the difference between accepting that a character that can do cool things does a cooler thing and just shaking your head asking what the hell the writers are thinking when a completely new character with no established feats manages to pull of the same kind of stunt effortlessly.

    Legolas gets a pass because he was already established doing these kind of crazy feats, and the elephant thing was the pinnacle. And since he was already a fan favourite character who pulled crazy stunts, it worked as an over-the-top crowd-pleaser moment as opposed to simply being a Jackie Chan 'What The?' meme moment.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2022-09-07 at 05:04 AM.

  13. #3973
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    You tried reading what you actually write?
    Have you tried reading what I actually wrote? Because I've asked the questions now twice...and you are still deflecting. It's getting sad at this point. You literally edited out me calling you out on not answering my questions so you wouldn't have to answer them and continue to push an attack on me "sperging".

    One more time:

    How does "likeability" factor into you ability to believe whether or not a character can do "impossible" (physics defying) shit

    And

    How do you measure "Likeability" as an objective value?

    And let's not pretend that the oliphaunt was the first time Legolas pulled some ridiculous shit

    Last edited by Evil Midnight Bomber; 2022-09-07 at 05:07 AM.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  14. #3974
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post

    One more time:

    How does "likeability" factor into you ability to believe whether or not a character can do "impossible" (physics defying) shit

    And

    How do you measure "Likeability" as an objective value?

    And let's not pretend that the oliphaunt was the first time Legolas pulled some ridiculous shit
    Likeability wasn't the main point. Familiarity is

    Establishing a character is the core part of setting the audiences expectations, and in turn, suspension of disbelief. Suspension of disbelief is relative to how much we can expect a character to perform a certain feat, as impossible as it may seem, regardless of 'physics'. For example, establishing a character known to be 'very lucky' would allow for a higher suspension of disbelief when they pull off seemingly impossible feats; say someone like Mr. Magoo.

    Familiarity is still subjective, but would be as close as you could get to an 'objective' means of establishing a difference between the expectations and suspension of disbelief of a new character compared to one that is well known. How much you know of a character and their capabilities influences how you perceive their actions. And in my original reply, I said 'Legolas was already established as a likeable character' meaning not only are we familiar with him and his 'impossible' feats, but that people generally enjoyed his character and said feats lean towards being favourable rather than confusing or annoying.

    Make sense?


    Familiarity can make a big difference in expectations. There is a bigger threshold for bullshit for a familiar and well liked character as opposed to some newcomer doing the same when no one expects them to be able to. Not always a rule, but as a general comparison, like when we're talking about LOTR Legolas and RoP Galadriel. The entire oliphaunt scene was crazy and over the top, but everything he did was built off of all his pre-established feats culminating into this one epic scene. The 'Go for the weak spot' happened in the first movie's Troll fight. His climbing and acrobatics established with him being able to mount a horse on full gallop with a single bound. His safe dismount off the oliphaunt's trunk is a more elaborate version of the shield surfing. So even if this one scene was crazy, people can still brush it off as a 'Legolas' thing.

    It has very little to do with gender. It doesn't even have anything directly to do with likeability. It has much more to do with whether we expect the character to be capable of it or not, and how well-accepted the suspension of disbelief would be.

    And this has literally nothing to do with 'physics', lol.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2022-09-07 at 06:28 AM.

  15. #3975
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Likeability wasn't the main point. Familiarity is
    Sure, Likeability wasn't the main point. Which is why you used the word.

    Establishing a character is the core part of setting the audiences expectations, and in turn, suspension of disbelief. Suspension of disbelief is relative to how much we can expect a character to perform a certain feat, as impossible as it may seem, regardless of 'physics'. For example, establishing a character known to be 'very lucky' would allow for a higher suspension of disbelief when they pull off seemingly impossible feats; say someone like Mr. Magoo.
    Was your suspension of disbelief suspended when Legolas was surfing on a shield?

    Familiarity is still subjective, but would be as close as you could get to an 'objective' means of establishing a difference between the expectations and suspension of disbelief of a new character compared to one that is well known. How much you know of a character and their capabilities influences how you perceive their actions. And in my original reply, I said 'Legolas was already established as a likeable character' meaning not only are we familiar with him and his 'impossible' feats,
    Legolas wasn't "established" as being able to surf down a flight of stairs on a shield until he did so. It wasn't "earned".

    but that people generally enjoyed his character and said feats lean towards being favourable rather than confusing or annoying.
    That's just another way of saying "likeability"

    Make sense?
    No.


    Familiarity can make a big difference in expectations. There is a bigger threshold for bullshit for a familiar and well liked character as opposed to some newcomer doing the same when no one expects them to be able to. Not always a rule, but as a general comparison, like when we're talking about LOTR Legolas and RoP Galadriel. The entire oliphaunt scene was crazy and over the top, but everything he did was built off of all his pre-established feats culminating into this one epic scene. The 'Go for the weak spot' happened in the first movie's Troll fight. His climbing and acrobatics established with him being able to mount a horse on full gallop with a single bound. His safe dismount off the oliphaunt's trunk is a more elaborate version of the shield surfing. So even if this one scene was crazy, people can still brush it off as a 'Legolas' thing.
    You keep on using likeability as a factor...even if you're chhanging tthe actual word choices.

    How much you like a character or how familiar you are with a character has literally nothing to do with their capabilities.

    There was absolutely nothing Legolas did that made the Shield surfing believable...I don't care how much of a mancrush you have on him.

    It has very little to do with gender. It doesn't even have anything directly to do with likeability. It has much more to do with whether we expect the character to be capable of it or not, and how well-accepted the suspension of disbelief would be.
    Then stop using likeability. And again, capability has nothing to do with likeability or familiarity. If you can accept that Legolas can do all those patently absurd things...then thhere is no reason to accept that Galadriel might also be able to do some pretty impressive things. And Galadriel killing the snow Troll isn't anywhere near on the scale of ridiculous impossibility that you accept from Legolas because you like him more.

    And this has literally nothing to do with 'physics', lol.
    Oh jesus. I really do have to explain how defying gravity goes against the laws of physics.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  16. #3976
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    Sure, Likeability wasn't the main point. Which is why you used the word.
    If you understood the context you would know it wasn't.

    Was your suspension of disbelief suspended when Legolas was surfing on a shield?

    Legolas wasn't "established" as being able to surf down a flight of stairs on a shield until he did so. It wasn't "earned".
    Neither is Galadriel taking down a snow troll by herself. It was not earned at all, and it felt jarring and out of place

    And yes, I'd say the surfing was quite ridiculous and out of place because it was not established. Yet it became a strong establishing point for what was to come with the 3rd film and the elephant scene. Expectations were tempered by the inclusion of this scene. The level of his accomplishments were built up from first film to what we have now.

    I'd equate this to how Star Wars has portrayed Obi-wan through the ages, and giving him stronger Force powers in each subsequent Star Wars movie even if they're completely out of order. The first time we see him he's merely using mind tricks. In the prequels, he's using force powers extensively. And now in the streaming series he's capable of lifting and throwing dozens of large boulders at a time. His feats get more 'ridiculous', yet expectations still remain relatively tempered because it's Obi-wan we're talking about.

    No.
    Not surprising that you don't understand basic concepts even when explained to you.

    Then stop using likeability.
    Does it bug you? If so I might use it more in even more places that don't make sense to you.

    And Galadriel killing the snow Troll isn't anywhere near on the scale of ridiculous impossibility that you accept from Legolas because you like him more.
    Doesn't have to be near on the scale of whatever you think is ridiculous, it still was and the whole fight quite jarring and unexpected. It wasn't built up or implied that she would have this ability at all, and merely being a commander of a company of Elves that were shown to be utterly demolished by the troll certainly gave no hints to her own ability.

    But hey, if you have a higher tolerance for ridiculous shit that newly established characters can do, by all means all the power to you.

    Oh jesus. I really do have to explain how defying gravity goes against the laws of physics.
    The real question is how likeable Legolas needs to be in order to allow him to fly.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2022-09-07 at 08:46 AM.

  17. #3977
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    If you understood the context you would know it wasn't.
    I understand the context just fine.

    Yet Galadriel taking down a snow troll by herself somehow is?
    I didn't say that. Just that it isn't less believable than anything Legolas did.

    And yes, I'd say the surfing was equally quite because it was not established. Yet it was a strong establishing point for what was to come with the 3rd film and the elephant scene. Expectations were tempered by the inclusion of this scene.
    It was ridiculous when he surfed on the shield. It was more ridiculous with the Oliphaunt. It's not even just about the dismount. The whole scene is preposterous.

    I'd equate this to how Star Wars has portrayed Obi-wan through the ages, and giving him stronger Force powers in each subsequent Star Wars movie even if they're completely out of order. The first time we see him he's merely using mind tricks. In the prequels, he's using force powers extensively. And now in the streaming series he's capable of lifting and throwing dozens of large boulders at a time. His feats get more 'ridiculous', yet expectations still remain relatively tempered because it's Obi-wan we're talking about.
    And here we are talking about Galadriel.

    Not surprising that you don't understand basic concepts even when explained to you.
    The problem with your "basic concept" is that it's basic nonsense.

    Does it bug you? If so I might use it more in even more places that don't make sense to you.
    If you're trying to say it's not about "likeability" you should stop using likeability in your arguments. If you want to keep using it, that's up to you...but it really goes against your stated purpose.

    Doesn't have to be near on the scale of whatever you think is ridiculous, it still was and the whole fight quite jarring and unexpected. It wasn't built up or implied that she would have this ability at all, and merely being a commander of a company of Elves that were shown to be utterly demolished by the troll certainly gave no hints to her own ability.
    Again, I'm not saying what she did was entirely believable...just that it isn't any less believable than anything Legolas did.

    But hey, if you have a higher tolerance for ridiculous shit that newly established characters can do, by all means all the power to you.
    Galadriel isn't a "newly established character".
    Last edited by Evil Midnight Bomber; 2022-09-07 at 08:58 AM.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  18. #3978
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    I didn't say that. Just that it isn't less believable than anything Legolas did.
    I didn't say it was less believable either, I said there's a difference between an established character doing it for the sake of being a fun moment with a comedic relief punchline at the end, and say literally establishing a new character by having them single-handedly defeat a creature that was demolishing everyone else in her party. They're both unbelievable moments, but it's not the unbelievability that people are complaining about, rather it's the lack of expectation for such a character to be acting in this way and having the moment be utterly jarring, and practically pointless to the overall narrative.

    The Mumak scene was played off for fun and laughs. The snow troll scene was meant to show off how badass Galadriel is, but it ends up being a confusing mess because it also implies a massive skill gap between her and her troops, and makes her character even less relatable for it.

    It was ridiculous when he surfed on the sielf. It was more ridiculous with the Oliphaunt. It's not even just about the dismount. The whole scene is preposterous.
    It was intentionally preposterous, that is the whole point of the scene. It was the punchline to a very long set up over the course of 3 movies.

    The whole point of that bit in the narrative isn't meant to be taken seriously like say Luke taking down an AT-AT by himself. It was completely played out as an over the top and fun moment that highlight's all of Legolas' capabilities. The scene itself doesn't have much lasting impact on the rest of the narrative or to the battle overall. They could literally cut the scene and nothing really changes from the movie.

    With Galadriel, they established her as being an irrational commander who doesn't have the wellbeing of her troops in mind, and taking down the snow troll single-handedly has pretty big ramifications to the overall narrative structure. It implies her company is weak-as-shit and narratively they're only there to hold her back. This makes the ultimatum very confusing because if she could take down the snow troll by herself then it implies to the audience that she doesn't even need them at all. There are so many problems with this very scene that aren't just about her being able to do some incredible feat that is seemingly unbelievable. That isn't even the point of complaint for me.

    The whole scene comes at the cost of destabilizing our understanding of her character and making her even less relatable as a result. And overall, it doesn't even paint a good picture of why she isn't literally off doing this alone sooner, since that's exactly what she does by the end of the episode anyways. This one scene makes it pretty clear that her company has done literally nothing but hold her back.

    This is the opposite of how the Cave Troll scene panned out in LOTR, where even though Legolas may have gotten the Last Hit in, it was a concerted effort by the entire group. It illustrated that the team needed each other to get through a tough situation. In Rings of Power, the Snow Troll scene has the complete opposite effect, where Galadriel is shown to be so much more capable than her compatriots that it doesn't even make sense why she would need them. We're given literally no scenes where they contribute anything of significance to her mission.

    Galadriel isn't a "newly established character".
    In the context of Rings of Power, she absolutely is. This isn't the Galadriel 'from the books'. She is Galadriel as Rings of Power introduces her to be. Otherwise, the character we should be addressing is Artanis, the name she had before Celeborn gifted the name Galadriel (Altariel) to her.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2022-09-07 at 09:27 AM.

  19. #3979
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post

    In the context of Rings of Power, she absolutely is. This isn't the Galadriel 'from the books'. She is Galadriel as Rings of Power introduces her to be. Otherwise, the character we should be addressing is Artanis, the name she had before Celeborn gifted the name Galadriel (Altariel) to her.
    She's still Galadriel...a different version of Galadriel perhaps...but it's not some completely new character.
    “The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.

  20. #3980
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Midnight Bomber View Post
    She's still Galadriel...a different version of Galadriel perhaps...but it's not some completely new character.
    I mean that's just splitting hairs.

    As an adaptation, this series doesn't even have connectivity to the Peter Jackson films (outside of creature designs) and is not canonical to the books by any means.

    She is a absolutely a different character. She is Amazon's Ring's of Power Galadriel, and this version of her character does not exist in anywhere outside of this show. They can call her Galadriel, but she would never be the Galadriel of the books or of the PJ movies. At that point, what is the difference if she is just a different version or if she is a different character altogether? She would only be Galadriel in name, not in personality or characterization or even in following the canonical events of her history.

    This is a completely different character to what anyone knows and expects of 'Galadriel'. By all means, the only reason this character bears her name is probably because Jeff Bezos wanted a bankable name to headline the series. Otherwise, I don't see why this character couldn't have been completely new, like Arondir.

    They could have written in a proper Galadriel character as a supporting character, like Elrond's role in the series. I enjoy Elrond's story and character. At least he makes sense.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •