Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Biomega]

Giancarlo Esposito as Professor X in the MCU? Take my goddamn money already.

This is my new favorite thing.

Hot damn that would be awesome.

[downnola]

This is my new favorite thing.

Hot damn that would be awesome.

Right? Patrick Stewart was amazing as Professor X. I even liked James McAvoy as the younger version of him. But Giancarlo would absolutely nail that role.

[InfiniteCharger]

Trolls were never pinkish. They are generally green and blue - then they added a purple skin tone to make night elves come from them in a lore shift we would later see many of.

But they authored their lore, so they have every right to change it at any point. We know what destroying your consistency and changing your lore does though, even when you own it and have full rights to do so - it destroys its integrity and people are far less inclined to follow or buy your shit because it’s meaningless even in your own fanrasy world a few episodes or years down the line.

It’s different with Tolkein, this isn’t some obscure poorly written half realised world, every detail is meticulously placed - there are many gaps, but you should at least not change the ones there and certainly not so drastically as to basically be something else.

At least not if you want to capture and build on the 10s if not 100s of millions or more who have loved Tolkein’s work.

They loved Tolkein’s work, what arrogance to think you can change it and do better. They fell in love with Tolkein’s work, they want to see that or a faithful and truthful version not your substitute you think is superior because you are ticking the political and socio religious boxes of your day you think are great or you think everyone loves (which usually is just everyone in your bubble).

This is not to say the show doesn’t have merit. But if it is not Tolkein or at least faithful to it, why call it that?

Hollywood lot are truly in their own bubble totally out of touch with the very masses they are trying to make more billions out of - this approach may work for some franchises that don’t care about endless re-imaginings of their shallow bit part fiction.

You really shouldn’t be taking one of the most detailed fictional works in history, re writing your own version and expecting everyone who loved the original to love yours.

It may work for the Eternals or Wonder Woman, but Tolkein designed and imagined an entire world, not a super hero version of 21st century Earth.

People are bound to notice.

Don't disagree. You must not have seen most of that discussion.

[Triceron]

So any theories on Sauron's appearance?

Is he the Stranger? Adar? Halbrand?

I think Sauron is still gonna be a secret till later, and these are all just different characters. Lots of red herrings. I think Halbrand might end up being one of the 9 though, possibly even the Witch King of Angmar.

[Mace]

Putting aside cynical reasons like branding and name recognition value, we are ONLY ever talking about degrees of faithfulness in ANY adaptation.

You put it out there that "it isn't Tolkien" like that was some obvious, self-evident truth. But it's not. Nothing "is Tolkien" except things actually written by Tolkien. What you're talking about is a SUBJECTIVE standard that pretends to have gatekeeping powers, deciding what is and is not Tolkien based on some kind of hypothetical fandom and its acceptance or rejection of things.

But that's not how it works. There is no cohesion here, no consensus, no objective measuring of "Tolkien-ness". Self-proclaimed fans do not get to decide what does and does not qualify as "being Tolkien" for other people; they couldn't even all agree on it if you asked them. All you're doing is going from something very general like "the Jackson LotR films were generally well regarded by audiences" to "therefore that adaption 'is Tolkien'" without real justification, based solely on a notion of acceptance that you subscribe to purely for the reason that it coincides with your own preference.

Never mind the fact that plenty of "Tolkien fans" consider some of Jacksons alterations to the plot unacceptably "not Tolkien", it's not what YOU think and you can retreat into the power of a perceived majority, therefore YOUR position on it is legitimized and can be posted as truth.

And in much the same way, you feel you are now entitled to be the arbiter of "Tolkien-ness" for this show - and in much the same way, you actually don't have any more justification for that than you did for the films.

Don't misunderstand: I've been pretty clear about my own dislike for this show. I barely made it through Ep3 and it's unlikely I'll watch Ep4. The show doesn't work for me for all sorts of reasons. But it supposedly "not being Tolkien" isn't one of them, because that's not a reason - it's a smokescreen for arrogantly asserting that you have the power to arbitrate over a literary legacy, when you don't and nobody does. (Except for the Tolkien estate, and that's in legal terms not in terms of creative judgement.)

It's not Tolkein in the spirit of his writing - adaptations do change things, but they went way off into something else.


These aren't Tolkein's ethos, values, or foundation for the lord of the rings

And while some things were good, may were awful - the elves for example, were awful, they basically come off no different from men which is a far cry from how the Silmaralion or the novels actually frame them -


Look, I watched it, and as a generic fantasy , I enjoyed, as a Tolkein world - it is very disappointing in every area apart from the scenery visuals of the land or cities which looks awesome.


It felt like a cheap knock off of Jackson's movies in terms of acting, characterisation, costumes.

Finally only Galadriel (not very likeable), or the black elf (quite likeable) seem to actually feel like elves.

What comes off as elves, doesn't match the description in Tolkein's, the magic and the @other race feeling you got when the Fellowship reaches Rivendell in the movie, Arwen, Galadriel and Legolas - not to mention - they felt special - and noldor high elves are fighting a Troll, and they're just tossed around like men - nothing special. . I'm still waiting to see how incredible the Numenorans are - having a pretty city doesn't make you remarkable, it should enhance a remarkable not be the only thing remarkable about the people.

So far, they seem terrible, with no decent explanation why, sure the explanation will come, but i'm already very skeptical

[Dhrizzle]

But if it is not Tolkein or at least faithful to it, why call it that?

Because while it isn't faithful to the timeline Tolkien sketched for the Second Age it is very much set in Arda with the themes and nature of the world intact.

[Triceron]

It's not Tolkein in the psirit of his writing - adapataions do change things, but they went way off into something else.


These aren't Tolkein's ethos, values, or foundation for the lord of the rings

And while some things were good, may were awful - the elves for example, were awful, they basically come off no different from men which is af ar cary from how the Silmaralion or the novels actually frame them -

Best you just treat this as a standalone spinoff on the level of 'Shadows of Mordor/War'.

[bledgor]

So any theories on Sauron's appearance?

Is he the Stranger? Adar? Halbrand?

I think Sauron is still gonna be a secret till later, and these are all just different characters. Lots of red herrings. I think Halbrand might end up being one of the 9 though, possibly even the Witch King of Angmar.

99% certain that Halbrand is Sauron, they will try to bait others but heard strong rumors it is him.

[Dhrizzle]

Think the latest episode was a bit slow at times. I also feel like Galadriels character is different from what I'd expect of someone who has lived as long as she has. I do think there are some great characters though and I'm still interested.

Elves can remain "youthful" and impetuous much longer than humans. In one of his schemes for ageing Elves Galadriel would have stayed in her "Years of Youth" until around the start of the Third Age when she would enter her "Years of Maturity." At the time of LotR she would be about to enter her "Years of Fading," the Elven equivalent of old age.

[bledgor]

Elves can remain "youthful" and impetuous much longer than humans. In one of his schemes for ageing Elves Galadriel would have stayed in her "Years of Youth" until around the start of the Third Age when she would enter her "Years of Maturity." At the time of LotR she would be about to enter her "Years of Fading," the Elven equivalent of old age.

The thing is it doesn't work when she is older than basically every other elf alive/Gil-Galad who act infinitely more mature than her. Not to mention at this point she is roughly ~4000 years old. Also her fading isn't because of age but because of her choice to not take the ring/losing the power of the ring Nenya IIRC. Not to mention the 3rd age is only ~3000 years, which is a bit more than half her years of youth (which is in part why I believe that scheme was never made story).

[Mace]

Skin tone is hardly a big deal when they are changing the timeline. It is silly how much focus it gets when "big deal" changes actually exist and were done actually tell a different story rather then just for cosmetic reasons. Since it is just cosmetic it seems silly to even try to claim 10 to 100 million only love Tolkien's work because of skin tone and that not adhereing to such won't build on or capture their interest.

Yeh, it's very different - in so many ways, it doesn't feel Tolkein. Peter Jackson's movies were not a 100% faithful adaptation, but they go the essence and feel of the lord of the Rings far closer. It was believably middle earth not just in appearnace but in characterisation, etc - this one isn't ..


People are more hung up on skin colour which to be hones t is one of the least offending thing

- - - Updated - - -

So any theories on Sauron's appearance?

Is he the Stranger? Adar? Halbrand?

I think Sauron is still gonna be a secret till later, and these are all just different characters. Lots of red herrings. I think Halbrand might end up being one of the 9 though, possibly even the Witch King of Angmar.

I thought Halbrand was Sauron.

But they are making it hard to care. hehe

[Dhrizzle]

That's part of it, but i think its that combined with her story having to be alongside the stories of other people with shorter lifespans.

I mean, if episode 1 was all about Galadriel's earlier years, growing up with her brother, witnessing some of the horrific events of the trees and the war and stuff, and him dieing and her deciding to go be a badass, and then in episode 2 we get...well the current episode 1 more or less, I think people would be more on board with her.

The trouble is they weren't given carte blanche to use Firsf Age stuff, I suspect what we did see was allowed by the Tolkien Estate in a severely restricted way which is why we only got an allusion to the Kinslaying and a shadow of Morgoth with no Ungoliant killing the trees. Even Finrod's manner of death is only hinted at by some wounds on his body.

- - - Updated - - -

You forgot them also conveniently being found by Elendil/Numenoreans in the middle of the ocean, Elendil who is perhaps the only Numenorean that would be willing to take her back to Numenor and take them to meet the queen.

Almost like the powers that Galadriel said were at work were in fact at work. I wonder if they're forbidden from using the names Ulmo or Ossë by the Estate.

- - - Updated - - -

This is my new favorite thing.

Hot damn that would be awesome.

Right? Patrick Stewart was amazing as Professor X. I even liked James McAvoy as the younger version of him. But Giancarlo would absolutely nail that role.

Yeah, Professor X is more likely Gus Frink from Breaking Bad than a lot of people realise. All smiles for the public but he still keeps a murder-squad on standby and is using a school to turn children into soldiers for his paramilitary group.

- - - Updated - - -

So any theories on Sauron's appearance?

Is he the Stranger? Adar? Halbrand?

I think Sauron is still gonna be a secret till later, and these are all just different characters. Lots of red herrings. I think Halbrand might end up being one of the 9 though, possibly even the Witch King of Angmar.

I'm hoping all three.

- - - Updated - - -

The thing is it doesn't work when she is older than basically every other elf alive/Gil-Galad who act infinitely more mature than her. Not to mention at this point she is roughly ~4000 years old. Also her fading isn't because of age but because of her choice to not take the ring/losing the power of the ring Nenya IIRC. Not to mention the 3rd age is only ~3000 years, which is a bit more than half her years of youth (which is in part why I believe that scheme was never made story).

Fading is definitely a part of Elven ageing that Galadriel should be hitting around the time of the War of the Ring. Tolkien had a couple of schemes worked out for the times before, in one the "Years of Youth" lasted from the end of Growth to the start of Fading. In another he has the "Years of Maturity" which for Galadriel should start around the Third Age.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeh, it's very different - in so many ways, it doesn't feel Tolkein. Peter Jackson's movies were not a 100% faithful adaptation, but they go the essence and feel of the lord of the Rings far closer. It was believably middle earth not just in appearnace but in characterisation, etc - this one isn't ..

Jackson absolutely butchered some of the characters, just compare his version of Eowyn's fight against the Witch King with what Tolkien wrote, or the way the other Hobbits came to join Frodo before leaving the Shire.

[Sialina]

Are you under the impression that only white Americans consume movies, comics, and other forms of entertainment intended for American audiences?



Middle-Earth is not England.

And Wakanda isn't Africa.

No, I haven't read Rage of Dragons. I don't know enough about the story or the author's intent when writing the characters to have an informed opinion about it. I do see that you're attempting to catch me in a double standard, though. I'll save you the trouble and freely admit I have double standards when it comes to representation in American popular culture. Why? Because I find it irritating that people want to gatekeep non-white casting out of popular franchises based on spurious and disingenuous reasons. Do you live in a world where you only interact with white people, and is that something you seriously want to be reflected in the media you consume? Unless we're talking about casting someone like Mahershala Ali as Bill Clinton in a movie, I don't see why skin color should be a factor when casting for fantasy films. I'd use any excuse I could find to cast Danai Gurira, Thandiwe Newton, or Michael Mando in a movie where possible. They're amazing actors so give me more.

Idris Elba as James Bond? Sign me right up for that shit.
Giancarlo Esposito as Professor X in the MCU? Take my goddamn money already.

I'm not white, and not American, American movies are showed outside of America where compositions of people are completely different.
Idris Elba as James Bond 007? No thanks, Idris Elba as Darrington Steel 008? Very much yes please, Idris Elba is an amazing actor.

- - - Updated - - -

We're only talking about Black Panther because another poster asked if I would care if white actors were cast as Wakandans. If it's not extremely obvious how mind-blowingly stupid that comparison is then I don't know what more I can say on the subject. I'm certainly sick of talking about it, that I can tell you.

I guess this is that double standard of yours speaking.

[Biomega]

It's not Tolkein in the spirit of his writing

Says who? You?

That's my point.

These aren't Tolkein's ethos, values, or foundation for the lord of the rings

Prove it. And I mean PROVE, not just "this is why I personally think so". Because I wager that's all you can do - say that YOU don't consider this Tolkien. Which you're free to do. Just as others are free to consider it Tolkien.

The problem isn't that some people like the show and some don't. The problem is there's people pretending they're the gatekeepers of an authenticity standard that does not - and indeed cannot - exist.

There's nothing wrong with just saying "I don't like this". That's what I did. Trying to make it as though somehow your personal preference is more than just preference but is the expression of a grander standard of "Tolkien-ness" that you subscribe to but others violate is presumption of the highest order.

[rhorle]

Yeh, it's very different - in so many ways, it doesn't feel Tolkein. Peter Jackson's movies were not a 100% faithful adaptation, but they go the essence and feel of the lord of the Rings far closer. It was believably middle earth not just in appearnace but in characterisation, etc - this one isn't ..

Does that actually surprise you? Of course the feel and essence would be far closer when all Jackson had to do was copy existing work to film. Amazon has no existing story to port over but has to create a new one so it has no "familiarity" to prop it up.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

And Wakanda isn't Africa.

Um Wakanda is very much so suppose to be an uncolonized part of Africa.

[rhorle]

The trouble is they weren't given carte blanche to use Firsf Age stuff, I suspect what we did see was allowed by the Tolkien Estate in a severely restricted way

I believe it has been stated Amazon can only use the "Concerning Hobbits" and Appendixes because Embracer Group (they bought Middle-Earth Enterprises formerly owned by the Saul Zaentz company) owns the exclusive rights to a lot of names and other stuff. Embracer is involved in the production somehow so maybe future seasons will see more things used. Rights are crazy things and many authors/estates made silly deals.

[Xath]

Because while it isn't faithful to the timeline Tolkien sketched for the Second Age it is very much set in Arda with the themes and nature of the world intact.

It's not Tolkien it's using the name to sell half baked bad fanfiction see Rafe of Time. It's crap writing that couldn't carry an original property so they attached it to a famous one.

[Ragedaug]

This comparison makes no sense. The Blank Panther superhero was purposely created to add diversity to Marvel comics because at that time there were only white, American-centric characters in their stories. The skin color and background of Black Panther and the citizens of Wakanda are not minor details in the comic: it's the entire basis for the comic itself. So yeah, that's an extremely bad analogy.

So what I'm hearing you say is that Black Panther was created to bring diversity into an otherwise, non-diverse universe - and if so, I can accept that.

But if Marvel is able to correct the errors of their forefathers and make all of their other titles reflect the racial diversity of the U.S. (which I think they have), then it is now OK to make Wakanda diverse as well? Once they have reached equal racial representation in their other titles, should they make Wakanda diverse as well?

If I could add my 2 cents, it would be to add diversity where it makes sense, but don't shoe horn it where it doesn't. The recent Spider-Man movies and cartoons are a perfect example of this. Lots of racial diversity, none of it shoe-horned.

[Fencers]

Every single major film or series will have a diverse cast in leading roles. Regardless of the source material.

If that is an issue, go watch an anime about dating a schoolgirl.