Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Mace]

The way a book writer writes is also not always going to hold up for a film/tv series either, anyone expecting tolkien was expecting way too much because hes dead and its impossible to do a film/tv series the same as a book either.

Also the author has not explained every single detail about everything in the LOTR world so there is plenty that is up for changing to suit the requirements for a tv/film series.

The quote you posted has nothing to do with adapting to todays world views, its actually about showing what middle earth looked like in that age, nothing to do with racial casting or anything like that, if you find a suitable actor that can fill the role nothing else matters, especially since not everything is set in stone by tolkiens own words.

Absolutely write, Peter Jackson's movies , mostly greatly loved are a perfect example of this, many creative liberties can and often need to be taken, which they did, which tolkien never said or wrote and somtimes actually changed what he did say or write, but but many of those changes were more for moving from book to screen .. Rings of power do more than that with their changes, they change Tolkien - Jackson was very faithful to Tolkien's ideals or, world view etc, anddidn't make changes to "reflect the world today" or promote his own beliefs, he wanted to do Tolkien's story.

Peter Jackson
"We made a promise to ourselves at the beginning of the process that we weren't going to put any of our own politics, our own messages or our own themes into these movies. What we were trying to do was to analyze what was important to Tolkien and to try to honor that. In a way, we were trying to make these films for him, not for ourselves."

The showrunners of RoP, did the opposite, not only were their the usually modifications and adaptations needed to go screen, but they put their own politics and messaging and own themes into RoP, and they think it's amazing - thing is, not everyone shares their views, but whether your views and world view were different from Tolkien, everyone loved Tolkien's, everyone loved his work - and that's what they wanted to see.

So when you change it, surprsie surprsie that people feel it's not Middle Earth, or not Tolkien's work, they're not merely talkinga bout minor changes made from going from book format to a film - it's the core vein of the world and the stories. And those are massive changes

- - - Updated - - -

If they can't use something then they can't be faithful, right? For example I remember seeing that in the Hobbit movies Gandalf couldn't name the Blue Wizards when asked about them because Jackson didn't have the rights to use them in the film. While they weren't named in the book the film was based on it is an example of how rights can impact even small things.

Also isn't some of the work the show is based on "established" by his son? So some of it is already a step removed from JRR Tolkien. So there really isn't a way to actually be faithful unless you just use the stuff that was published just by JRR.

Don't assume the complaint is not being strictly faithful to the letter of the work, the complaint is that this isn't recognisably Tolkien's world because they've changed the politics, messaging and world view it's based on.


IT will never be or feel Tolkien if you do that, no matter if you make everything else accurate to the molecule. It may have been liked despite being different some feel if the story was better.. but the changes just desecrate the man's work - it's hard to even like their story.

So now high elves are going around being sly and cheap like devious humans - as if the show runners have no concept to see what distinguished is, because such concepts don't exist in their world view perhaps? or mean something entirely different to them.. well if you're going to use Tolkien and call it Lord of the Rings etc, you kinda should stick to it being exactly that.


As I said before, this is not some low class semi popular work, this is one of the world's most loved books and famous ones, you' might get away with it for other works, might, but you won't when you do it for such a high profile masterpiece. Most Brits are positively insulted by what they've done. And it's not a judgement of the ideology and messaging they've injected, , it is so universally disliked because they changed Tolkien's system, as i said, regardless whether you believe or agree with Tolkien's world view, you show his story and his messaging because everything is set up that way.

You don't start changing elves into angsty humans, puffing up and completely changing female characters from what the original story wrote them to be because you have to pass the Bechtel test and promote your intersectional beliefs or ideology.. you could have and believe all those things and still genuinely put forth Tolkien's work that his world view is tightly integral with. This is what Peter Jackson and his crew did, and Ic an assure you very flew of them hold to Tolkien's beliefs, but despite having vastly different opinions and world views, they all loved his work and sought to recreate it faithfully.

These showrunners did not, they thought to message us and change his work, and it's junky, people wanted to see Tolkien's world reflected, not their own.

Their sheer arrogance to think that this is what everyone wants all the time, and incapable of actually believing that someone doesn't have to have his real life or identity reflected in a film before he would either enjoy or relate to it. Sheesh.. if all films were like that?

This is why Hollywood has that very same feel to it on a lot of their stuff, because they're all following and preaching the same messaging.

- - - Updated - - -

It's so wild that you think it's "ideology" if showrunners think they're "changing race in a good way," but see none in your objection that it's "changing race in a bad way," and similarly assume Tolkein wasn't operating on "ideology" when he made characters white. It would truly be a thing of beauty if the next time people collapsed and clawed their their chests over the inclusion of black people, while pretending it's fidelity to the work of fantasy they're upset about (it's about ethics in film adaptations!), that they replace every single white character with a person of color and call it a fucking day. What astonishes me--and it's not the casual racism because that's as tedious and run of the mill as it gets--is the absolute utter stinginess of people who just can't bear to share a single goddamn shred of joy with anyone else.

My point is about their ideology, not about race changing - as a black gay person, I think I understand the difference. Tolkien has a world view and an ideology, we all do, , but you can like someone else's work immensely even if you don't share their world view or beliefs, you can appreciate a great story.

You then want to see that story, I don't need to see my current 21st century world or politics reflected in everything. When i come to watch Tolkien ii like his work so i want to see things the way he saw them. I can appreciate people who are different from me, i don't' expect them to change to me or change to reflect me, there different stat is interesting and unique and when it's good i like to see it.

Everyone and everything doesn't have to be the same as me.

If you are doing Tolkien's work and Tolkien's world your audience will expect his world, reflecting his ideals and world view, not yours.


They have changed things in this series, because they are injecting their world view and messaging.. this is why Galadriel has to behave just so, and this character that character so, this is why elves, behave like so where they are very different in Tolkien's work.






Look they can do what they want, and they clearly did, just realise that most people who like Tolkien want to see Tolkien's work reflected, not a cocky show runner's view of the world or how they think the world should be. They can go write their own fantasy for that, and their are plenty others who around that follow that world view - don't kid yourself to think their won't be backlash if you change one of the world's most popular fantasy books to fit your US urban left wing view of things- and expect everyone to be happy. - You'd piss off everyone on your right, everyone who doesn't share your views, not only that, you'd piss up people like me who mostly share a less extreme version of your views, not because of the views, but because you changed Tolkien's work which is what you sold it to me as - I came to see Tolkein's world reflected and stories expanded, not changed and bastardised or coopted version so naturally this disappoints

[InfiniteCharger]

I was pointing out the absurdity of you inventing an argument over the show being canon. If the show is made up because something doesn't appear in canon then of course the show will not be canon. Lol. It is crazy how often people that hate the show bring up canon in their arguments when no one in this thread tries to argue that the show is canon.

So if it isn't canon and you agree then why are you still going on about it? Sounds like you want it both ways.
And specifically this series is literally not how Tolkien imagined and wrote the Rings of Power being created.
And that is the fundamental point. If you like the show and want to defend it then fine, but that also means defending the fact that it is its own thing. There is nothing wrong with that.

So they are adapting the stuff they have the rights to but at the same time not adapting those things to create a show? Lmao.

They are telling their own story loosely based on characters and settings from the 2nd age and are not calling it an adaptation.
It says so itself at the end of every episode. Again, if you agree it isn't canon and is its own thing then what is the point?
You are in agreement. It being its own thing and not canon does not make it "good" or "bad" as that is up to individual opinion.

[Mace]

The proof of the pudding is in the eating.. most people around the world hate it, yet they are all represented - so by their logic we should love it. You are just thinking the racists don't love it, but you're blind to all the other flaws and are not listening to the other reasons other people don't think much of it.


Do you think they're that many racists? Do you think the issue is really just because an elf is made black and there is a black dwarf/ Do you think that is what i mean by Tolkien's world view and ideology.. sigh if you do, then you lack understanding.

Do you even know the messaging and ideology the show runners hold to, you need to know that so you can positively identify what it is, you don't need to know it necessarily to be able to notice it is different, but it will help you articulate and see this is far beyond race.

But it doesn't stop at ideology changes, I have admitted I like it some what, but it's not Tolkien, yet there is a lot about it that is badly done, from plot, characters, acting, etc, some good things too, there are so many issues people don't like about it that it has drowned out all the positives that could have helped.


But this is Lord of the Rings you're making, not some random superhero movie or some random author - you are taking the world's finest fantasy and most acclaimed fantasy writer's work,, and you think you can just bring it forward with your world view and not his, change far more than you need to to reflect today's world and thin people will love it just because they're represented, and just go lazy on the story, ruin your characters (which i firmly believe part of the reason Galadriel is so unlikeable is because she is a product of their ideology not Tolkien's work you have to have female lead, according that ideology, and she has to be so, can't have this and that happen to her etc.. it's called the Bechtel test, and only people of a certain ideology care about that, and they change characters and works to reflect their world view, when people have to watch Tolkien's world

when you do that, you honestly expect people to like your stuff.. really? suppress their comments and their negative reviews, pretend that everyone likes it, lie about your audience views and scores try all your skills at manipulating perception.. at the end of the day, people watch it and they see what they see, no matter how much you spin it, this isn't Tolkien and they should have made Tolkien's based Rings of Power reflecting Tolkien's races and characters, not changing them to fit you ideology.

And trust me, Galadriel, Muriel and the harfoots are not that way because of licensing.. what a joke, they are the way they are because of ideology of the show runners injecting their beliefs and politics rather than the author of the world which most people love)'s own view and own work. But then how arrogant you must be to think your version would be better and more loved than a globally loved author with highest publishing count/book sales probably second only to the bible in recorded history.

Such arrogance.

- - - Updated - - -

Show is badly written too.. but that is relatively speaking.. to the trash we tend to get these days, it's no bad, but compared to Tolkien, who you are trying to have it fit in as part of his work, it is terrible, and not even close. - but I have no sympathy, arrogant people, fell they are better always. Pride goes before a fall, it seriously does.

I will watch the series, enjoy as a middle range okay story (for the aggregate of stuff that comes out), that's got pretty pictures, abut not Tolkien, yet every time I see them do silly things that are just so against or so not Tolkien's way I can't help but sigh, I wonder now if there would be enough of these to out weigh my propensity to watch junk.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean you want this to storm the world.. you are goingt o have to do more than have an astonishingly good set, graphics and music score.

You need great, actors, a great plot and a great story - and it doesn't have that, by a long shot.

worse, is that because it's the Lord of the Rings, because it's Tolkien, anything that doesn't measure up or come close, is like basically drawing on Da Vinci's paintings thinking you can improve them or adding to them but with your own style and saying - this is a genuine continuation or extension of Da Vinci's work - such arrogance

[rhorle]

So if it isn't canon and you agree then why are you still going on about it?

Again. I was pointing out the absurdity of your statement. No one has called Rings of Power canon. You keep inventing arguments so you can keep arguing.

They are telling their own story loosely based on characters and settings from the 2nd age and are not calling it an adaptation.

They say "based on" which is calling it an adaptation. Things don't have to be canon in order to be an adaptation.

[Triceron]

Did you bitch as much when LOTR didn't make sure to film the 30 odd years before Frodo left the shire? Like make the movie 10 films long with the first 4 being Frodo and the gang hanging out and smoking pipes.

Like ya'll are whiney. If you have an issue with a 3000 year story being compressed, you come up with a better solution.

To be honest, most of the criticisms in this thread come from people who are discussing what would be better solutions, one of which is not picking this particular timeline to tell this story. The entire show is predicated on adapting something from the appendices that wouldn't have translated well onto the big screen, and so they have to rearrange, compress and practically invent an entirely new story to make it work. And what we have is barely recognizeable as an adaptation of any pre-existing work at all, if not for the names of settings and characters and a general theme of the making of the Rings of Power. It's otherwise quite on the level of fan fiction.

And if we're talking about fan fiction, like.. .there's infinitely better solutions that any fan can come up with that would be better than what we're getting now. Just like how I point out there are fan edits of the Hobbit trilogy series that cuts it down to a single 4-hour movie that IMO is far superior than the full 3 movies we got in theatres.

There are fan edits right now of other shows out there, like Obi-Wan, which fixes some issues that many people had with pacing and sequencing in the show. Just cutting out some fluff or rearranging some scenes changes the tone a lot. Rings of Power could definitely benefit from better editing, but sadly that wouldn't be a solution for all the other problems this show has, like in characterization or overall plot.

- - - Updated - - -

Again. I was pointing out the absurdity of your statement. No one has called Rings of Power canon. You keep inventing arguments so you can keep arguing.

You're doing the same thing dude. You're just as equally inventing arguments for the sake of shitposting. No fucking difference lol.

[rhorle]

You're doing the same thing dude. You're just as equally inventing arguments for the sake of shitposting. No fucking difference lol.

How is using words another posts inventing an argument? Of course a made up story isn't canonical. That is why it is made up rather then using canon. That isn't inventing an argument. It is an observation. Same thing you are doing right now, right?

So you are saying I am right and salty that this made up story literally isn't even trying to be canonical?

How can a made up story be canonical when the entire reason it is made up is because it wasn't in the canon? lol.

[Mace]

No intelligent person can swithc on their brain and call this show good, not because of ideology or Tolkien, just the plot and lines on their own -

To enjoy this show, i have to switch off my brain, and even then, it's hard, and I'm quite good at doing that for entertainment. But if you want to storm the world, you have to at least write well.

I don't know if it's the show writers or the environemnt.. i mean, only their bubble would think this was great, they don't seem to see how obviously bad so much of it is - the characterisation and writing (I mean), but it's terrible because of their world view, tolkien's world is not the place for such

[Triceron]

How is using words another posts inventing an argument? Of course a made up story isn't canonical. That is why it is made up rather then using canon. That isn't inventing an argument. It is an observation. Same thing you are doing right now, right?

So you are saying I am right and salty that this made up story literally isn't even trying to be canonical? <- Rhetorical question that doesn't need to be answered to get the point that he's unhappy about Rings of Power because it is not canonical, and to the point, not a faithful adaptation of the canon.

You're literally agreeing with a statement he made and yet arguing it because you want to catch him in a 'gotcha' because you think his rhetoric implies that Rings of Power could ever be 'canonical'.

The story was never meant to be canonical, but more to the point, Rings of Power doesn't even attempt to be faithful to the original story. That is what is being pointed out, that is the reason for the rhetoric, which is overdramatized to make a point. You seem to take it at face value. IC's point isn't about the show needing to be canon, it's about the fact that the show isn't even close to being a faithful adaptation of actual source material. It's a loose adaptation that is merely inspired by a section in the appendices which they are taking completely out of context and retelling with a compressed timeline, through new characters or by reinventing ones that had been established.

But hey, it's easier for you to just focus on the 'canon' part of the argument for the sake of argument. Cherry pick what you can take and get people on the 'Gotcha's. Good job fostering Good Discussion with shit posting.

[InfiniteCharger]

Again. I was pointing out the absurdity of your statement. No one has called Rings of Power canon. You keep inventing arguments so you can keep arguing.



They say "based on" which is calling it an adaptation. Things don't have to be canon in order to be an adaptation.

No you just keep repeating yourself. You say that it isn't canon but then say it is an "adaptation".
There is no complete story of the second age that Tolkien wrote so it isn't an adaptation.
And not to mention they aren't following what is written in the appendices either.
So literally it is mostly a made up story. So why are you so offended by that?
If you like it and are happy with it why is that statement bothering you so much that you keep replying to me about it?

Any studio trying to do the entire story of the 2nd age would be taking on risk due to the lack of a complete novel in this era.
And yes, even if they did focus on smaller parts of the 2nd age and just did a series on that, things would have to be made up.
That is where the risk comes into play. This isn't unique to Amazon, it is just that some people are pretending otherwise.

[Levelfive]

My point is about their ideology, not about race changing - as a black gay person, I think I understand the difference. Tolkien has a world view and an ideology, we all do, , but you can like someone else's work immensely even if you don't share their world view or beliefs, you can appreciate a great story.

You then want to see that story, I don't need to see my current 21st century world or politics reflected in everything. When i come to watch Tolkien ii like his work so i want to see things the way he saw them. I can appreciate people who are different from me, i don't' expect them to change to me or change to reflect me, there different stat is interesting and unique and when it's good i like to see it.

Everyone and everything doesn't have to be the same as me.

If you are doing Tolkien's work and Tolkien's world your audience will expect his world, reflecting his ideals and world view, not yours.


They have changed things in this series, because they are injecting their world view and messaging.. this is why Galadriel has to behave just so, and this character that character so, this is why elves, behave like so where they are very different in Tolkien's work.






Look they can do what they want, and they clearly did, just realise that most people who like Tolkien want to see Tolkien's work reflected, not a cocky show runner's view of the world or how they think the world should be. They can go write their own fantasy for that, and their are plenty others who around that follow that world view - don't kid yourself to think their won't be backlash if you change one of the world's most popular fantasy books to fit your US urban left wing view of things- and expect everyone to be happy. - You'd piss off everyone on your right, everyone who doesn't share your views, not only that, you'd piss up people like me who mostly share a less extreme version of your views, not because of the views, but because you changed Tolkien's work which is what you sold it to me as - I came to see Tolkein's world reflected and stories expanded, not changed and bastardised or coopted version so naturally this disappoints

You literally said they were "changing race in a bad way" so I'm going to take you at your word. If you're going to claim that black characters and "modern feminine heroes" existing is "political" then you're going to have to admit their absence is, too, but that in the latter case you're fine with politics in your preferred works of fantasy as long as it's excluding the people you're comfortable being excluded. You seem all good with Peter Jackson's take even though, for instance, he had Eowyn kill the Witch-King rather than Merry (how woke!), so what are these "views" you keep insisting are not being faithful to Tolkein? Because things like strength in diversity and the overlooked and marginalized doing great things when given the chance seem right on brand to me, which makes your claims about supposed lack of fidelity ring false and just seem wildly overwrought generally. Lastly, speaking of arrogance, please don't speak for "most people who like Tolkein."

[rhorle]

You're literally agreeing with a statement he made and yet arguing it because you want to catch him in a 'gotcha' because you think his rhetoric implies that Rings of Power could ever be 'canonical'.

What gotcha am I trying to catch him in? Why would I think him saying that Rings of Power is not canon actually means that he thinks it is canon? You are doing the same t hing he is doing. Inventing an argument that exists only in your head. Just so you can argue. Lmao.

[Biomega]

There is no complete story of the second age that Tolkien wrote so it isn't an adaptation.

Nothing says adaptations can only come off complete stories.

Yet again, a restriction completely invented by you.

So literally it is mostly a made up story.

Also doesn't matter. You can have very loose adaptations, that doesn't mean they're not adaptations. You have no actual criteria to go by here as to the degree of faithfulness that is required to pass for adaptation or not.

If anything is "a made up story" here, it's your repeat insistence on non-existent standards of adaptation.

[rhorle]

No you just keep repeating yourself. You say that it isn't canon but then say it is an "adaptation".

What is wrong with that? An adaptation doesn't have to be canon. They are adapting the parts they have the rights to into a story. If it is mostly made up, your own words, then they are clearing adapting the non-made up parts, right? The only one getting offended here is yourself. Lol.

It is like the MCU compared to Comics. The comics are "canon" as they are the original source. The MCU adaptations are not canon because they only adapted some things from the comics. The industry, and wider world, doesn't use the restrictive definition of adaptation that you use.

[DarkAmbient]

>open thread
>people are still replying to him

[InfiniteCharger]

Nothing says adaptations can only come off complete stories.

Yet again, a restriction completely invented by you.


Also doesn't matter. You can have very loose adaptations, that doesn't mean they're not adaptations. You have no actual criteria to go by here as to the degree of faithfulness that is required to pass for adaptation or not.

If anything is "a made up story" here, it's your repeat insistence on non-existent standards of adaptation.

They only have the rights to the appendices. I have said this literally multiple times. The appendices are not a complete story.
So literally they are not adapting a novel like Lord of the Rings, where you have dialog, events and characters that are well defined.
I said this before and you keep ignoring it in order to make your argument.

Meaning, this is not like Lord of the Rings which adapted a complete story written in books.
This is a mostly made up story that only loosely follows the appendices.
In reality it is an "imagining" or "reimaginng" of events of the 2nd age.
It is not literally an adaptation of a complete work or series of stories of the 2nd age.

- - - Updated - - -

What is wrong with that? An adaptation doesn't have to be canon. They are adapting the parts they have the rights to into a story. If it is mostly made up, your own words, then they are clearing adapting the non-made up parts, right? The only one getting offended here is yourself. Lol.

It is like the MCU compared to Comics. The comics are "canon" as they are the original source. The MCU adaptations are not canon because they only adapted some things from the comics. The industry, and wider world, doesn't use the restrictive definition of adaptation that you use.

See above. Literally they only have the rights to the appendices and to use those as "inspiration" for their own made up story set in Tolkien's 2nd age. You keep debating this but agreeing with it at the same time. Meaning these are possible ways for the events to have happened, but because there is no explicit source material on all of the events of the 2nd age, it is literally not an adaptation. Comic books with multiple issues and chapters are not a comparison for this, because Marvel owns the IP and can reinvent these stories and characters however they want.

You keep trying to throw around the word adaptation as if it is trying to follow a very detailed story when it isn't versus simply being a made up story with the rights to use characters and settings from Tolkien. That is literally all this is. And if you agree then what is the point of continuing this line of discussion?

[Triceron]

What gotcha am I trying to catch him in? Why would I think him saying that Rings of Power is not canon actually means that he thinks it is canon? You are doing the same t hing he is doing. Inventing an argument that exists only in your head. Just so you can argue. Lmao.

Which is exactly what you're doing too, do you not realize that?

It's the formulation of opinion. And the odd thing is, you actually agree with it, yet still arguing it on principle of non-canon stories can still be enjoyed, when that is a completely subjective matter which is the deriding point of why he doesn't like RoP to begin with. He doesn't like RoP because of it lacking faithfulness to the canon.

It's like someone saying they don't like the taste of pineapple because it's sour, and you reply with an observation that sour-tasting foods can be good too. Like, yes you made an observation, but there's no real point to it other than thinly-veiled gatekeeping. That is the context of your argument.

[Biomega]

They only have the rights to the appendices. I have said this literally multiple times. The appendices are not a complete story.
So literally they are not adapting a novel like Lord of the Rings, where you have dialog, events and characters that are well defined.

"They're not adapting a novel" is NOT THE SAME as "this is not an adaptation".

Don't pretend that was what you were saying. Because even if you were, that's an absolutely asinine point to make that was never in dispute to begin with, since no one claimed they were adapting a novel. Ever. Anywhere.

Meaning, this is not like Lord of the Rings which adapted a complete story written in books.

And nobody ever said "this is an adaptation like the Lord of the Rings" OR "this is an adaptation of a complete story written in books".

No one. Anywhere. Ever. Said. That.

In reality it is an "imagining" or "reimaginng" of events of the 2nd age.

You can call it that if you want, but that doesn't mean it's NOT an adaptation. Those are not mutually exclusive categorizations.

It is not literally an adaptation of a complete work or series of stories of the 2nd age.

Since those do not exist, it can't be. Which is why no one ever claimed it was.

But, again - this is NOT the same as saying "this is not an adaptation". Which is what you did, repeatedly.

[Triceron]

"They're not adapting a novel" is NOT THE SAME as "this is not an adaptation"

To be honest, it's an adaptation only through the most technical of definitions. Otherwise, it's pretty clear this is very loosely adapted, and if anything, merely 'inspired by'.

It's pretty close to the level of calling Dragonball an adaptation of Journey to the West. It is, and it isn't.

[InfiniteCharger]

"They're not adapting a novel" is NOT THE SAME as "this is not an adaptation".

Don't pretend that was what you were saying. Because even if you were, that's an absolutely asinine point to make that was never in dispute to begin with, since no one claimed they were adapting a novel. Ever. Anywhere.

I am distinguishing the fact that this series is based on the appendices which are not a complete novel or story.
Therefore, they have to mostly make up characters, dialogs, events, settings and everything else to tell a complete story.
You know that yet you sit here and try and pretend that this wasn't the point I was making when I literally laid it out the first time I said it.

And nobody ever said "this is an adaptation like the Lord of the Rings" OR "this is an adaptation of a complete story written in books".

No one. Anywhere. Ever. Said. That.

Because it isn't an adaptation of any book containing the complete story of the 2nd age.
That is simply a fact, versus Lord of the Rings literally being a complete work of literary fiction.
The fact that you cannot see the difference between the two and throw around the term "adaptation" as if those are the same is the problem.
Literally it is two completely different things.

You can call it that if you want, but that doesn't mean it's NOT an adaptation. Those are not mutually exclusive categorizations.


Since those do not exist, it can't be. Which is why no one ever claimed it was.

But, again - this is NOT the same as saying "this is not an adaptation". Which is what you did, repeatedly.

The fact is they only have the rights to the appendices which gives them the rights to use characters and places from Tolkien.
And the rest is a mostly made up story not based on any existing novel or complete work of fiction. That is a fact.
You are just arguing to argue as if that is literally not the case.

[kenn9530]

Sure, the Approved data proves me that, cute.

Any review above 6 is a lie and below 2 is a meme, simple as that, the show is bad by all critical points you can name it, with the exception of the visuals, even if you think otherwise

You get proven wrong on a regular basis, just because you dont like something doesnt mean plenty others are more than happy with the results, i dont need to think its there to see and proven by all data available that the show is good and you are just upset you cant prove otherwise.

- - - Updated - - -

The data that is manipulated and rigged by Amazon omegalul, you didn't just say that with a straight face.

There is more than just amazon, the information is backed up by every single bit of data available, your opinion doesnt change the simple fact the show is still good.