Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[rhorle]

It isn't an adaptation. You keep trying to claim it as something that Amazon doesn't even say it is and neither does the Tolkien estate.

An adaptation doesn't have the requirement of following an existing story. They are adapting parts of Tolkien's work to tell a story. Westside Story is an adaptation of Romeo and Juilet. I haven't objected to you saying it is not canon. As I said before you keep making things up in order to argue.

On the intro for the show amazon has "Based on 'The Lord of the Rings' and appendices by J.R.R. Tolkien". The trivia, under x-ray, also indicates "Most of the details and elaborations told herein are derived from 'The Lord of the Rings', its prologue entitled 'Concerning Hobbits', and its appendices, A through F, where the intrepid traveler may journey to discover even farther horizons".

Which clearly indicates it is an adaptation. They aren't telling canon but are adapting portions of his work into their own story.

[Biomega]

It isn't an adaptation.

There is no universal reference for what is or is not an "adaptation". There's no definitions beyond perhaps legal ones, which are often vague as well. There's operational definitions from literary reference works or encyclopedias, and there's usage descriptions from dictionaries - but there IS. NO. objectively applicable definition of "adaptation" with sharp boundaries that you can apply here.

All you can do is argue why YOU think it's not an adaptation. And that can be convincing or not, depending on how you argue for it, and who you argue it to. But there isn't some grand template that you can look at going "yep, this fits, therefore it's an adaptation, the end, we can all go home now".

There are no authorities on such definitions either, in case you were thinking of linking a YT video of someone giving their definition or whatever. The Grand Council of All Adaptations does not exist*



*I am oath-bound to disavow any knowledge of the GCoAA. It does not exist, it never existed, it definitely doesn't meet at Barney's Corner Tavern every second Tuesday from 6-9pm

[InfiniteCharger]

An adaptation doesn't have the requirement of following an existing story. They are adapting parts of Tolkien's work to tell a story. Westside Story is an adaptation of Romeo and Juilet. I haven't objected to you saying it is not canon. As I said before you keep making things up in order to argue.

On the intro for the show amazon has "Based on 'The Lord of the Rings' and appendices by J.R.R. Tolkien". The trivia, under x-ray, also indicates "Most of the details and elaborations told herein are derived from 'The Lord of the Rings', its prologue entitled 'Concerning Hobbits', and its appendices, A through F, where the intrepid traveler may journey to discover even farther horizons".

Which clearly indicates it is an adaptation. They aren't telling canon but are adapting portions of his work into their own story.

You keep saying it is an adaptation as if that means it is canon. It does not mean that.
They only had the rights to the appendices of Lord of the Rings.
Therefore, by definition, they were given the rights to make up whatever they wanted and call it Lord of the RIngs: Rings of Power.
But again, these events are not the canon of how the rings of power were created, how numenor was destroyed and so forth.
It isn't even an adaptation of those things because they literally don't have the rights to those stories.

- - - Updated - - -

There is no universal reference for what is or is not an "adaptation". There's no definitions beyond perhaps legal ones, which are often vague as well. There's operational definitions from literary reference works or encyclopedias, and there's usage descriptions from dictionaries - but there IS. NO. objectively applicable definition of "adaptation" with sharp boundaries that you can apply here.

All you can do is argue why YOU think it's not an adaptation. And that can be convincing or not, depending on how you argue for it, and who you argue it to. But there isn't some grand template that you can look at going "yep, this fits, therefore it's an adaptation, the end, we can all go home now".

There are no authorities on such definitions either, in case you were thinking of linking a YT video of someone giving their definition or whatever. The Grand Council of All Adaptations does not exist*



*I am oath-bound to disavow any knowledge of the GCoAA. It does not exist, it never existed, it definitely doesn't meet at Barney's Corner Tavern every second Tuesday from 6-9pm

What book are they adapting here?

And if there is no book they have the rights to adapt then it isn't an adaptation.

It is only legal rights to use certain characters, places and events in a brand new made up story.
The end credits blatantly state that.

What are you even talking about here?

Not to mention like I said before, calling it an 'adaptation' doesn't make it canon.
Somehow you think this means otherwise.

This series called "Lord of the Rings: RIngs of Power" is not going to be the literal canon of how the rings of power were created. And by being an "adaptation" they are under no obligation to be canon. So therefore, if you are going to keep claiming that adaptation allows for changes then fine, but that also means it isn't canon. It cannot be both free to go against canon and be canon at the same time. Pick a side and stay there.

[rhorle]

You keep saying it is an adaptation as if that means it is canon. It does not mean that.

What? An adaptation is not required to be canon. I have never said Rings of Power is canon. Again you are inventing things in order to argue.

[Hansworst]

You keep saying it is an adaptation as if that means it is canon. It does not mean that.
They only had the rights to the appendices of Lord of the Rings.
Therefore, by definition, they were given the rights to make up whatever they wanted and call it Lord of the RIngs: Rings of Power.
But again, these events are not the canon of how the rings of power were created, how numenor was destroyed and so forth.
It isn't even an adaptation of those things because they literally don't have the rights to those stories.

Nope, as the intro says, it's an adaptation of LotR and it's appendices. So they are allowed to use descriptions used in those titles of said events.
I don't see anyone claiming RoP is canon.

[Biomega]

What book are they adapting here?

And if there is no book they have the rights to adapt then it isn't an adaptation.

Says you. But as I pointed out, you do not constitute the definitive authority on how adaptations work.

They have certain rights to certain materials, and they are adapting those materials for the screen. The end.

How well they do it and how loosely they do (or do not) follow the materials is a separate discussion.

Not to mention like I said before, calling it an 'adaptation' doesn't make it canon.

Nobody said that calling something an adaptation equals making something canon. That's a ludicrous idea.

That being said, "canon" is also loosey-goosey stuff. It's very negotiable.

Somehow you think this means otherwise.

No I don't and I never said so anywhere, in any way.

So therefore, if you are going to keep claiming that adaptation allows for changes then fine, but that also means it isn't canon. It cannot be both free to go against canon and be canon at the same time. Pick a side and stay there.

Canons change. Something can go against an old canon, and be new canon. Happens all the time. Heck some franchises MASSIVELY reorganized and redefined their canon (Star War, for example). I'm not saying this is happening here, I'm saying that this CAN HAPPEN in general. And those kinds of exclusive categorizations you put forward are something YOU MADE UP.

[Triceron]

Yeah the canon argument just doesn't fly. No TV series or movie would ever be canon no matter how faithful it would be.

[Shadowferal]

Canons change. Something can go against an old canon, and be new canon. Happens all the time. Heck some franchises MASSIVELY reorganized and redefined their canon (Star War, for example). I'm not saying this is happening here, I'm saying that this CAN HAPPEN in general. And those kinds of exclusive categorizations you put forward are something YOU MADE UP.

Canon doesn't change just because some shitty production makes shit up. And using Star Wars as an example? Lucas got crapped on for, among of changes, changing "canon" of Jedi mysticism in favor of biological "mitichlorians."
Changing canon is nothing more than retconning...or making shit up because the writer is too stupid to adhere to consistency. Or in this case the writer was simply instructed to.

[VMSmith]

Any metric you search for proves the show is good, a 1 min search proves the show is highly rated and the metrics are only brought down a little from clearly inaccurate ratings because some fans are upset while many other fans are more than happy with RoP.

The show would be in the 8/10 plus ratings if not for inaccurate reviews, but anything 6/10 plus is still a good show, 8/10 plus is in the excellent range.

I don't get where people get this idea that poor reviews don't count. I mean, if someone didn't like something, for any reason at all, that's still just as valid as someone liking that thing, for any reason at all. "Review bombing" is not really a thing, and even if it were it would be counterbalanced by "Review fluffing".

You can't just say "Those ratings don't count because they didn't like the thing for reasons I don't agree with".

[Syegfryed]

I don't get where people get this idea that poor reviews don't count. I mean, if someone didn't like something, for any reason at all, that's still just as valid as someone liking that thing, for any reason at all. "Review bombing" is not really a thing, and even if it were it would be counterbalanced by "Review fluffing".

You can't just say "Those ratings don't count because they didn't like the thing for reasons I don't agree with".

He can't be serious, the show is in no way in the nine hells good and would never be a 8/10, its scrapping a 3 or a 4 just by the visuals, but even the production is poor, just see the scene with the elves when there is one more and later one less, this is awfully done.

[kenn9530]

I don't get where people get this idea that poor reviews don't count. I mean, if someone didn't like something, for any reason at all, that's still just as valid as someone liking that thing, for any reason at all. "Review bombing" is not really a thing, and even if it were it would be counterbalanced by "Review fluffing".

You can't just say "Those ratings don't count because they didn't like the thing for reasons I don't agree with".

A 1/10 review is not a real review there is no discussion on it, you cant say RoP deserves a 1/10 in any situation, there is rarely anything that can deserve a 1/10 rating, a person not liking something doesnt mean you can rate something 1/10.

- - - Updated - - -

He can't be serious, the show is in no way in the nine hells good and would never be a 8/10, its scrapping a 3 or a 4 just by the visuals, but even the production is poor, just see the scene with the elves when there is one more and later one less, this is awfully done.

The show is good, the data proves you wrong if you think otherwise.

[Flurryfang]

So, is it any good atm? Heard some talk after the first 2 episodes, but has the series changed for the better or worse since then?

[Syegfryed]

The show is good, the data proves you wrong if you think otherwise.

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

- - - Updated - - -

So, is it any good atm? Heard some talk after the first 2 episodes, but has the series changed for the better or worse since then?

Every episode is worse or more nonsensical than the last, we had 5 episodes, ~=5 hours and almost nothing happened.

[rogueMatthias]

So, is it any good atm? Heard some talk after the first 2 episodes, but has the series changed for the better or worse since then?

TBH, it's a tough watch. Ignoring all the talk of lore, and all the talk of "wokeness" or whatever... it just really isn't very good.

The writing it just really bad and boring and, outside of Durin and Elrond's friendship, there just aren't any likeable characters.

The writers aren't smart enough to out-Tolkien Tolkien (Some pretty mad audacity that they think they are lol), so whenever they try and come up with some quotable wisdom it comes across as cringey fortune-cookie dialogue.

Perfect thing to sum up this series is a song in the latest episode that goes "Not all who wonder or wander are lost".
There's a lot to unpack on this one line -

• They're relying entirely on memberberries
• they've needlessly extended it with some wordplay because they think they're clever, but it makes no fucking sense now - why would people wondering be lost?
• It's messing with lore to try to have a cool moment - Bilbo wrote the original line in a poem. Did he just rip off a song from thousands of years before?
• & it's worse sin... It's just a bland boring song, trying so hard to be something more than it is.

[shise]

TBH, it's a tough watch. Ignoring all the talk of lore, and all the talk of "wokeness" or whatever... it just really isn't very good.

The writing it just really bad and boring and, outside of Durin and Elrond's friendship, there just aren't any likeable characters.

The writers aren't smart enough to out-Tolkien Tolkien (Some pretty mad audacity that they think they are lol), so whenever they try and come up with some quotable wisdom it comes across as cringey fortune-cookie dialogue.

Perfect thing to sum up this series is a song in the latest episode that goes "Not all who wonder or wander are lost".
There's a lot to unpack on this one line -

• They're relying entirely on memberberries
• they've needlessly extended it with some wordplay because they think they're clever, but it makes no fucking sense now - why would people wondering be lost?
• It's messing with lore to try to have a cool moment - Bilbo wrote the original line in a poem. Did he just rip off a song from thousands of years before?
• & it's worse sin... It's just a bland boring song, trying so hard to be something more than it is.

This is all your opinion.

I don´t understand all the arguing going on?

A - It is not LotR related, it simply uses the names. Period.

B- It is a created story which pretends to be the origin of the rings. Bear that in mind and move on.

C- Either you like it, or you do not. Tastes are like colors...

D- Integration is done in a rather silly way .Yes, but since it is not real LotR.. who cares.



That´s all, really...

I personally find the show to be good, far better than I expected. 8/10 so far for me (being aware of A-B-C-D)

[Kumorii]

So, is it any good atm? Heard some talk after the first 2 episodes, but has the series changed for the better or worse since then?

Neither... arguably worse. But the first 2 episodes, especially first were bad for me. The episodes after are more tolerable, however since the pacing is so slow they seem meaningless and thus probably at the same tier as the first episodes, but for other reasons.

There's an hour of material but maybe around 10-15 minutes of it actually progress the show forward. And some of those moments feel rushed because so little time is spent on it that's wasted on fluff.
People describing this show as going to slow and too fast at the same time is kinda apt imo.

The show also keeps writing dialogue a bit too poetic for their own good. They can't pull it off imo so it just comes across badly.

- - - Updated - - -

This is all your opinion.

Why do people waste time stating this?
Yes, him stating his opinion is his opinion and the person he answered asked a question that can only be responded with ones opinion.

Talking about a show or movie is mostly based on opinions and people talk about it because they want to share and hear others opinion and hopefully discuss it, though that one is difficult to achieve here.

[shise]

Neither... arguably worse. But the first 2 episodes, especially first were bad for me. The episodes after are more tolerable, however since the pacing is so slow they seem meaningless and thus probably at the same tier as the first episodes, but for other reasons.

There's an hour of material but maybe around 10-15 minutes of it actually progress the show forward. And some of those moments feel rushed because so little time is spent on it that's wasted on fluff.
People describing this show as going to slow and too fast at the same time is kinda apt imo.

The show also keeps writing dialogue a bit too poetic for their own good. They can't pull it off imo so it just comes across badly.

- - - Updated - - -



Why do people waste time stating this?
Yes, him stating his opinion is his opinion and the person he answered asked a question that can only be responded with ones opinion.

Talking about a show or movie is mostly based on opinions and people talk about it because they want to share and hear others opinion and hopefully discuss it, though that one is difficult to achieve here.

I didn´t. That was 1/10th of my whole reply, which is general anyway.

[Yossarian]

So, is it any good atm? Heard some talk after the first 2 episodes, but has the series changed for the better or worse since then?

it's a giant missed opportunity
at this point is nothing more than fan fiction, it has NOTHING of Tolkien's works but the names of the characters and places
timeline is totally messed up (the elven rings were forged much earlier than Isildur's birth), and no character or race is coherent with Tolkien's original characterization and spirit

and once you accept the fact that this has nothing to do with Tolkien canon, you think you can enjoy an one billion show?
no, and that's the worst part!
this show just sucks on every levels because of terrible writing and terrible acting, specially Galadriel being played by an inconceivably awful actress
everybody does stupid things, nothing is coherent, the plot is non-sense, and you end up wondering how is it possible to waste such an opportunity for a great show

music and visuals are wonderful, but that's it, this is one of the most disappointing shows ever made

[rogueMatthias]

This is all your opinion.

I don´t understand all the arguing going on?

A - It is not LotR related, it simply uses the names. Period.

B- It is a created story which pretends to be the origin of the rings. Bear that in mind and move on.

C- Either you like it, or you do not. Tastes are like colors...

D- Integration is done in a rather silly way .Yes, but since it is not real LotR.. who cares.


That´s all, really...

I personally find the show to be good, far better than I expected. 8/10 so far for me (being aware of A-B-C-D)

I'm not sure your "It has nothing to do with Lord of the Rings and isn't related to it at all" argument really cuts it. Not only is it CLEARLY meant to be related to LOTR, but most of the timeline and characters are drawn directly from appendices in Tolkiens work.

I'm glad for you that you're enjoying it. In regards to point C though, while everyone definitely has different tastes, there are also basic tenets to story, theme and character building that are ignored by this series. It's an "executive led" series rather than "creative led" series and it shows.

[Kumorii]

I'm not sure your "It has nothing to do with Lord of the Rings and isn't related to it at all" argument really cuts it. Not only is it CLEARLY meant to be related to LOTR, but most of the timeline and characters are drawn directly from appendices in Tolkiens work.

The argument that it isn't related to previous works etc etc would be fine if it wasn't for the fact that they marketed it as being faithful to tolkien.
The marketing made people think this would've been faithful. It isn't. And people are upset about it. If they didn't market it as being faithful then the arguments of it not being tolkien would still be made, but have no grounds. Now they have grounds however. Marketing matters.