Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[s_bushido]

I had a friend who was a cop and he'd say if TV cop shows were accurate they'd be 70% of the movie of them doing paper work lol.

I used to watch the LotR special features a lot around the time those movies came out, and when they were talking about the sword-fighting there was an anecdote about how someone went up to the guy overseeing the choreography (same guy who worked on stuff like Princess Bride and Star Wars). They said something to effect of "it wouldn't really go like this right?" and his response was something like "hah! it's the movies my boy!" I wish I could find the clip, but it's been over a decade since I watched those.

[Kumorii]

Been watching some lore videos mainly for my heightened interests this show spurred. Watched the Hobbit maple edit ( which really helped the series) and the LOTR movies.

Found this channel and video on how he would set up the series seasons. This video is made before the show released and is mostly him talking how he would've done it. He doesn't shit on RoP and focus more on the story itself even though he is clearly not liking the ideas of how RoP adapted it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9NR06-QtR8

His lore videos are very good from what I can tell and how he set up the season 1 and 2 in video above it sounds really interesting.

Maybe some of you might like it, if so... enjoy!

[Syegfryed]

From a guy who experts in weaponry and fighting, I know the guy is very knowledgeable (also his videos on castles is fantastic), as I said I have no issues with his knowledge on that front, its his nit picking, over analysing, and over the top hate of the show catering to the toxic fandoms that I have an issue with.

I don't think its over analyzing, its just a normal amount of criticism, well based and its not bs, its not even nitpicking because there is some bits he miss. He is also not commenting about the lore being butchered, because he is not versed about it, he could, and he could get a lot of fuel out of it.

Being over the top is obviously the character he put, it gives views cause some people think its funny, of course is not for everyone but hardly disregard what he say.

I mean going back to his sword autopsy, its like anyone who works in a certain profession, for example my sister is a nurse, and whenever she sees nurses or medical staff on TV act a certain way she would go 'they make it look so easy' or 'that's not how that works'. Things wills stand out to you if you are in that position. I had a friend who was a cop and he'd say if TV cop shows were accurate they'd be 70% of the movie of them doing paper work lol.

It can be fun to highlight bad chorography in shows or highlight things that are not accurate, if you are knowledgeable on that subject, but to a general audience no one really cares. (well until they see the videos highlighting it and then all of sudden people now care)

I disagree on that, even the general audience can see someone is being garbage at it.

Like, using your analogy, imagine a tv show about doctors and there is some guy making a heart surgery in someone else kidney, that is over the top absurd, just like aiming your sword for someone who is not even there.

[InfiniteCharger]

Yet he willingly gave information, contained with in, to people when inquiring about stuff. He never considered any of his works finished. Hence why up until his death he was fixing and changing things. Your reasoning of "published" has no merit because of how he treated all of his work. You don't have to like it but to call it a falsehood or nonsense is silly.

The biggest tale is that Canon incorporates those unpublished works. If we are to count them as things that Tolkien didn't want the public to see then only The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings matters to canon. I'm pretty sure you've used things from the work his son published that JRR never wanted to be public in discussions before. Most people that discuss Tolkien have. So it is silly to only draw the line now for "adaptations". It also ignores how Rings of Power is drawing from work that was published in addition to unpublished work. So your reasoning is even more irrelevant to the show.

You are dogding facts which is why this discussion is going in circles. He didn't publish those works. Your point about his personal discussions don't matter to this fundamental point. Those things weren't published and they were not part of any rights that he gave to United Artists. The only rights that he gave were for his two published books and that is it. Anything that happened after his death is irrelevant to the point that Tolkien himself did not finish the story of the 2nd age as seen in the fact that the works covering those other ages weren't published. And he did not intend for the appendices to LOTR to be the basis of the story for the 2nd age. No matter how much he was changing stuff in his notes or unpublished works, that doesn't change what was actually published and what rights were given before he died. Those did not change.

Again, I heard you the first time and no matter how many times you keep saying it, doesn't make it right.

So lets leave it, stop repeating yourself. You aren't making any sense and there is no need to keep retreading the same wrong point.

[Rageonit]

Again, I'm arguing that the entire role is unnecessary to Rings of Power's story.

And again, you're doing it not knowing the actual story. So to be precise, you're arguing that the character of Arondir is unnecessary to the story in the context of the small part of the story we actually know, which is obtuse. This whole debacle between you and rhorle is pointless, and serves only to give you a "I told you so" platform to preach from if - and that's a big if - Arondir indeed turns out to be unnecessary for the whole story.

[Orby]

I disagree on that, even the general audience can see someone is being garbage at it.

Like, using your analogy, imagine a tv show about doctors and there is some guy making a heart surgery in someone else kidney, that is over the top absurd, just like aiming your sword for someone who is not even there.

Well as much as we don't want to admit it, there are a lot of people who generally enjoy the show and didn't care about the sword choreography maybe if you watch nothing but grifter youtube channels you would assume that the show is a flop and no one likes it.

Luckily for me I watch a few reviewers of the show, and while its easily to flock to one point of view to feed the hivemind, its more healthy to catch a few opinions that differ and offer good and bad, instead of outragers painting with a broad brush with '(X) is bad so all is bad' attitude. And with that said no one I know thinks the show is a masterpiece or a great Tolkien adaptation. I think as an adaptations its failed, but that doesn't mean that you still cannot find things to like or enjoy. And its not my place to tell others they are wrong for liking it as much as me either.

The reviewers I been watching

Hello Future Me (TwotheFuture)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDT...xxCyRzA/videos

Daniel Greene
https://www.youtube.com/c/DanielGreeneReviews

Nerd of the Rings
https://www.youtube.com/c/NerdoftheRings

The Broken Sword
https://www.youtube.com/c/TheBrokenSword

And yes I have tried watching Shad's Knight's Watch channel too, but its a chore. There are only so many times you can hear the words 'forced diversity' and 'woke agendas' (paraphrasing here) before my brain just startied turning to mush.

[InfiniteCharger]

I get what you're trying to say, but my comparison again is to Xena's combat or Pro Wrestling. Plenty of stuff is tied to the real world, but it's all scripted out for the purpose of entertainment and cartoon-level dramatic effect more than an authentic realistic world. This is not Tolkien in whatever sense you actually want to consider it to be, it's an over-exaggerated version where the action is overdramatized for the sake of entertainment.

It doesn't matter what armor they're wearing or what weapons they're using if the characters are being protected by Plot Armor. Even main characters being skewered by arrows will end up walking it off by the end of the episode.

Your point seemed to be about fantasy not taking combat seriously, which isn't really true as in the "rules" around combat that have developed in D&D and MMOs as the epitome of fantasy to most people today. Xena had somewhat exaggerated action, which was done on a 90s tv budget and decent for what it was, but that show is not 'representative' of all fantasy. And so, beyond that, the point I was making is that the combat in Tolkien is basically an extension of medieval combat and not really far out and fantastical like World of Warcraft. This series doesn't take combat seriously at all which is why so many have commented on it, which has nothing to do with how Tolkien treated combat.

[kenn9530]

You are spouting absolute falsehoods. His work has been popular since the Hobbit was first published 85 years ago.

There is popular and only selling a few thousands copies here and there over many decades so you are talking nonsense, the books didnt sell that great at all in reality until the films released, thats considered popular not the small amount sold over several decades.

His writing is long winded and spends far too much time explaining pointless things, he also has many occasions where things just dont make sense so and his writing style is about mythology and history not about actually telling a story so yes his writing is not great at all.

[InfiniteCharger]

Have you forgotten where you are? This is a WoW forum. Extensive and in depth fictional histories with hosts of races and even made up languages are extremely common across fantasy settings in book series, video games, table top RPG’s, collectible card games, shows, and movies nowadays. It’s pretty much expected.

Tolkien’s depictions of dwarves, elves, orcs, goblins, etc have all pretty much become the generic versions that people think of. Being synonymous with “generic high fantasy” is a strength of Tolkien’s legacy.

Seriously? So you are saying that when Tolkien is the inspiration for all of these modern high fantasy stories? And the reason his work is not generic is because of the time he put into the history and mythology of Middle Earth, beyond just the two books. As such story of Middle Earth is very unique and distinct and that is why it is not "generic" fantasy. So while Tolkien didn't go as far with magic and other kinds of fantastical powers as they do in modern High Fantasy, that doesn't mean his work is generic.

And it all depends on how you define "generic" fantasy to begin with. For me, "generic" fantasy generally applies to movies and TV where they often aren't able to capture all the fantastical elements of written works or even video games. As a result what you get is something more "generic" meaning more grounded because of the practical needs of filming and production. And that extends into costumes, make up, special effects and so forth. And I would put this series in the category of being very generic because of the decisions they made.

[Lady Atia]

Well as much as we don't want to admit it, there are a lot of people who generally enjoy the show and didn't care about the sword choreography maybe if you watch nothing but grifter youtube channels you would assume that the show is a flop and no one likes it.

Luckily for me I watch a few reviewers of the show, and while its easily to flock to one point of view to feed the hivemind, its more healthy to catch a few opinions that differ and offer good and bad, instead of outragers painting with a broad brush with '(X) is bad so all is bad' attitude. And with that said no one I know thinks the show is a masterpiece or a great Tolkien adaptation. I think as an adaptations its failed, but that doesn't mean that you still cannot find things to like or enjoy. And its not my place to tell others they are wrong for liking it as much as me either.

The reviewers I been watching

Hello Future Me (TwotheFuture)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDT...xxCyRzA/videos

Daniel Greene
https://www.youtube.com/c/DanielGreeneReviews

Nerd of the Rings
https://www.youtube.com/c/NerdoftheRings

The Broken Sword
https://www.youtube.com/c/TheBrokenSword

And yes I have tried watching Shad's Knight's Watch channel too, but its a chore. There are only so many times you can hear the words 'forced diversity' and 'woke agendas' (paraphrasing here) before my brain just startied turning to mush.

Nerd of the Rings is actually quite positive and awesome to watch, none of this "woke agenda" bullshit. Are the other ones similiar to that?

Besides that, I also watch "Heavy Spoilers" and "Emergency Awesome" which also are on the fair spectrum of reviews, aswell as "New Rockstars" although I think they didn't put out a video about every episode yet.

[Gumble]

I loved the part where Galadriel stood firm and strong and didn't move an inch when the volcano erupted, while all the lesser men were fleeing and screaming like little girls. Slay queen is so brave in the face of oblivion, I am so proud of her!!

So they killed her? Elves are just as killable as humans, so a volcano would kill her right?

I assume she did that to save the people who were fleeing in some way to protect them from the exploding volcano and died to save the lives of others?

So she's dead? They are moving on to a new protagonist?

[InfiniteCharger]

There is popular and only selling a few thousands copies here and there over many decades so you are talking nonsense, the books didnt sell that great at all in reality until the films released, thats considered popular not the small amount sold over several decades.

His writing is long winded and spends far too much time explaining pointless things, he also has many occasions where things just dont make sense so and his writing style is about mythology and history not about actually telling a story so yes his writing is not great at all.

The fact you would sit here and argue that his work wasn't that popular says that you are not even talking in the realms of reality and in your own opinions. It is the success of the Hobbit, which Tolkien never had initially planned to publish, that caused the publisher asked him for a sequel and led to the creation of Lord of the Rings. Obviously that means the sales of the Hobbit were successful enough to justify that sequel.

[Kumorii]

So they killed her? Elves are just as killable as humans, so a volcano would kill her right?

I assume she did that to save the people who were fleeing in some way to protect them from the exploding volcano and died to save the lives of others?

So she's dead? They are moving on to a new protagonist?

They've released a promo picture of what happens... At least what I assume is this event. Where she is just covered in ash and everything is red.
So no, that won't happen. She will just take the volcano ash.

[Triceron]

Your point seemed to be about fantasy not taking combat seriously, which isn't really true as in the "rules" around combat that have developed in D&D and MMOs as the epitome of fantasy to most people today. Xena had somewhat exaggerated action and of course on a 90s tv budget and was decent for what it was, but that show is not 'representative' of all fantasy. And so the point I was making is that the combat in Tolkien is basically an extension of medieval combat and not really far out and fantastical like World of Warcraft. This series doesn't take combat seriously at all which is why so many have commented on it.

Aren"t we on the aame regard that RoP isn't Tolkien?

It's an adaptation of his work, but by no means held to any standard set by his writings in terms of how cimvat is portrayed.

The show is literally Xena or Pro wrestling level of fantasy fighting. And I didn't mean all fantasy fighting is Xena level, I was making a point that RoP specifically is overdramatized, and not using any modern HEMA or historic fighting styles really. It's overdramatized action.

[kenn9530]

The fact you would sit here and argue that his work wasn't that popular says that you are not even talking in the realms of reality and in your own opinions. It is the success of the Hobbit, which Tolkien never had initially planned to publish, that caused the publisher asked him for a sequel and led to the creation of Lord of the Rings. Obviously that means the sales of the Hobbit were successful enough to justify that sequel.

The books barely sold any copies before the films, at most a few hundred thousand copies sold over several decades, that is not considered popular no matter how hard you try and spin it. Book sales have no impact on what gets put into a movie or not, studios dont want to create whole new stories and universes when they can get the rights to use pre existing ones.

[Triceron]

And again, you're doing it not knowing the actual story. So to be precise, you're arguing that the character of Arondir is unnecessary to the story in the context of the small part of the story we actually know, which is obtuse. This whole debacle between you and rhorle is pointless, and serves only to give you a "I told you so" platform to preach from if - and that's a big if - Arondir indeed turns out to be unnecessary for the whole story.

I've been clear about expressing my opinion based on the context of the 6 eps we have so far.

They could have Arondir become high general of the Elves of the Southland Reclamation Army in season 2, and it wouldn't affect what I'm saying about the here and now. Cuz if thus is just build up to something like that, I would just as well argue that they could have or should have just spent time on the other arcs, and introduce a more prominent Arondir character for S2 with some flashback scenes for context. Literally move the prison scenes into next season to give context to this character instead of fronting it now, where there's already too many plotlines to follow.

But it's clear to me they want this character here and now in S1. For what I believe are obvious reasons that others can feel free to disagree with me on.

- - - Updated - - -

The books barely sold any copies before the films, at most a few hundred thousand copies sold over several decades, that is not considered popular no matter how hard you try and spin it. Book sales have no impact on what gets put into a movie or not, studios dont want to create whole new stories and universes when they can get the rights to use pre existing ones.

You seriously downplay how many sales the books had prior to the PJ movies.

It's not a few hundred thousand copies, it's closer to 100 million. Over in fact, before the PJ movies came out.

https://atomtickets.com/movie-news/h...oks-to-movies/

J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings had sold 100 million copies in almost half a century before the movie’s release

Can you give a source for where you pull a few hundred thousand copies sold?

[kenn9530]

You seriously downplay how many sales the books had prior to the PJ movies.

It's not a few hundred thousand copies, it's closer to 100 million. Over in fact, before the PJ movies came out.

Can you give a source for where you pull a few hundred thousand copies sold?

Its already been proven in this thread that global sales in 2003 was 50 million, 2 years after the first films release so dont talk total nonsense. Total global sales hit 150 million in 2007. There is not much other information on sales apart from selling a few thousand copies here and there prior to the films.

Even tolkien himself writing a letter to another author that is helping him improve his writing style stated book sales were not that great.

[Rageonit]

I've been clear about expressing my opinion based on the context of the 6 eps we have so far.

Now matter how clear you are about it, it's still pointless and obtuse. You use this argument to force @rhorle into defending a position that needs no defending (hopefully he realizes that rather sooner than later) and to make the show look worse than it actually is. But hey, you can always argue later that maybe this Arondir dude was indeed necessary for the story, but not in season 1, because why not flashbacks! Bravo, sir. That's a win-win for you no matter how you look at it. A damn tactical masterclass (for people blind enough to not to see what you're trying to accomplish here).

Yet still completely pointless.

[frn1]

Its already been proven in this thread that global sales in 2003 was 50 million, 2 years after the first films release so dont talk total nonsense. Total global sales hit 150 million in 2007. There is not much other information on sales apart from selling a few thousand copies here and there prior to the films.

Even tolkien himself writing a letter to another author that is helping him improve his writing style stated book sales were not that great.

Ah, you edited your post..

The books barely sold any copies before the films, at most a few hundred thousand copies sold over several decades, that is not considered popular no matter how hard you try and spin it. Book sales have no impact on what gets put into a movie or not, studios dont want to create whole new stories and universes when they can get the rights to use pre existing ones.

https://www.thestar.com/entertainmen..._the_king.html

"Thanks partly to filmmaker Peter Jackson, the Tolkien brand has never been stronger. Fully one-third of the 150 million copies of The Lord of the Rings sold to date were purchased after the release of the first film in the series."

If we are to believe this article, you really have no idea what you are talking about.
If you were correct, it would also mean the LOTR books sold like 149.6m copies of the book between 2001-2007.

Ofc book sales has an impact on if a movie is created or not.

You must be trolling.

[kenn9530]

Ah, you edited your post..



https://www.thestar.com/entertainmen..._the_king.html

"Thanks partly to filmmaker Peter Jackson, the Tolkien brand has never been stronger. Fully one-third of the 150 million copies of The Lord of the Rings sold to date were purchased after the release of the first film in the series."

If we are to believe this article, you really have no idea what you are talking about.
If you were correct, it would also mean the LOTR books sold like 149.6m copies of the book between 2001-2007.

Ofc book sales has an impact on if a movie is created or not.

You must be trolling.

"That's just in the U.S.," Harper says. "Tolkien has been a cultural phenomenon for years. The Lord of the Rings has sold 50 million copies worldwide. But there's been nothing like the audience growth we've experienced coinciding with the new movies. I know of no other publishing experience like it." an article from 2003

as i have already said it has been proven that most of the books were not sold prior to the films, as you can read 50 million sales worldwide in 2003, the article you posted only mentions 50 million books being sold after the first film in the series so obviously the other sales happened after the other films released to bring the total to 150 million sales over 7 years or do you believe no more books sold at all over several years after the successfull films released. Around 7 years is more than reasonable to expect up to 150 million books to sell.

Dont embarrass yourself by posting when you dont know anything in the first place.

Infracted for continued derailing/trolling.