Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Triceron]

It’s an argument, not a debate?..

Hmmmm someones getting a thesaurus for christmas ;D

Yup, just like this isn't a debate, its just shitposting.

Is there anything you actually want to discuss, or you just want to keep trolling here? Otherwise not sure why you're even replying to me.

- - - Updated - - -

I've already read the material it's very loosely based on not hard to read a summary and pick out the things that glaringly go against canon. You on the other hand haven't read the material and base your entire knowledge on wiki and loose adapts.

- - - Updated - - -



I honestly think Amazon is blowing smoke with their numbers just looking at the advertising stuff that gets sent out to prime members LoTR is at the very bottom of the blast below stuff like Licorice Pizza and WoT isn't even on it while a ton of older stuff is above the fold so to speak. Bosch Good Omens Man in High Castle all are much more prominently placed than LoTR even Dog is.

Yeah but those are all successful shows, success isn't measured merely by beating others but whether it does well for itself.

Transformers and Twilight aren't more profitable or well acclaimed than Marvel or Avatar, doesn't mean the movies had to beat em to be considered a success right?

[Xath]

Right. It is okay when you do it but not okay when others do it. A double standard. A wiki is the same as reading a summary for the show. Yet it is good when you do it and bad when I do it. Strange, right? Did you even watch any of the show or did you just read summaries?

- - - Updated - - -



So Amazon is lying about numbers because they are advertising shows to you that are not Lord of the Rings? Lmao. It is crazy that a person that didn't even watch, all or part of, the show is creating a conspiracy. If Amazon was lying would they have put RoP at number 2 in the US this week? As The Peripheral has reached the number 1 slot currently.

Nielsen ratings, which Amazon doesn't control, also don't paint a bleak picture. As the 19-25 got 977 million minutes. I drop of 10 million from the last week. Episode 5 released part way through these numbers. But it is easier to believe it is all a lie just because you dislike the show, right?

Again it's not a double standard. You are making claims about the material which the trash adapt is referencing but haven't read it I am talking about specific things that are verifiably different between the trash adapt and the source material. And no it's just odd to see a show that literally just finished being put under shows that are not even currently going like Good Omens. There is a supposedly a second season coming but no actual info about when. Also under Licorice Pizza like really??? One of us works in marketing and it isn't you it's extremely odd to see a new seasonal product being given lower billing than old finished ones.

- - - Updated - - -

Yup, just like this isn't a debate, its just shitposting.

Is there anything you actually want to discuss, or you just want to keep trolling here? Otherwise not sure why you're even replying to me.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah but those are all successful shows, success isn't measured merely by beating others but whether it does well for itself.

Transformers and Twilight aren't more profitable or well acclaimed than Marvel or Avatar, doesn't mean the movies had to beat em to be considered a success right?

It's not about whether it's beating them it's about what's being promoted. Even if this is based on purchasing in the last several months I have a bunch of fantasy books purchased via audible as well as dnd stuff direct via amazon it would make much more sense to have a fantasy product at the top than for it to be given much lower billing.

[rhorle]

And no it's just odd to see a show that literally just finished being put under shows that are not even currently going like Good Omens. There is a supposedly a second season coming but no actual info about when. Also under Licorice Pizza like really??? One of us works in marketing and it isn't you it's extremely odd to see a new seasonal product being given lower billing than old finished ones.

As someone who works in marketing wouldn't you understand why a show a person didn't finish (or even start) wouldn't be prominent in targeted advertisement? Even if the e-mail or ads are not tailored specifically to you Amazon still has reasons to draw people into their other shows. Likely why Wheel of Time is number 9 on prime video currently despite having no new content. You are also trying to gate keep again by saying only you have a right to talk about marketing because it is your job.

So I can't reference specific things about Tolkien Canon with wiki's but you can reference specific things about the show with summaries? That is a double standard. One is acceptable because it comes from you or reinforces your view on the show. The other is not acceptable because it doesn't come from you and go against your view of the show.

- - - Updated - - -

Your argument makes sense if you think that the content of the show is equal to the content of the source material in terms of understanding the universe. And uh, it's just not. The books are 1000X more important than any adaptation.

Strawman. I never made the argument that source material is not more important then an adaptation faithful or not. It is still a double standard to whine about a show you haven't watched or only watched part of while at the same time gate keeping a person that hasn't read the full source material.

[Xath]

As someone who works in marketing wouldn't you understand why a show a person didn't finish (or even start) wouldn't be prominent in targeted advertisement? Even if the e-mail or ads are not tailored specifically to you Amazon still has reasons to draw people into their other shows. Likely why Wheel of Time is number 9 on prime video currently despite having no new content. You are also trying to gate keep again by saying only you have a right to talk about marketing because it is your job.

So I can't reference specific things about Tolkien Canon with wiki's but you can reference specific things about the show with summaries? That is a double standard. One is acceptable because it comes from you or reinforces your view on the show. The other is not acceptable because it doesn't come from you and go against your view of the show.

No it isn't holy crap. Wiki's are a summary of passages that are usually hundreds or even thousands of words in length for example when you try to talk about wot. I've read the damn scripts because it was faster and less painful than watching the trash meanwhile you try to crib stuff that took place over dozens of chapters from a simple summary that misses out on all context.

[rhorle]

I didn't say you did... ...I interpret that to mean that you view both sources as equally valid

You did and just confirmed you did. Lmao. If a person can't use summaries to talk about the book then they shouldn't be able to use summaries to talk about a show. Reading a book confers no special knowledge that reading the same info in a summary or wiki does not. You are just gate keeping but doing so second hand.

- - - Updated - - -

No it isn't holy crap. Wiki's are a summary of passages that are usually hundreds or even thousands of words in length for example when you try to talk about wot. I've read the damn scripts because it was faster and less painful than watching the trash meanwhile you try to crib stuff that took place over dozens of chapters from a simple summary that misses out on all context.

You've read the script for the show? I thought you said you got your knowledge from a summary? A wiki provides relevant information about the story and it provides a source to back up claims other then "I read it in the book". You haven't even tried to argue that what I provide from a wiki or other sources is wrong. You just attack the source because you know that the information isn't wrong.

[rhorle]

Again, one of the two is by the actual creator of the fictional universe, the other is by two random scriptwriters. One is way more important than the other... you don't seem to realize that.

Again not something I've stated. The show also has more then two writers. Did you by chance use the wrong word again? As there are two show runners.

[Triceron]

You are correct. I stated that... this new line of attack is particularly bizarre. Am I not allow to say things that you haven't already said first?

Maybe contradict me - it's my impression that you think the book material isn't more important than the show. I've stated that several times and you haven't disagreed, you just keep saying that you haven't said that yet. You haven't really said at all what you think. So say it - is the book material more important than the show's?

You'll find this a part of his argument style. He will focus on attacking what you say, while not presenting his own opinion on the matter. There is no conversation being had, he's only interested in prolonging the discussion enough to find something to attack you on. He doesn't actually care to discuss actual opinion, and if you push him hard enough on something he refused to acknowledge he'll straight up stop responding and pretend the entire discussion didn't happen.

And this is a guy who claimed to be here interested in having good discussions, yet all he ever does is... Whatever this is.

[rhorle]

You are correct. I stated that... this new line of attack is particularly bizarre. Am I not allow to say things that you haven't already said first?

Did I say you couldn't? You keep trying to attribute things to me that I've never said. Implied or Direct. I've never once stated that source material is more important than the show.

- - - Updated - - -

it undermines his argument that it doesn't matter that he hasn't read the books.

It doesn't matter if I haven't finished Lord of the Rings if I provide relevant text from Tolkien, the books, or wiki's about the book. Most of us would have to refresh our memory anyways if it is something that was read 20 years ago, right? I imagine you don't have a perfect recall of past events. If it is bad for me to be discussing the books while not having read part of the books then it is bad for a person to not have watched part of the show while discussing the show.

It is the same principle that is given a double standard just because you are looking for something to attack and discredit over.

[qwerty123456]

For some reason this guy showed up in my recommended and I gotta say dang that Ian McKellen deepfake face looks good. I wouldn't be surprised if future films are filmed so they can make better use of the technology and exploit dead actors when their children want some quick cash.

[rhorle]

So no answer to my question. Got it.

I believe I answered it multiple times with the text of my posts. Book is important to the books. The show is important to the show. Knowledge of both can be gained through other means then reading or watching. There are a number of times in this thread where people didn't notice things when they watched the show. Just as there are some who remember things incorrectly about the books and over all Tolkien-canon.

Wiki, letters, or anything else used to refresh memories or back up claims isn't a bad thing. However if someone is going to label not reading all of the books bad then they can't also defend not watching all of a show as good. It is a double standard that only exists because they can't label themselves "bad" while trying to label another "bad" for doing the same exact thing.

- - - Updated - - -

I wouldn't be surprised if future films are filmed so they can make better use of the technology and exploit dead actors when their children want some quick cash.

James Earl Jones gave rights to Respeecher to AI generate his voice for Darth Vader and he isn't even dead yet. It is going to be interesting how voices and images can be preserved in the future and the on going rights over it. Would an AI voice/image become public domain at some point like other work can?

[rhorle]

So they are equally important? The writings of JRR Tolkien, one of the most celebrated authors of the 20th century, are equal in importance to the two random writers who Amazon hired to run their show?

Ahh there is the strawman trap you've been so eager to spring. When discussing a show then the show is important. When discussing the books then the book is important. It is as simple as that. Just because the show is important to the show doesn't mean Tolkien is any less important for the things he has done. Your reasoning is basically saying gas is important to an electric car because it is also important to a ICE car.

[rhorle]

So would you say the books are important when there's a show written based on them, or is that totally irrelevant?

They are as a reference. The show isn't a faithful adaptation so ultimately the show and what they've decided is most important. If I have to read all the books to be able to reference the books then don't others need to watch the entire show to reference the show? Isn't the show the most important thing when discussing the show?

[rhorle]

Matter of opinion. In my opinion, I'd rather talk with someone who has read the book and didn't see the show than vice versa, because they would have a better idea of how fucked up the show is if I give them a few highlights.

And yet I haven't had an issue seeing how divergent from canon the show is. Strange, right? Why can't I get knowledge of the books with highlights? You know using quotes, wiki, letters by the author, etc. You are just looking to dismiss anyone who doesn't have the same opinion about the show as you and others. You took a long and winding road to just say you want to gate keep who you talk with for silly reasons. You are just looking to dismiss anyone who doesn't have the same opinion about the show as you and others. lmao.

[rhorle]

No - there's a reason storytelling is an important skill. It's about more than the facts. It's reading things in the way the author arranged them, recognizing the themes woven throughout the universe, and building up a connection to characters and the story the author wants to tell. None of that happens when you get the cliff notes.

All of those things are important for understanding a show as well. Again showing the double standard. If they can get those things from a summary about the show then a person can also get those things from a summary of Tolkiens. What if a person read all the published books but did so 30+ years ago and can't recall everything clearly? Are they dismissed as well? Or do you just invent a new way of gate keeping when they don't dislike the same things you do?

It also ignores how a lot of Tolkien's canon isn't even in a woven universe. They are notes published by his son. Some contradictory and some changed by Christopher based on what he thought his father meant or would have done.

[Xath]

No - there's a reason storytelling is an important skill. It's about more than the facts. It's reading things in the way the author arranged them, recognizing the themes woven throughout the universe, and building up a connection to characters and the story the author wants to tell. None of that happens when you get the cliff notes.

You don't have to read like 10 books by the way - just the Silmarillion pretty much covers it.

I'm not saying you can't watch the series and develop your own opinions by the way - just it doesn't make sense for you to be getting in arguments with book readers because your perspective will be fundamentally different, particularly for series like this one where the book and the show diverge so ridiculously wildly. It's the same as how I don't insert myself into the deep lore discussions on this website - I play wow, but I'm not familiar enough with the lore to insert myself into those debates.

They weren't able to finish lotr because it was too hard no way in hell they finish Sil.

[rhorle]

They weren't able to finish lotr because it was too hard no way in hell they finish Sil.

Hard to get through and boring is what I stated. I just couldn't get into it in high school and never returned to it. It was just some of book 2 of LotR I skipped. Just as you couldn't watch part (or all) of the show of the show. You really are the pot calling the kettle black here.

[Corvus]

Seeing a lot of reports that season 2 won't make an appearance to 2024. Bit of a wait.

[Skulltaker]

Right. And what is the poem referencing doing the ruling? The One Ring. What is the poem referencing that is doing the binding? The One Ring. They are not bound to Sauron but to the Ring.

Durin III is alive when the rings are forged. Durin IV is alive for the War of the Last Alliance. The show is starting with the rings being forged and ending (season 5) with the War of the Last Alliance. What doesn't make sense about having both present on the show? It not following canon is not the same as not making sense. They compressed the time line and changed things to make it work. If they didn't have Durin IV it would be something you, or others, complain about it. If they didn't have Durin III it would be something you, or others, complain about. Because it removed a special lore figure from the show. Yet if they have both it is still complained about.

The compressed timeline is not to build tension. It seems it needs to be talked about more since you don't understand why it exists. They compressed it so they could keep the same actors through out the whole series. If they didn't compress it then only Elven actors would be kept and human, dwarf, hobbit, etc would all have to be replaced. Also you seemed to have watched a different show because Sauron didn't touch the three rings. They were created on the show after Galadriel confronted him.

No, the poem is referencing Sauron doing the ruling. One Ring, for Dark Lord, on his Dark Throne. One Ring, for the Dark Lord, to rule them all. That's why the context of the poem is important.

It makes no sense for them to share a screen because Dwarves named Durin are supposed to be a reincarnation of Durin the Deathless. I've said that numerous times, and you keep ignoring it.

If you stuck to the canon, there'd be no need for compression. It's all just for cheap emotions.

Sauron handled the Mithril. Technically, he touched them.

[Triceron]

No, the poem is referencing Sauron doing the ruling. One Ring, for Dark Lord, on his Dark Throne. One Ring, for the Dark Lord, to rule them all. That's why the context of the poem is important.

It makes no sense for them to share a screen because Dwarves named Durin are supposed to be a reincarnation of Durin the Deathless. I've said that numerous times, and you keep ignoring it.

If you stuck to the canon, there'd be no need for compression. It's all just for cheap emotions.

Sauron handled the Mithril. Technically, he touched them.

He's obviously not going to regard the context. To him, the poem can only be about the One Ring because if he admits it's about Sauron, he would also have to admit he fucked up referencing this poem at all, and that's not gonna happen. However he replies, he's gonna ignore that you even said the poem is about Sauron and just go at it from another angle like saying 'Tolkien never stated that in his notes' or some shit.

I mean we all know he's just arguing for attention here. His responses aren't actually in the interest of any decent discussion, he hasn't even stated whether he actually likes the show enough to defend it as much as he does. He just hates Tolkien fans and thinly veils his attacks against anyone who criticizes the show. He's an apologist, through and through. The guy hasn't even bothered reading the novels, and his argumentative style clearly shows he has no intention on actually empathizing with anyone who has. He has zero interest in reaching any good discussion with people who have read the books because he sees anyone who has as being a problem, one that he needs to defend the show against.

Dude is just a shitposter. Called it months ago, and here he is still pulling the same shit over and over again. All while pretending he's actually here looking for good discussion lol.

[Mace]

You'll find this a part of his argument style. He will focus on attacking what you say, while not presenting his own opinion on the matter. There is no conversation being had, he's only interested in prolonging the discussion enough to find something to attack you on. He doesn't actually care to discuss actual opinion, and if you push him hard enough on something he refused to acknowledge he'll straight up stop responding and pretend the entire discussion didn't happen.

And this is a guy who claimed to be here interested in having good discussions, yet all he ever does is... Whatever this is.

No amount of rhorle's arguing has convinced me. Ini fact, I like the show less now.