1. #9381
    Quote Originally Posted by rogoth View Post
    i love how moronically naïve you are, you genuinely believe a company like Amazon plays by the rules?, you seriously believe the 'checks and balances' that are in place prevent them from lying outright to anybody about anything?

    let me educate you on something, Amazon has more money than some of the G10 countries in the world, to them breaking laws is a matter of cost benefit analysis, if the juice is worth the squeeze then it's done, if it's not they play by the rules until such a time as they can either find a loophole to abuse or outright ignore and pay the miniscule fine to make the problem go away.

    and it's been made perfectly clear that this show was an abject failure in the industry, it may well have been a rip roaring success TO AMAZON, but as an industry standard this show failed SPECTACULARLY based on both critic reviews of the whole series after the fact, the severe and prolonged public backlash against the dross served up, as well as the internal reports that showed that the series bombed spectacularly and couldn't even maintain a respectable threshold of viewership DESPITE being free to view to anybody with an Amazon prime subscription, and if that doesn't speak volumes in and of itself then i don't know what will.
    Why dont you prove your own opinions with actual facts, every fact available proves the show to be a success despite your personal feelings you have nothing to back yourself up, you just like to make things up since you are unable to validate any point you make.
    STAR-J4R9-YYK4 use this for 5000 credits in star citizen

  2. #9382
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    The Dunedain weren’t at Helm’s Deep. That happened afterwards.

    I mostly consider the dropping of that storyline as necessary streamlining for the movie. It would be confusing to include it as written in the books, and require a lot more setup - like the books have a whole scene about how few are coming to Gondor that helps set up Aragorn rounding them all up, and there’s substantial story filled in afterwards about how he got there.
    Yeah, I confused the timeline a bit and mentally put them in the battle of Helm's Deep. They joined Aragorn after the Battle of Helm's Deep, when Aragorn and company returned to Helm's Deep from Isengard, in route to Dunharrow.

    So yeah, makes me curious if Jackson traded out the Grey Company for the Elves of Lothlórien, but either way I would now say you are correct in adding the Elves to the Battle of Helm's Deep appears insular to the rest of the story.


    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    The movies also consistently have battles end quickly, which matched the pacing of the book - the part of the book where Aragon arrived and they win takes up about 2 and a half pages, and a good portion of that is Eomer watching them arrive. Having the army of the death arrive and quickly win, instead of having a long drawn out ending to the battle that exists in the story (but is just summarized so passed quickly), is mostly about preserving the book’s pacing on screen.
    My issue isn't with the pacing of battle scenes that include the Dead Men, it's that the Dead Men never went to Minas Tirith. Aragorn released the Dead Men at Pelargir after they defeated the Corsairs.

    "Take the time to sit down and talk with your adversaries. You will learn something, and they will learn something from you. When two enemies are talking, they are not fighting. It's when the talking ceases that the ground becomes fertile for violence. So keep the conversation going."
    ~ Daryl Davis

  3. #9383
    Herald of the Titans rogoth's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    in the land of killer unicrons
    Posts
    2,660
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn9530 View Post
    Why dont you prove your own opinions with actual facts, every fact available proves the show to be a success despite your personal feelings you have nothing to back yourself up, you just like to make things up since you are unable to validate any point you make.
    nothing i said was an 'opinion' everything i stated was 'fact', it has been shown that upon final review critics have given barely 5/10 - 6/10 ratings to the show, considerably lower than their 'paid for' pre release reviews of 8.5/10 (on average), not just that but there have been dozens of articles posted both in this thread as well as online as well showing that based on internal data Amazon couldn't get past a 37% completion rate for the series domestically, and couldn't even break 50% worldwide, where the industry average is 55%+ in all metrics, meaning that by using the INDUSTRY STANDARD this show failed, not just that but from a domestic point of view it was a catastrophic failure from both an engagement metric point of view but also from a cost to performance metric point of view, to argue anything else at this point is both moronic and factually wrong as well as being a direct denial of objective reality.

  4. #9384
    Quote Originally Posted by Adamas102 View Post
    Just because you're not successfully gatekeeping doesn't mean you don't share the mentality. If you were in Jeff Bezo's position, it very much sounds like you would prevent the project from proceeding just because "they lack[ed] the rights to detailed accounts of specific historic events in the 2nd Age that they want to adapt", which very much sounds like "if they're not going to do it the way I want them to then they shouldn't do it at all".
    Honestly, if you intend to weaponize my opinion against me, I'm gonna have to call you out for arguing in bad faith.

    You're implying accusations that have nothing to do with my opinion. You're inferring that *if I had the power* to do something bad, I would do it. It has nothing to do with anything I said, since you could be accusing me of that regardless of what I say. You may as well accuse me of hacking their servers or committing mass murder at their Prime Video offices since you think me capable of such things.

    I think you should rethink what you're trying to accuse me of here. You've stepped over a line, and you should be aware of what you've said here.

    How is Halbrand a "highly diminished version of Annatar"?
    Annatar was directly responsible for many major events, whereas Halbrand's interactions in the show are not exactly causal at all. One such example is playing on Celebrimbor'a hubris and convincing him to create the Rings of Power in the first place, whereas the lore in RoP was changed to have Celebrimbor already in the process of such a creation and merely being given the right shape and alloy to do so. Celebrimbor doesn't even realize the deception until Sauron completes the forging of the One Ring, and the other rings distributed to all the other races. There is depth to Annatar's treachery in Celebrimbor's arc.

    Here, the plot has been uncovered by Galadriel the moment the Elven rings were _being_ forged, and there's some wavy explanation of having to make three to maintain balance. Sauron's treachery is _premptively_ discovered in RoP, meaning he will be forging and distributing the rings to other races in a completely different way. This diminishes the depth of his treachery and patience, and ability to keep his plot a secret. Rings of Power will be playing on a completely different theme of cat and mouse, which undermines the original lore which recorded that Sauron was capable of hiding his intentions from even Galadriel and Gil-Galad, the two wisest beings in Middle Earth.

    The show has the right to make Sauron's reveal a mystery and seeding multiple red herring characters, while having Halbrand be only revealed in truth to Galadriel. The show has the right to have Galadriel be a super sleuth who is hot on the heels of Sauron's every move. But these changes diminish the actual depth of deception that Annatar was capable of, and all the events he had a direct hand in manipulating without being detected or having his plans changed by the Scooby Gang.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2023-05-04 at 10:23 PM.

  5. #9385
    The Unstoppable Force rhorle's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    20,709
    Quote Originally Posted by rogoth View Post
    nothing i said was an 'opinion' everything i stated was 'fact', it has been shown that upon final review critics have given barely 5/10 - 6/10 ratings to the show, considerably lower than their 'paid for' pre release reviews of 8.5/10 (on average), not just that but there have been dozens of articles posted both in this thread as well as online as well showing that based on internal data Amazon couldn't get past a 37% completion rate for the series domestically, and couldn't even break 50% worldwide, where the industry average is 55%+ in all metrics, meaning that by using the INDUSTRY STANDARD this show failed, not just that but from a domestic point of view it was a catastrophic failure from both an engagement metric point of view but also from a cost to performance metric point of view, to argue anything else at this point is both moronic and factually wrong as well as being a direct denial of objective reality.
    Catastrophic? Amazon has said it has paid for itself already. That isn't catastrophic. 50% completion is what Netflix uses to renew or cancel a show so not hitting that number isn't catastrophic. Arcane, a highly praised show, only got 60% for example. Squid Game had an 87% one only. The article I got that from said The Office, Parks and Rec, and Breaking Bad struggled as well at first.

    The show isn't a massive success or critically acclaimed (1 major and a few minor nominations) but that is far from a failure or "catastrophic failure". The only ones denying objective reality are those that can't handle the show being anything but a major failure.

    https://www.inverse.com/culture/1899...mpletion-rates
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  6. #9386
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    Hard disagree that continuity going forward is still ok. The elves being addicted to the light of the trees or they die breaks the overall lore. The morally gray orcs storyline that is coming next season is the writers being like, "Well Tolkien said he'd like to do this but he couldn't figure it out, but WE GOT THIS". Numenor is supposed to be incredibly powerful to the point where they think they can defeat Valinor - and in the show they are laughably below this level.
    We haven't even gotten to the point where they think they can challenge Valinor. If the cataclysm occurs next season then yeah maybe it'll be a bit too rushed, but given the number of seasons they're going for and the other events they plan to cover I'm quite certain they won't reach that point till a couple more seasons down the road.

    As for the morally grey orcs, how does that break continuity? Are they saying that ALL orcs will be morally grey in which case they can no longer connect to the Peter Jackson movies? Or just some orcs, in which case the pure evil ones still exist (and are probably still the norm) going forward.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    But the biggest ones are Elendil and Gil-Galad, who are arguably the protagonists of this entire era. Lloyd Owen is 57 years old. He will be well into his 60s when he finishes playing the role. How the hell is he gonna be believable swinging Narsil around at age 64 or whatever? Similarly, the guy playing Gil-Galad, the ageless elf who's supposed to be deadly with a spear (and elvish warriors are normally very quick) is a somewhat doughy guy in his 40s. That's just shit. Also they significantly nerfed Elendil's importance - in the book his line was Lord of Andunie and 2nd most powerful lord in the kingdom, in the tv show the queen doesn't even know who he is.
    Pretty sure he'll be about the same age as Peter McKenzie must have been when he portrayed that same character in the Fellowship prologue sequence. Either way, prop weapons, stunt doubles, motion capture, and general "movie magic" is more than enough. How does that have anything to do with continuity? Do you think they just won't have the battles because the actors themselves aren't Olympic athletes with a lifetime of combat experience? Do you think Orlando Bloom actually surfed down an oliphant's trunk?

  7. #9387
    The Unstoppable Force rhorle's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    20,709
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    They made Numenoreans weak union workers worrying about elves taking their jobs. Hard to reconcile that with "maybe the most powerful kingdom ever".
    So you expected the Kings Men to just have no basis for gaining political power in the nation? It is hilarious how often you, and others, fall back into the same stuff and can never move on from those specific moments. The show even had, Sauron, influence those events.

    It is also hilarious that you think continuity has to do with how well you like an actors portrayal of a character. That logic indicates that even if Amazon followed the exact letter of the lore you would still complain.
    Last edited by rhorle; 2023-05-04 at 11:03 PM.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  8. #9388
    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    /shrug
    Being a "cult classic" doesn't necessarily mean people think it's actually good. Just that it's enjoyable in some way despite its flaws. I mean...Neil Breen definitely has a dedicated following of a certain type of people, but even they know that his movies are garbage. Doesn't stop them from enjoying them.
    Well yeah, but that's clearly not what you meant when you wrote:

    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    People wouldn't forgive bad performances and poor pacing just because it got the lore right...and it wouldn't matter how much a production "butchered" the source material if the end product was itself very good anyway. Fucking obviously.
    Ultimately, if you have an established audience for your product because you are making an iteration of an existing IP in a new format, such as a videogame>film or book>film then deviating from that existing story is going to be disparaging to a subset/majority of the audience. This is a given, it's also indicative of fairly major hubris to take a super established work like the one that basically laid the foundation of modern fantasy and re-arrange it. It implies that you know better and the original author did a bad job, otherwise you wouldn't need to change it besides the concessions you may have to make to transform its medium from paper to film.

  9. #9389
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Honestly, if you intend to weaponize my opinion against me, I'm gonna have to call you out for arguing in bad faith.

    You're implying accusations that have nothing to do with my opinion. You're inferring that *if I had the power* to do something bad, I would do it. It has nothing to do with anything I said, since you could be accusing me of that regardless of what I say. You may as well accuse me of hacking their servers or committing mass murder at their Prime Video offices since you think me capable of such things.

    I think you should rethink what you're trying to accuse me of here. You've stepped over a line, and you should be aware of what you've said here.
    Uh, no. It's not really an implication. It's a direct quote. You're not going to claim some moral high ground here by playing the victim after having your own words tossed back at you. It's not a game we're going to play. Moving on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Annatar was directly responsible for many major events, whereas Halbrand's interactions in the show are not exactly causal at all. One such example is playing on Celebrimbor'a hubris and convincing him to create the Rings of Power in the first place, whereas the lore in RoP was changed to have Celebrimbor already in the process of such a creation and merely being given the right shape and alloy to do so. Celebrimbor doesn't even realize the deception until Sauron completes the forging of the One Ring, and the other rings distributed to all the other races. There is depth to Annatar's treachery in Celebrimbor's arc.
    All Annatar did was give the elves the knowledge to forge the rings. That is the entire extent of what the lore covers. What did he say to convince them? Don't know. What knowledge did he teach them? Don't know. Did he do anything else over those 300 years? No idea. Why did Celebrimbor make the three in secret if he was unaware of any deception? Who the fuck knows but it sure was convenient. There's truly very little substance to any of this Annatar related lore on the page.

    Halbrand's scene meeting Celebrimbor already adds a lot more depth than what is in both the appendices and Silmarillion combined simply by them having dialogue and an actual exchange of ideas. He does play to the elf's pride and he imparts the necessary knowledge that leads to the creation of the rings. The important parts are right there. As for the other rings, in the lore they were lesser because they were made over the 300 year "ring-making masterclass", while in the show it's likely they're lesser because the specific materials used for the Three could not be exactly replicated. Neither explanation is really more interesting or substantive than the other, and whether they were made before the three or after the three doesn't really matter since their fate is just to be taken by Sauron and distributed anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Here, the plot has been uncovered by Galadriel the moment the Elven rings were _being_ forged, and there's some wavy explanation of having to make three to maintain balance. Sauron's treachery is _premptively_ discovered in RoP, meaning he will be forging and distributing the rings to other races in a completely different way. This diminishes the depth of his treachery and patience, and ability to keep his plot a secret. Rings of Power will be playing on a completely different theme of cat and mouse, which undermines the original lore which recorded that Sauron was capable of hiding his intentions from even Galadriel and Gil-Galad, the two wisest beings in Middle Earth.
    What plot has been uncovered? Sauron fled before the rings were created with the Valinor dagger and doesn't know that three were made. On the other side, Galadriel has no idea about any plan to make the One Ring, and the implication is that in making three rings it will disrupt whatever plan Sauron might have had if they'd just make the single one. There's no suggestion that Sauron has any power over the ring (or rings) if they're not in his possession. It won't be until the One Ring is made and its influence is felt that the plot will be uncovered.

    As for distributing the rings, there is absolutely nothing in the lore detailing that except for the one that is given by the elves to Durin. There's no detail on what form he takes to distribute the rings or why no one who takes one apparently knows that they're the entire reason for the obliteration of Eregion.

  10. #9390
    Quote Originally Posted by rogoth View Post
    nothing i said was an 'opinion' everything i stated was 'fact', it has been shown that upon final review critics have given barely 5/10 - 6/10 ratings to the show, considerably lower than their 'paid for' pre release reviews of 8.5/10 (on average), not just that but there have been dozens of articles posted both in this thread as well as online as well showing that based on internal data Amazon couldn't get past a 37% completion rate for the series domestically, and couldn't even break 50% worldwide, where the industry average is 55%+ in all metrics, meaning that by using the INDUSTRY STANDARD this show failed, not just that but from a domestic point of view it was a catastrophic failure from both an engagement metric point of view but also from a cost to performance metric point of view, to argue anything else at this point is both moronic and factually wrong as well as being a direct denial of objective reality.
    No all you have is opinions none of the facts back up your own opinion stating the show has done bad or is a bad show.

    Reviews still mean nothing, most reviews are around 1% of the actual ppl who watch the show, the only numbers that actually matter is who has watched the show, RoP is pulling between 40-50 million just from when the last episode released, far higher than other similar shows such as house of the dragon, numbers who have watched the show by now it far larger than that now.

    Completion rate also means nothing, those who watched it will still watch the rest at some point and do you have completion rates for all the other shows because without that it still means nothing, there is no comparrison to say whats good or not, going by the numbers for house of the dragon with only 9.3 million watching the last episode its completion rate is around 33% since they stated it tripled its viewers. Pretty much every single show has half its viewers not watch it all the way through as soon as it releases.

    You are in denial, the show is a success and its good, not the best show in the world but a solid good show.
    Last edited by kenn9530; 2023-05-05 at 01:13 AM.
    STAR-J4R9-YYK4 use this for 5000 credits in star citizen

  11. #9391
    Quote Originally Posted by SpaghettiMonk View Post
    They made Numenoreans weak union workers worrying about elves taking their jobs. Hard to reconcile that with "maybe the most powerful kingdom ever".

    The orcs has to do with continuity because I suspect it will take up a fair portion of the next season on something Tolkien actively chose not to include in his writings because he said he didn't know how to accomplish it. At some point if your series is substantially focused on things the writer didn't focus on, that breaks your continuity.

    To the final point, your buffoonish questions aside - yes, I do think that horribly miscasting the two main characters creates problems with continuity going forward, because they're going to be terrible at playing the roles they are supposed to play.
    Well, now this makes more sense. You don't know what "continuity" means.

  12. #9392
    The Unstoppable Force rhorle's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    20,709
    Quote Originally Posted by WaltherLeopold View Post
    this is a given, it's also indicative of fairly major hubris to take a super established work like the one that basically laid the foundation of modern fantasy and re-arrange it. It implies that you know better and the original author did a bad job, otherwise you wouldn't need to change it besides the concessions you may have to make to transform its medium from paper to film.
    That is a bold statement considering Tolkien himself was constantly revising his work and even wanted to rewrite The Hobbit to better fit Lord of the Rings. Amazon hasn't really re-arranged anything though as they've just condensed a timeline. It doesn't imply you know better than the original author or that the original author did a bad job. It simply means that you are adapting a story.

    It is crazy how offended people get over an adaptation to work and think that changes mean insults to a person that might not actually have been offended. It also means that we need to trash all over the Peter Jackson work because the author's estate actually was offended at what he did. Isn't it strange how very few in this thread think that Peter Jackson's work was an insult to Tolkien? That the line between "its an insult" is dependent on personal views of Rings of Power.

    We even have words from Tolkien himself on an adaptation that drastically changed stuff and is not remotely close to the changes Rings of Power did so far. He didn't like it but was willing to give it a chance. Heck he even disliked a radio adaptation but said it was good for sales. Then there is this quote from a letter, "I have agreed on our policy : Art or Cash. Either very profitable terms indeed ; or absolute author's veto on objectionable features or alterations"-Letter 202.

    So it really is doubtful that the original author would have been to terribly upset over the Amazon re-writes. It is more fan's that need to rationalize the show being bad that are insulted.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  13. #9393
    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    That is a bold statement considering Tolkien himself was constantly revising his work and even wanted to rewrite The Hobbit to better fit Lord of the Rings. Amazon hasn't really re-arranged anything though as they've just condensed a timeline. It doesn't imply you know better than the original author or that the original author did a bad job. It simply means that you are adapting a story.

    It is crazy how offended people get over an adaptation to work and think that changes mean insults to a person that might not actually have been offended. It also means that we need to trash all over the Peter Jackson work because the author's estate actually was offended at what he did. Isn't it strange how very few in this thread think that Peter Jackson's work was an insult to Tolkien? That the line between "its an insult" is dependent on personal views of Rings of Power.

    We even have words from Tolkien himself on an adaptation that drastically changed stuff and is not remotely close to the changes Rings of Power did so far. He didn't like it but was willing to give it a chance. Heck he even disliked a radio adaptation but said it was good for sales. Then there is this quote from a letter, "I have agreed on our policy : Art or Cash. Either very profitable terms indeed ; or absolute author's veto on objectionable features or alterations"-Letter 202.

    So it really is doubtful that the original author would have been to terribly upset over the Amazon re-writes. It is more fan's that need to rationalize the show being bad that are insulted.
    There's a distinct difference between the author of a work revisiting their story and a new author changing the existing story. Changes occur on a scale, a change that is necessary because you're making a different medium adaptation will appear to be less intrusive than a change that seemingly has no justification.

    That is to say, for example including foreshadowing shots and images of Smaug because the medium is primarily visual makes sense from a viewers POV while inserting a completely new elf character (Tauriel) that will introduce new plotlines and contrivances that the original story did not give room for will be more jarring because the setting will usually not give room for such a character to grow since it was not organic from the start.

    There are times where changes occur because films are a limited medium in ways a book aren't, such as removing side quest characters whose revision/removal will not change the outcome of the story in any way such as Tom Bombadil primarily serves to equip the hobbits for their journey or giving Arwen some of Glorfindel's roles. Sometimes a screen medium will have to amalgamate several characters that largely serve the same purpose into one character like Ulana Khomyuk from Chernobyl (2019), this is not a very intrusive change because the film is much, much more limited in how many characters it can present to you and still keep you as the viewer engaged with them.

    Fwiw I am not upset or offended at any of these adaptations, I don't have a very deep connection with this IP though I understand why people are OK with some changes and not OK with others.
    Last edited by WaltherLeopold; 2023-05-05 at 02:32 AM.

  14. #9394
    Quote Originally Posted by WaltherLeopold View Post
    Ultimately, if you have an established audience for your product because you are making an iteration of an existing IP in a new format, such as a videogame>film or book>film then deviating from that existing story is going to be disparaging to a subset/majority of the audience. This is a given, it's also indicative of fairly major hubris to take a super established work like the one that basically laid the foundation of modern fantasy and re-arrange it. It implies that you know better and the original author did a bad job, otherwise you wouldn't need to change it besides the concessions you may have to make to transform its medium from paper to film.
    I don't think I could disagree more...

    On one hand, I'd be willing to bet that the percentage of the audience in an adaptation (at least one that's intended for a mainstream audience) who know/care about the source material beyond vague generalities is much much smaller than people assume.

    On the other, it's not hubris or "thinking you know better" to acknowledge and try to deal with the realities of taking something that was written for one medium and translating it into another. Especially in this case when there was barely anything written...at all. Case in point for the billionth time: Tolkien purists (up to and including the man's son) are notorious for shitting on Jackson's first trilogy, and yet they're viewed in much the same way that you described the books they were adapted from. "The foundation of modern fantasy" filmmaking.

  15. #9395
    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    I don't think I could disagree more...

    On one hand, I'd be willing to bet that the percentage of the audience in an adaptation (at least one that's intended for a mainstream audience) who know/care about the source material beyond vague generalities is much much smaller than people assume.
    Really, because for a long time everyone had read Lord of the Rings, it was one of the most translated and sold books ever written. I tried to explain above why I think some alterations to the works are tolerated and why others aren't. Primarily I believe it's holistic, as in a dramatic change to an event in the books is tolerated if the overall adaptation follows the same beats as the original work and/or does not impede on said beats.

    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    On the other, it's not hubris or "thinking you know better" to acknowledge and try to deal with the realities of taking something that was written for one medium and translating it into another. Especially in this case when there was barely anything written...at all. Case in point for the billionth time: Tolkien purists (up to and including the man's son) are notorious for shitting on Jackson's first trilogy, and yet they're viewed in much the same way that you described the books they were adapted from. "The foundation of modern fantasy" filmmaking.
    I don't think this applies here, there is enough source material to structure the story to actually fit into the existing zeitgeist of Lord of the Rings, whether that means you have to copy the style of Peter Jackson or follow the source material more stringently. It also begs the question why you would set your story in such a well established IP if you don't think you have material to work with, at some point the onus is on you as a producer of said adaptation to accept responsibility.

    It's also very, very evident that the Rings of Power project is not on par with or will be considered on par with the Peter Jackson adaptation of Lord of the Rings, I don't even know why you are trying to compare the two, Rings of Power will not be a leading show in modern fantasy showmaking.

  16. #9396
    Quote Originally Posted by WaltherLeopold View Post
    Really, because for a long time everyone had read Lord of the Rings, it was one of the most translated and sold books ever written.
    Then I think someone needs to update the wiki, because that has it down between Twilight and Fifty Shades at around 150 million copies. I think people vastly overestimate the relevance of the books themselves in pop culture...at least in the past couple decades.

    Quote Originally Posted by WaltherLeopold View Post
    I don't think this applies here, there is enough source material to structure the story to actually fit into the existing zeitgeist of Lord of the Rings, whether that means you have to copy the style of Peter Jackson or follow the source material more stringently. It also begs the question why you would set your story in such a well established IP if you don't think you have material to work with, at some point the onus is on you as a producer of said adaptation to accept responsibility.
    There's nothing about RoP that conflicts with the "existing zeitgeist" of LotR. And they chose this setting presumably because it's what they could get the rights to. If you don't like that they're so limited in what they can actually draw from, have a conversation with the Tolkien estate.

    Quote Originally Posted by WaltherLeopold View Post
    It's also very, very evident that the Rings of Power project is not on par with or will be considered on par with the Peter Jackson adaptation of Lord of the Rings, I don't even know why you are trying to compare the two, Rings of Power will not be a leading show in modern fantasy showmaking.
    I never said it was on par with Jackson's trilogy. I make the comparison because people have somehow convinced themselves that RoP is uniquely irreverent to the source material, even though people have said the exact same shit about those movies, despite how well-received they were.

  17. #9397
    The Unstoppable Force rhorle's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    20,709
    Quote Originally Posted by WaltherLeopold View Post
    There's a distinct difference between the author of a work revisiting their story and a new author changing the existing story.
    To an extent but not in the way you are using it. Amazon hasn't even changed a story because one doesn't exist for the second age. The lore they have changed hasn't even been published by the original author because it was constantly changing and being revised. It shows that you, and others, are giving it this sacred status just so you can label something else as an insult to it.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  18. #9398
    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    Then I think someone needs to update the wiki, because that has it down between Twilight and Fifty Shades at around 150 million copies. I think people vastly overestimate the relevance of the books themselves in pop culture...at least in the past couple decades.
    My use of past tense here is intentional. However Lord of the Rings was and still is an immensly popular & influential book series.


    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    There's nothing about RoP that conflicts with the "existing zeitgeist" of LotR. And they chose this setting presumably because it's what they could get the rights to. If you don't like that they're so limited in what they can actually draw from, have a conversation with the Tolkien estate.


    I never said it was on par with Jackson's trilogy. I make the comparison because people have somehow convinced themselves that RoP is uniquely irreverent to the source material, even though people have said the exact same shit about those movies, despite how well-received they were.
    I think this is a bit contrived since Amazon bought rights to almost everything pertaining to LotR.

    "We have the rights solely to The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King, the appendices, and The Hobbit,” Payne says. “And that is it. We do not have the rights to The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, The History of Middle-earth, or any of those other books.” That takes a huge chunk of lore off the table and has left Tolkien fans wondering how this duo plans to tell a Second Age story without access to those materials. “There’s a version of everything we need for the Second Age in the books we have the rights to,” McKay says. “As long as we’re painting within those lines and not egregiously contradicting something we don’t have the rights to, there’s a lot of leeway and room to dramatize and tell some of the best stories that [Tolkien] ever came up with.”
    https://lrmonline.com/news/what-mate...ower-answered/

    Quote Originally Posted by rhorle View Post
    It shows that you, and others, are giving it this sacred status just so you can label something else as an insult to it.
    What is this strawman you're attempting to build?

  19. #9399
    The Unstoppable Force rhorle's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    20,709
    Quote Originally Posted by WaltherLeopold View Post
    What is this strawman you're attempting to build?
    You tell me since you are the one inventing it. Didn't you say that Amazon is insulting Tolkien by changing his story?

    I think this is a bit contrived since Amazon bought rights to almost everything pertaining to LotR.
    They aren't adapting Lord of the Rings though. They are adapting the second age which without full rights to all that content they are limited. They specifically say they have the rights to everything they need from the Second Age which is different from all the rights to the Second Age material.
    "Man is his own star. His acts are his angels, good or ill, While his fatal shadows walk silently beside him."-Rhyme of the Primeval Paradine AFC 54
    You know a community is bad when moderators lock a thread because "...this isnt the place to talk about it either seeing as it will get trolled..."

  20. #9400
    Herald of the Titans rogoth's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    in the land of killer unicrons
    Posts
    2,660
    Quote Originally Posted by kenn9530 View Post
    No all you have is opinions none of the facts back up your own opinion stating the show has done bad or is a bad show.

    Reviews still mean nothing, most reviews are around 1% of the actual ppl who watch the show, the only numbers that actually matter is who has watched the show, RoP is pulling between 40-50 million just from when the last episode released, far higher than other similar shows such as house of the dragon, numbers who have watched the show by now it far larger than that now.

    Completion rate also means nothing, those who watched it will still watch the rest at some point and do you have completion rates for all the other shows because without that it still means nothing, there is no comparrison to say whats good or not, going by the numbers for house of the dragon with only 9.3 million watching the last episode its completion rate is around 33% since they stated it tripled its viewers. Pretty much every single show has half its viewers not watch it all the way through as soon as it releases.

    You are in denial, the show is a success and its good, not the best show in the world but a solid good show.
    since you lack the reading comprehension necessary i'll repeat it in simple terms:

    the show has a DOMESTIC completion rate of 37%, the industry average is 55%+

    the show has a GLOBAL completion rate of 48%, the industry average is 55%+

    almost unanimously the 'viewer' ratings for this show are below a 4/10 average on every site excluding the heavily censored IMDB which RESTRICTED the ability for people to give less than a 5/10 on this show EXCLUSIVELY, no other show or movie on the site has had this level of censorship and oversight from the site owner Amazon.

    critic reviews from those who actually watched the entire series have rated the show a 5/10 - 6/10 as the best scores seen, and staggeringly almost 90% of those who gave a 'pre release' score didn't actually watch the full series, they watched the same 2 episode release that everyone had access to and did not go back to watch the remaining episodes after giving that paid for favourable review.


    all of these things are both immutable fact and are objective reality as to what has happened with this show, not just that but from a potential view pool of 220 million people, less than half of that even bothered to check it out despite the product being FREE TO VIEW for those people, meaning that the show was so piss poor that people either didn't know about it, or didn't care about it to even bother checking it out, valuing their time spent watching other media.

    i also find it hilarious you're trying to compare a show, with a potential viewer base of ~90 million total HBO max subscribers, if you compare that as a %, then house of the dragon has a SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER viewer count than rings of power, an order of magnitude higher than this Amazon funded abomination, and something that house of the dragon did every episode was increase viewer count over the course of its run time, rings of power did the inverse by losing viewers every episode over its run time, to the point that the show lost more viewers from the first episode than watched the finale episode in total, as stated by industry insiders in several different articles posted in both magazines and online, this show is seen as a failure both commercially and critically, but you keep telling yourself it was a 'solid show'.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •