Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Shadowferal]

Ignoring the fact that every one of WoW's fantasy races can have a wide variety of skin tones without the need to separate each one into its own bucket? Whether you make your Night Elf a pale blue, or purple, or turquoise, no one is going to come up to you to demand you explain your origin. You're just a Night Elf.

I wouldn't make such a comparison.
Different languages and cultures should've played out.
Adûnaic = Númenor
Sindarin = Beleriand (Grey Elves)
Quenya = High Elf

Ah! like gold fall the leaves in the wind, long years numberless as the wings of trees!
The beginning of the Quenya poem Namárië written in Tengwar

[jbombard]

They were made because the Elves didn't want to fade. The Tree in the show represents that fading in a visual manner.
...

So to sum up what you are saying is they made the whole tree thing up.
I just checked appendix B... the only thing in there is the date the 3 rings were forged. So I am wondering what your source is, hopefully not just a wiki page, because I am pretty sure J.R.R. Tolkien didn't write that. If it is some other source that J.R.R. didn't publish, then it isn't canon. Either way though, if the question is "did they make the whole tree thing up?" The only answer is yes, they made it up.

[rhorle]

So to sum up what you are saying is they made the whole tree thing up.
I just checked appendix B... the only thing in there is the date the 3 rings were forged. So I am wondering what your source is, hopefully not just a wiki page, because I am pretty sure J.R.R. Tolkien didn't write that. If it is some other source that J.R.R. didn't publish, then it isn't canon. Either way though, if the question is "did they make the whole tree thing up?" The only answer is yes, they made it up.

Lol, of course a wiki page is dismissed when it shows you are wrong. Yes, they made up the specific example of the tree but they didn't make up the concept it represents. It is no secret that elves were fading as that was the reason for their migrations out of Middle-Earth.



"Do you not see now wherefore your coming is to us as the footstep of Doom? For if you fail, then we are laid bare to the Enemy. Yet if you succeed, then our power is diminished, and Lothlórien will fade, and the tides of Time will sweep it away. We must depart into the West, or dwindle to a rustic folk of dell and cave, slowly to forget and to be forgotten.'

Frodo bent his head. `And what do you wish? ' he said at last.

'That what should be shall be,' she answered. 'The love of the Elves for their land and their works is deeper than the deeps of the Sea, and their regret is undying and cannot ever wholly be assuaged. Yet they will cast all away rather than submit to Sauron: for they know him now. For the fate of Lothlórien you are not answerable, but only for the doing of your own task. Yet I could wish, were it of any avail, that the One Ring had never been wrought, or had remained for ever lost.'"

[Eapoe]

Did Tolkien wrote that the elves need to forge the rings to save the elven race?


You mean that Tolkien DID NOT WROTE Celeborn into the narrative?

Those are just clear examples of the show NOT adhering to the source material, just like the mithril bit you ignored on purpose, but you still think the show does while the movies not, its laughable.



Lmao, gil'galad in the show is a chubby loser who barely shows up, soy, didn't even got to "treat" with Adar, yes, something definitely that adhere to the source, orcs and elves treating terms, because Tolkien NEVER said this didn't happen

You know what else Tolkien didn’t write? Here’s a nice website of changes from the book to film.
https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/Tolkien...and_Screenplay
I’m sure someone else already linked this for your benefit.
Also, from reading yours and Adams’s’ back and forth, you keep clinging to this ‘Tolkien didn’t write it therefore it’s bad’ argument, and if you’re going to adhere to that then you obviously must state the movies are also bad.

[rogoth]

You know what else Tolkien didn’t write? Here’s a nice website of changes from the book to film.
https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/Tolkien...and_Screenplay
I’m sure someone else already linked this for your benefit.
Also, from reading yours and Adams’s’ back and forth, you keep clinging to this ‘Tolkien didn’t write it therefore it’s bad’ argument, and if you’re going to adhere to that then you obviously must state the movies are also bad.

since you're new here, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but to provide some context, this is the ONLY argument adamas et al have been using for years now whenever the writing in the show was criticised, and now syegfreyed is using it in an ironic manner to show how stupid the things adamas et al are saying, which is proven time and time again in every post.

[Volatilis]

Lol, of course a wiki page is dismissed when it shows you are wrong. Yes, they made up the specific example of the tree but they didn't make up the concept it represents. It is no secret that elves were fading as that was the reason for their migrations out of Middle-Earth.
]

Well defending of wiki pages aside to prove your point is rather dubious at best,

Elves fading is symbolic of a few things not just related to the rings but their overall theme of man before the fall taken from a christian perspective. Elves are more in tune with nature, never die but different from the faeries of European tales which would also be a source of inspiration which are far more nature aligned. Where as the lord of the rings elves they actually build cities and civilizations and show the flaws of man like arrogance and hubris. And I think of them fading as symbolic they are being replaced with man (with knowledge of the forbidden fruit) and now is the time of man.

[Eapoe]

since you're new here, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but to provide some context, this is the ONLY argument adamas et al have been using for years now whenever the writing in the show was criticised, and now syegfreyed is using it in an ironic manner to show how stupid the things adamas et al are saying, which is proven time and time again in every post.

Yeah…no they’re not.

[rhorle]

Well defending of wiki pages aside to prove your point is rather dubious at best,

Nah, there is nothing wrong with using wiki's or other sources of information to indicate a point. Facts don't care about your feelings. Yes, Tolkien had a lot of meaning in how he wrote things. It still doesn't change that he wrote the elves would fade into something wraith-like unless they went west to Aman. The rings were an attempt to delay and they succeeded.

[Volatilis]

Nah, there is nothing wrong with using wiki's or other sources of information to indicate a point. Facts don't care about your feelings. Yes, Tolkien had a lot of meaning in how he wrote things. It still doesn't change that he wrote the elves would fade into something wraith-like unless they went west to Aman. The rings were an attempt to delay and they succeeded.

my students try argue the same thing all the time as I give them a failing grade.

Wiki entries being "facts" is a meme from over 10 years ago. I thought the internet in general had kinda learned that already. Especially with the emergence of chat AI etc

[rhorle]

my students try argue the same thing all the time as I give them a failing grade. Wiki entries being "facts" is a meme from over 10 years ago. I thought the internet in general had kinda learned that already. Especially with the emergence of chat AI etc

That would make you a poor teacher plus this isn't a formal setting. Dispute the facts the wiki states and not that it came from a wiki. It's not like the wiki I linked to is without sources cited. Like I said facts don't care about your feelings.

[Adamas102]

Did Tolkien wrote that the elves need to forge the rings to save the elven race?

Yes, the excerpts from the Silmarillion were posted above, including:

"...they [the smiths] desired both to stay in Middle-earth, which indeed they loved, and yet to enjoy the bliss of those that had departed. Therefore they hearkened to Sauron [Annatar]..."

Part of their motivation for making the rings was to create items that could harness the beauty of Aman while remaining in Middle-earth.

Of their power, Tolkien wrote: "those who had them in their keeping could ward off the decays of time and postpone the weariness of the world"

The show gives it a bit more drama by SHOWING that weariness and decay and making it a more immediate threat, because that's what one does when adapting a story to a visual format.

As for your complaint that the elves should have simply not made the rings once Galadriel knew Sauron had a hand in it, that is also in part addressed by Tolkien. In the Unfinished Tales (Tolkien's notes) there is mention that the smiths brought the rings to Galadriel once they learned that they were bound to the One Ring and they could no longer wear any of them. Instead of destroying them (which she very well could have), she decided that they should be kept and hidden, of course risking that they could fall into the wrong hands.

The Three Rings were the reason why the elves were able to remain in Middle-earth for so long, and they had good reason to keep them around. Once the One Ring was destroyed, the remaining rings lost their powers and the elves departed Middle-earth. So yeah, the rings were VERY important for "saving the elven race".

None of this required a deep reading of the source material. If you even bothered to understand the lore itself this would never have come up as an issue, but all you care about is whining and bitching.

They [the Three] were made to defend against Sauron, not to fix a tree.

Wrong. See above. Celebrimbor made the Three before he even knew of Sauron's involvement, and his motivations, like the other smiths of Eregion, were pride and the desire to remain in Middle-earth. Sauron didn't reveal himself until AFTER all the rings were created, when he put on the One Ring, and the elves realized that ALL of the rings were bound to him (including the Three).

You mean that Tolkien DID NOT WROTE Celeborn into the narrative?

Correct, Celeborn has no role in this part of the narrative in either the appendices or the Silmarillion. You have to go all the way to the Unfinished Tales (Tolkien's unfinished notes) for even a glimpse. There it is said that when Galadriel departed Eregion to go to Lothlorien Celeborn stuck around Eregion and was completely ignored by Celebrimbor. So yeah, he doesn't do shit. Celebrian also plays no role in these events. Her marriage to Elrond doesn't happen till the Third Age (they don't even meet till after Rivendell is established). These characters can absolutely be introduced later in the show (or not at all) without affecting the narrative itself.

Also, you said it was a "plot hole", which I'm guessing means that you don't even know what a "plot hole" is.

Lmao, gil'galad in the show is a chubby loser who barely shows up, soy, didn't even got to "treat" with Adar, yes, something definitely that adhere to the source, orcs and elves treating terms, because Tolkien NEVER said this didn't happen

I guess this is a pretty good example of how much of a joke you are. Soy? Does anyone over the mental age of 12 even talk like that?

First off, the actor is not chubby, you're just a fucking weirdo. In fact, what they did was they cast someone who looks very similar to the actor who played Gil-galad in PJ's Last Alliance intro.


And yeah, Tolkien barely had him show us as well. He doesn't really do much until much later, after the fall of Numenor when Elendil establishes the realm of Gondor and during the Last Alliance of Elves and Men. His role in the books at this point is that he sends Elrond to Eregion (which is why it's Elrond who meets with Adar). The show adds him to the battle, but that doesn't really make a difference one way or another. If anything you should be happy about that if your complaint is that he "barely shows up".

I noticed that you didn't say anything about how his personality of motivations were changed compared to the books, especially compared to how Aragorn's were. I'm guessing that's because you know you're wrong about that and just want to ignore it and hope no one keeps calling you out on your bullshit.

[Volatilis]

That would make you a poor teacher plus this isn't a formal setting. Dispute the facts the wiki states and not that it came from a wiki. It's not like the wiki I linked to is without sources cited. Like I said facts don't care about your feelings.

Well thankfully im judged by people who know what peer review means. And while literature isnt as scientific and needing such an iron eye on detail when discussing the specific work of JRR tolkien and possibly the most well known books in the west outside of the bible theres no need to bring in wiki entries and treating them as facts in a rather condescending way.

[rhorle]

Well thankfully im judged by people who know what peer review means. And while literature isnt as scientific and needing such an iron eye on detail when discussing the specific work of JRR tolkien and possibly the most well known books in the west outside of the bible theres no need to bring in wiki entries and treating them as facts in a rather condescending way.

The only one being condescending here is yourself. You came into the discussion attacking information that was correcting another then bragged about how good of a teacher you are because you don't let your students cite information from wiki's. The information I provided is factual. Notice how you've yet you cite anything that indicates what I cited from Wikipedia is wrong. I even provided a secondary source to back it up and you are still trying to argue that it isn't factual.

Like I said facts don't care about your feelings.

[Adamas102]

I just checked appendix B... the only thing in there is the date the 3 rings were forged. So I am wondering what your source is, hopefully not just a wiki page, because I am pretty sure J.R.R. Tolkien didn't write that. If it is some other source that J.R.R. didn't publish, then it isn't canon. Either way though, if the question is "did they make the whole tree thing up?" The only answer is yes, they made it up.

So you wouldn't consider the Silmarillion canon? That's where the lines I referenced come from, and a lot of the naysayers here seem to fall back on it even if they themselves have never read it and do not own it. I do think the Appendices are enough to adapt this story, the Silmarillion only gives a bit more detail here and there, but nothing that really changes the course of the narrative.

[Syegfryed]

Also, from reading yours and Adams’s’ back and forth, you keep clinging to this ‘Tolkien didn’t write it therefore it’s bad’ argument

No, thats not the argument im clinging, Adamas is disingenuous saying the show is more faithful to the source material than the books, and every time people criticise something the show changed they want to cry over the movies saying people are hypocrite because the movies changed stuff and we are fine with it

But the problem is not having changes, like we constantly said, but having waay to many bad to awful changes, that do not adhere the source, at all, since it actively change the plot, like with the mithrill nonsense

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, the excerpts from the Silmarillion were posted above, including:

"...they [the smiths] desired both to stay in Middle-earth, which indeed they loved, and yet to enjoy the bliss of those that had departed. Therefore they hearkened to Sauron [Annatar]..."

Nothing have to do with they saving the elven race from corruption because they would die without magic mithril, that is completely made up and tolkien did not write that

you are again, trying to distort shit, but that is to be expected from your earlier argument of 'tolkien never wrote X didn't happen, so it can happen". You even ignored how the order of the rings forged is DIFFERENT FROM WHAT TOLKIEN WROTE, but im sure that doesn't matter right?

Correct, Celeborn has no role in this part of the narrative in either the appendices or the Silmarillion.

oh? And Galadriel was in Eregion killing orcs right? totally something Tolkien wrote? or something he SPEFICIALLY did not wrote?

You are becoming more and more phoney trying to keep up with this nonsense.

First off, the actor is not chubby,

Lo and behold, the great elven high-king, great warrior gil'galad, with a beer belly

I noticed that you didn't say anything about how his personality of motivations

What else need to be said his part in the story and his balls were given to Guyladriel

[Volatilis]

Nah, there is nothing wrong with using wiki's or other sources of information to indicate a point. Facts don't care about your feelings. Yes, Tolkien had a lot of meaning in how he wrote things. It still doesn't change that he wrote the elves would fade into something wraith-like unless they went west to Aman. The rings were an attempt to delay and they succeeded.

That would make you a poor teacher plus this isn't a formal setting. Dispute the facts the wiki states and not that it came from a wiki. It's not like the wiki I linked to is without sources cited. Like I said facts don't care about your feelings.

The only one being condescending here is yourself. You came into the discussion attacking information that was correcting another then bragged about how good of a teacher you are because you don't let your students cite information from wiki's. The information I provided is factual. Notice how you've yet you cite anything that indicates what I cited from Wikipedia is wrong. I even provided a secondary source to back it up and you are still trying to argue that it isn't factual.

Like I said facts don't care about your feelings.

Are you quite alright there? I don't see how my feelings are relevant to the discussion. But it doesn't look like you are very interested in having a conversation either so I'll just leave it there.

[Eapoe]

No, thats not the argument im clinging, Adamas is disingenuous saying the show is more faithful to the source material than the books, and every time people criticise something the show changed they want to cry over the movies saying people are hypocrite because the movies changed stuff and we are fine with it

But the problem is not having changes, like we constantly said, but having waay to many bad to awful changes, that do not adhere the source, at all, since it actively change the plot, like with the mithrill nonsense

- - - Updated - - -



Nothing have to do with they saving the elven race from corruption because they would die without magic mithril, that is completely made up and tolkien did not write that

you are again, trying to distort shit, but that is to be expected from your earlier argument of 'tolkien never wrote X didn't happen, so it can happen". You even ignored how the order of the rings forged is DIFFERENT FROM WHAT TOLKIEN WROTE, but im sure that doesn't matter right?





oh? And Galadriel was in Eregion killing orcs right? totally something Tolkien wrote? or something he SPEFICIALLY did not wrote?

You are becoming more and more phoney trying to keep up with this nonsense.





Lo and behold, the great elven high-king, great warrior gil'galad, with a beer belly



What else need to be said his part in the story and his balls were given to Guyladriel

I haven’t once seen them state the show is more faithful to the source when compared to the movies. What I have seen them do is call you out for saying it’s not faithful at all while linking sources that shows it is, and that they did a pretty good job with the source material they have,
The funny thing is, even if Adamas DID state the show is more faithful, they’d be correct. The show has, what, 10 lines worth of source material to work with, and it sounds like they nailed it. Jackson has 4 books between the trilogy and The Hobbit, and he omitted entire chapters, changed entire scenes, and changed how people acted. If you really want to break it down, the show is more faithful to the source material it’s been adapted from, compared to the movies, because it has a lot less to work with.

[Syegfryed]

I haven’t once seen them state the show is more faithful to the source when compared to the movies.

thats because you are not paying attention, and you see what you want to see, its very subtle too, not going to fault you here, since they are using disingenuous arguments twisting then.

What I have seen them do is call you out for saying it’s not faithful at all while linking sources that shows it is, and that they did a pretty good job with the source material they have,

Thats the problem, they did a terrible job with the source material they had, they had few stuff to draw on and they still chose to change then and add their own narrative that directly contradict what tolkien wrote. Again, the example of the whole plot in numenor being twisted, two durins alive, the wizards in middle earth, the mithril crap, and on and on.

This is due to terrible writing, and its no surprise why the entire writing team but one person was replaced for season 3.

The show has, what, 10 lines worth of source material to work with

And they still fuck it out

Jackson has 4 books between the trilogy and The Hobbit, and he omitted entire chapters

And he mantained the essence and the story pretty much the same, the message, people reading the book and watching the movies can say they experienced the same story, not so much if you read the silmarilion and watch the show.

f you really want to break it down,

I don't want to do that again, did for season 1 and its enough losing time and patience with people clearly on bad faith, the show doesn't deserve the work either, as it is objectivelly garbage.

[rogoth]

Yeah…no they’re not.

yeah...yes they are, and have been since the earliest episodes released, it's one of the go-to defences of this utterly indefensible pile of trash.

as an aside it should be noted that the vast majority of things being linked by the white knight brigade and the other cult members are from sources and works that Amazon has no rights to use, has no ability to use, and therefore should be barred from being used as a source to back up whatever asinine bullshit that's being spewed on the regular, but then if that happened adamas/rhorle etc wouldn't have a leg to stand on, because then 99% of their arguments would disintegrate right on the spot, and while I'm on that tangent, they have spent thousands of posts arguing the toss using every single 'modern audience defenders handbook' tactic, so I wouldn't be so quick to hop on their bandwagon unless of course that's where you feel you belong.

[rhorle]

Are you quite alright there? I don't see how my feelings are relevant to the discussion. But it doesn't look like you are very interested in having a conversation either so I'll just leave it there.

Your feelings on wikis was entirely relevant to your responses, lol. Why are you lying? You've yet to answer why the wiki is wrong about the Rings being used to delay the elves from fading. Strange how the conversation you say I'm not interested is the one you keep ignoring.

- - - Updated - - -

Thats the problem, they did a terrible job with the source material they had, they had few stuff to draw on and they still chose to change then and add their own narrative that directly contradict what tolkien wrote. Again, the example of the whole plot in numenor being twisted, two durins alive, the wizards in middle earth, the mithril crap, and on and on.

So wouldn't that mean the Jackson adaptations are worse because he had a whole lot of information to draw on and still chose to change and add his own narrative that directly contradicts what tolkien wrote? Oh, wait a double standard.