Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Biomega]

With new IPs this isn't so bad and there's still hope (looking at The Boys by Amazon or Squid Game, for example).

You do know The Boys is an adaptation, right. It's not original IP, it's from a comic book. And while Squid Game isn't a DIRECT adaptation, it's very strongly influenced by the 2005 manga Liar Game.

Those are really not good examples for "new IP".

[s_bushido]

TV is only getting worse when producers try to use original source material and make a show out of - Witcher, Wheel of Time, Lord of the Rings - pretty much all of it is at least underwhelming or straight out sucks.

Most TV is underwhelming or straight out sucks, adaptation or otherwise. If it was easy to make good shows, everyone would be doing it.

But if you've already concluded that this is bad without having seen a second of it beyond the brief trailers...why are you even here?

[Nyel]

You do know The Boys is an adaptation, right. It's not original IP, it's from a comic book. And while Squid Game isn't a DIRECT adaptation, it's very strongly influenced by the 2005 manga Liar Game.

Those are really not good examples for "new IP".

I know as I have the comic book right here next to me. It was just an example for a good practice relying on source material. And Squid Game as an example for good new stuff. Every show is more or less influenced by other things and still can be mostly original. See Game of Thrones which was heavily inspired by Tolkien et al.

- - - Updated - - -

Most TV is underwhelming or straight out sucks, adaptation or otherwise. If it was easy to make good shows, everyone would be doing it.

But if you've already concluded that this is bad without having seen a second of it beyond the brief trailers...why are you even here?

Those trailers tell you enough of how they treat the source material. And the in parts insulting comments from producers just add to that. Everything surrounding this show is just cringeworthy.

[Celement]

Most TV is underwhelming or straight out sucks, adaptation or otherwise. If it was easy to make good shows, everyone would be doing it.

But if you've already concluded that this is bad without having seen a second of it beyond the brief trailers...why are you even here?

It can be fun to watch a dumpster fire too. I know I hoped wheel of time would be good but even before the trailer I didn't have much hope for it... how do you make a TV show about a book that is 70-80% inner dialogues?

Poorly it turns out.

That said even though I have misgivings about what I've seen so far I get amazon tv bundled with prime so it can't hurt to give it a shot.

[Dhrizzle]

TV is only getting worse when producers try to use original source material and make a show out of - Witcher, Wheel of Time, Lord of the Rings - pretty much all of it is at least underwhelming or straight out sucks. With new IPs this isn't so bad and there's still hope (looking at The Boys by Amazon or Squid Game, for example). It's just like producers love to take the biggest IPs in the world and just turn them into travesty cringe shows.

You mean The Boys which takes absolutely massive liberties with the characters and stories, partly to make it work better on TV but also so they can push a stronger woke message?

[Shadowferal]

You mean The Boys which takes absolutely massive liberties with the characters and stories, partly to make it work better on TV but also so they can push a stronger woke message?

Did you really want to see Homelander rip Maeve's head off?

[Dhrizzle]

Did you really want to see Homelander rip Maeve's head off?

Hell no, I'm loving the women being empowered and given greater agency especially when they use it to beat the shit out of a thinly disguised metaphor for Nazi influences on American right-wing politics.

I just think it's a really bad example to praise if you want to complain about source material being changed to fit a different media and modern sensibilities.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I know as I have the comic book right here next to me. It was just an example for a good practice relying on source material.

You may have the comic next to you...but apparently you haven't read it because The Boys deviates heavily from the Source Material....

[Nyel]

You may have the comic next to you...but apparently you haven't read it because The Boys deviates heavily from the Source Material....

I did not deny that, it's still a good example of how you do an original franchise justice by a TV adaption.

- - - Updated - - -

You mean The Boys which takes absolutely massive liberties with the characters and stories, partly to make it work better on TV but also so they can push a stronger woke message?

I find The Boys' message pretty believable though. At least when it comes to "Hollywood terms". You can still dislike it, which I partially do, but at least they don't take themselves too seriously. Which transports the message way better than - for example - Marvel & Co.

[eschatological]

I know as I have the comic book right here next to me. It was just an example for a good practice relying on source material. And Squid Game as an example for good new stuff. Every show is more or less influenced by other things and still can be mostly original. See Game of Thrones which was heavily inspired by Tolkien et al.

They changed Starlight's main inciting incident of being gang raped by Homelander/The Deep/Noir right off the bat. They changed that the Boys don't have powers. They genderbent Stormfront.

They adapted it quite a bit, actually.

As usual, it's about the skill of the adapters, not whether it's adapted or not.

[Xath]

Let's not talk about spoilers to other shows in threads that aren't for those shows

[Biomega]

I find The Boys' message pretty believable though. At least when it comes to "Hollywood terms". You can still dislike it, which I partially do, but at least they don't take themselves too seriously. Which transports the message way better than - for example - Marvel & Co.

It's a tightrope walk. Comedy can be a great amplifier - allowing messages to be over the top but all the more effective in their impact because of it. Or they can turn serious issues into throwaway jokes, undercutting their relevance and importance with glib parody.

The Boys has both. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

At the end of the day, I only look at works as they are, and on their own merit: I don't care if they're adaptations, I don't care how much they deviate from sources or not, I don't care what genre they are, what tropes they use or eschew, or whatever else. I only care about what's actually there, how it's executed, and how well it works in the way it's presented.

It'll be the same with me for this series. It could be loosest, most liberal interpretation of Tolkien ever made and it wouldn't matter to me one bit if they do it well; or it could be a faithful adaptation down to meticulous detail, and I'd still hate it if they don't make it a good show.

That being said, from what we've seen so far I am not hopeful this will be a good show. But I don't know, since I haven't seen anything. I'll give it a shot. I don't expect much, but I'm also prepared to be positively surprised.

[Nyel]

This TV show will undoubtly be compared to Game of Thrones or more recently the upcoming House of Dragon. And I fear that's what's going to break it. Or break it even more, because ever since we saw and heard the first bits about it, the mean-spirited intentions have been pretty obvious.

- - - Updated - - -

It's a tightrope walk. Comedy can be a great amplifier - allowing messages to be over the top but all the more effective in their impact because of it. Or they can turn serious issues into throwaway jokes, undercutting their relevance and importance with glib parody.

The Boys has both. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

At the end of the day, I only look at works as they are, and on their own merit: I don't care if they're adaptations, I don't care how much they deviate from sources or not, I don't care what genre they are, what tropes they use or eschew, or whatever else. I only care about what's actually there, how it's executed, and how well it works in the way it's presented.

It'll be the same with me for this series. It could be loosest, most liberal interpretation of Tolkien ever made and it wouldn't matter to me one bit if they do it well; or it could be a faithful adaptation down to meticulous detail, and I'd still hate it if they don't make it a good show.

That being said, from what we've seen so far I am not hopeful this will be a good show. But I don't know, since I haven't seen anything. I'll give it a shot. I don't expect much, but I'm also prepared to be positively surprised.

I think the entire Stormfront storyline in the TV show was done magnificiently and I think it transported the message very well. Just to have one positive example.

[Rennadrel]

My expectations for this show are zero because Amazon has yet to provide anything interesting or compelling as far as what the series is going to be about. I subjected myself to the first few episodes of the WoT show and couldn't stomach watching the rest because I love the books way too much to keep watching such an unfaithful adaptation that disrespects it's protagonists, invalidates major plot arcs that matter to the series while fabricating ones that didn't exist in the books. That's on top of other major glaring issues.

Considering this show is going to disrespect established characters like Galadrial by hamfisting them into roles they were never in, and the amount of obfuscation about what kind of narrative the series will have, it's going to be extremely difficult for anyone to get hyped for this show. It comes off as more of subversion of Tolkien rather than caring about the world that he created, at least for me right now.

[Mace]

There's only one gauge for whether people are going to like or appreciate it, and it's whether it's done well.

If it's a good series, then people will like it and remember it for what it is. If it is done poorly, then it will be forgotten or live on in infamy.

Whether the story is altered or not is irrelevant. Peter Jackson's LOTR Trilogy is HEAVILY altered from the original books, but it's a great movie series. Hobbit followed in the same vein, and was poorly received. Both altered many things in the books, and it wasn't down to one being more successful than the other because it stayed true to the source. Hardly the case at all.

The PJ LOTR Trilogy is so well received that most people's recollection of LOTR has become altered by the medium. For example, most people will associate Legolas having Blonde hair because of the movies, even though his hair color was never actually described in the books. Or they will see the Balrog as a winged creature, even though it was never described with wings in the books. It's not true to the source, but it has become so popular and well accepted that the alterations don't get in the way of the enjoyment of the series. That is the beauty of adaptations; they present new ways of interpreting the fiction. A winged devil-like Balrog looks more intimidating than if it did not have wings.

It's true, you forgive the alterations when the replacements are better.. sadly for most star wars releases since Disney took over, especially Obi Wan this isnt the case. Especially true with Wheel of Time. Garbage.

Wow players are use to changes, when they are good, most get on board even tho the inconsistency is annoying

[Rennadrel]

There's only one gauge for whether people are going to like or appreciate it, and it's whether it's done well.

If it's a good series, then people will like it and remember it for what it is. If it is done poorly, then it will be forgotten or live on in infamy.

Whether the story is altered or not is irrelevant. Peter Jackson's LOTR Trilogy is HEAVILY altered from the original books, but it's a great movie series. Hobbit followed in the same vein, and was poorly received. Both altered many things in the books, and it wasn't down to one being more successful than the other because it stayed true to the source. Hardly the case at all.

The PJ LOTR Trilogy is so well received that most people's recollection of LOTR has become altered by the medium. For example, most people will associate Legolas having Blonde hair because of the movies, even though his hair color was never actually described in the books. Or they will see the Balrog as a winged creature, even though it was never described with wings in the books. It's not true to the source, but it has become so popular and well accepted that the alterations don't get in the way of the enjoyment of the series. That is the beauty of adaptations; they present new ways of interpreting the fiction. A winged devil-like Balrog looks more intimidating than if it did not have wings.

The Hobbit took far more creative liberties than LOTR did as far as deviating from the source material and that is why most Tolkien diehards accept LoTR for what it is and hate The Hobbit movies. In the most important aspects of the story, they remained faithful. All I see out of Amazon's product is that they've tried to take the artistic design aspects of what Peter Jackson did and slap a different skin on it while providing no context as to the story that is being told. To me, all it looks like is a series that tries to tick off diversity checkboxes rather than introduce us to what should be a compelling story. And when, as a company, you pay "influencers" who do nothing but praise it for diversity rather than it's story, it definitely isn't going to sell it to anyone.

[tikcol]

Not terribly excited for generic fantasy trash overall. Regardless of the universe it's supposed to be based on

[Throren]

I just noticed the show has both DUrin the III and Durin the IV alive at the same time, and they are supposedly father/son, man that makes zero sense. Did they not do any research on Tolkien's work regarding dwarves?

Sure some alterations are to be expected but unlike Jackson's original trilogy who made in the grand scheme of things, fairly minor alterations, these guys are condensing the timeline and putting events and people who lived 'thousands' of years apart, next to each all in the same time period.

It's literally impossible to have two 'Durin's' alive at the same time, just...wat

[Triceron]

The Hobbit took far more creative liberties than LOTR did as far as deviating from the source material and that is why most Tolkien diehards accept LoTR for what it is and hate The Hobbit movies. In the most important aspects of the story, they remained faithful.

The Hobbit was a mess for trying to expand a short novel into 3 movies. That is basically the same problem that this series will face, by adapting appendices into a full series. Even if they stuck close to the 2nd Age source, people would undoubtedly criticize them for making something else up. Criticism of this nature is relative.

I still remember people making major criticisms of LOTR because Tom Bomadil was removed and his lines given to Treebeard. While many of us find it acceptable, there are plenty of people who also do not. Same as with Hobbit, some people find Tauriel to be acceptable, many others do not. It's all relative.

All I see out of Amazon's product is that they've tried to take the artistic design aspects of what Peter Jackson did and slap a different skin on it while providing no context as to the story that is being told. To me, all it looks like is a series that tries to tick off diversity checkboxes rather than introduce us to what should be a compelling story. And when, as a company, you pay "influencers" who do nothing but praise it for diversity rather than it's story, it definitely isn't going to sell it to anyone.

That may be true, but that exists in all media now regardless of whether it is good or bad movie. Even good movies have this. Every best Marvel movie has it, every worst Marvel movie has it, and it isn't a real big deal unless we make it one.

I enjoy the Witcher, and Game of Thrones, and I see just as much 'woke garbage' in both series if we're gonna compare it to the source. It's just a matter of what we personally consider acceptable.

[Askyl]

For me it's the exact opposite. I don't know anyone who likes and enjoys Tolkien (beyond ocassionally watching the movies) who likes this show or is positive towards it. This show is a disgrace for Tolkien and his work.

How? Just like the LoTR-trilogy maybe? Since the hate towards the show is the exact same type of hate (almost identical) to Jackssons Trilogy. And that was also a disgrace for Tolkien and his work.

You are living proof of "Haters gotta hate". You've seen a minute of random scenes and hate it for literally no reason.