Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Dhrizzle]

<snip - long, boring rant I've read a hundred times before>

So is that a yes? You think people of colour can only qualify for parts that are written around their ethnicity, and if it is decided that skintone doesn't matter the part would naturally go to white actors unless they are shoe-horned in for the sake of tokenism?

[Sluvs]

And who exactly are you to say that it doesn't matter? Why should the appearance of the ethnic groups that inspired the roots of the setting not be an important part? Why did Tolkien go out of his way to describe the peoples living in this Middle-Earth in great detail if it doesn't matter? Don't you realize that a large part of Tolkien's work went into creating a genuine historical context in order to give meaning and gravity to the world that he created for his languages?

These vulgar demands that the ethnic makeup of Tolkien's world must correspond to the reality of modern countries is very much incompatible with his world building and his outlook in general. Tolkien vehemently opposes the view that things can or should be separated from their history in order to make it a universal rule. That is the territory of modernists which Tolkien rejected pretty profusely.

Listen, I know that you think you are keeping the sanctity of the text by arguing this but in the end the only thing you are truly arguing for is the lack of representation for black people. You might think you are in a high horse, but it all boils down to: I don't want black elves. Which you have to agree, even in this case, is silly.

And while I can see where you coming from, you are currently trying to say that Tolkien would have hated this. While you might be right, you also might be very wrong. All of Tolkien talking points about culture in a broader sense, we might extrapolate what he would think but there was no discussion of representation in his time.

Instead of trying to puppeteer the dead to make a point, we should probably take the series for what it is: an adaptation. Changes happen, it is impossible to be 100% faithful to the material. E.G.: the lack the battle of the shire in the movies was heartbreaking for me. I think It could be an awesome way to end the movie, and it is WAY more plot relevant than black elves existing.

If I was an author, I would be WAY more pissed if they changed the plot, than if they included a black character where there was none.

People are posting quotes and whatnot, believing that they are making a grand stand. But, IMHO, they are just against black elves and black dwarves. And that seems like a crappy point to me.

At this point, the series is bound to be underwhelming, no matter how good or bad it is. The hype so gigantic, the outrage so enormous... The jury is already out. Which I think it is a shame.

If people could look past the lack of Tom Bombadil, the lack of the battle of the shire and the inumerous inconsistencies of the hobbit, surely they could look past a black elf. It is just a shame that they choose not to do it.

The series should be judged by itself, instead it is being judged based on nothing but casting.

This generational war is tiresome and pointless.

[bledgor]

<snip - basic I don't care about logic, consistency, or anything but race argument.

So glad you admit you are racist and only care/focus on race, not on logic, nor consistency or author's intent, or anything else for that matter (and only for blacks, who cares about those other minorities). You just want shoe horned tokenism so you can feel better.

...

You also have to consider, by adding them they now have two important questions to answer or they are forcing us to not think, which I always hate in anything but a mindless action movie. Those two questions are where did they come from, and where did they go.

While the former can be answered in ways not to bad, the latter it requires a genocide or a convenient "they all just decided to leave" around the same time, which is a shitty explanation (unless there are literally only 1 dwarf and 1 elf, then it is just bad tokenism).

When reading fantasy I at least one logical consistency and things like this take me out of the story, which is a big no no to me. If instead they just had the Haradrim story introduced, I would have been completely open to it.

[Nerovar]

Listen, I know that you think you are keeping the sanctity of the text by arguing this but in the end the only thing you are truly arguing for is the lack of representation for black people. You might think you are in a high horse, but it all boils down to: I don't want black elves. Which you have to agree, even in this case, is silly.

And while I can see where you coming from, you are currently trying to say that Tolkien would have hated this. While you might be right, you also might be very wrong. All of Tolkien talking points about culture in a broader sense, we might extrapolate what he would think but there was no discussion of representation in his time.

Instead of trying to puppeteer the dead to make a point, we should probably take the series for what it is: an adaptation. Changes happen, it is impossible to be 100% faithful to the material. E.G.: the lack the battle of the shire in the movies was heartbreaking for me. I think It could be an awesome way to end the movie, and it is WAY more plot relevant than black elves existing.

If I was an author, I would be WAY more pissed if they changed the plot, than if they included a black character where there was none.

People are posting quotes and whatnot, believing that they are making a grand stand. But, IMHO, they are just against black elves and black dwarves. And that seems like a crappy point to me.

At this point, the series is bound to be underwhelming, no matter how good or bad it is. The hype so gigantic, the outrage so enormous... The jury is already out. Which I think it is a shame.

If people could look past the lack of Tom Bombadil, the lack of the battle of the shire and the inumerous inconsistencies of the hobbit, surely they could look past a black elf. It is just a shame that they choose not to do it.

The series should be judged by itself, instead it is being judged based on nothing but casting.

This generational war is tiresome and pointless.

I don't understand this argument. You are basically saying that I cannot criticize one adaptation because another adaptation also had flaws. Does one bad thing cancel out another bad thing? What is the purpose of these cheap apologetics? Do you honestly think that I would go through the effort of posting all of these quotes from Tolkien and Tolkien scholars just because I don't want to see minorities represented in media? If that is the case and you seriously ascribe that position to me, then there really is no need to argue about this because you have already determined my position to be in bad faith.

[Rageonit]

Honestly, this makes me cheer for Sauron, Orcs n the forces of evil, at least they make sense, so plz kill all the humies dworfs n elfs

Man, why would you waste your time watching something like THIS? Any by this, I mean the commentary. The guy doesn't say a single interesting thing. It boils down to: "My god, looks so bad, so cheap, this is shit, my god", plus repeating the most trite arguments you could ever make.

[Triceron]

Adaptations change things.

Beorn is described as being a 'Black-haired man', while his depiction in the Hobbits is with light-medium brown hair with touches of grey.

I don't see what the big deal is, really.


As for the Dwarf Queen not having facial hair, I can see the criticism behind that but I think I understand the creative decisions not to go in that direction either. It's a tough challenge to have a 'bearded lady' be taken seriously in a visual medium, without coming off as looking gaudy or over the top. I've seen yearning to see the character with a 'big beautiful beard', but social norms have ingrained the idea of associating beards on women with drag queens and circus freaks that it's only going to be a uphill battle to change those norms while presenting it in a serious drama. I'd imagine it'd just get in the way of enjoying the performance. I mean, sure, it's gonna be controversial no matter what they do, but I can understand that forgoing the beard is probably the better decision.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I'm glad I'm a bookfag, hehe. the original movie trilogy is also 'meh'

Ascend to a higher plain accept the rotoscope version as the one true masterpiece.

[Dhrizzle]

So glad you admit you are racist and only care/focus on race, not on logic, nor consistency or author's intent, or anything else for that matter (and only for blacks, who cares about those other minorities). You just want shoe horned tokenism so you can feel better.

Not even close to what I said, well done for trying I guess.

So now you've admitted that to your mind it is impossible for non-white actors to get roles without them being shoehorned in for tokenism, why do you believe that white people are naturally superior actors?

[Valysar]

I fear it's gonna be a cancel culture/woke serie...

[BigToast]

I fear it's gonna be a cancel culture/woke serie...

Yea, I mean LOTR really is woke garbage anyways. Remember when Eowyn killed the Witch King with a little help from Merry. "I am no man." Ugh, Tolkien was the original Woker/cancel culture guy.

[Veggie50]

I fear it's gonna be a cancel culture/woke serie...

Right now there’s very little we know…

So why are people condemning it already?

[Dhrizzle]

The Dark Elves don't refer to skin colour in Tolkien's writings. There are no dark skinned elves. Dark Elves are just the elves that never travelled to Valinor and never saw the light of the Two Trees. There is no real physical difference between any of the types of elves.

Not strictly correct, the elves who dwelt in Valinor are generally mightier than those who stayed in Middle-Earth, especially those who were there in the time of the trees. Even Thingol who only visited the Undying Lands was mightier than his kinsfolk, but in part that was thanks to the mutual love between him and Melian.

[Sluvs]

I don't understand this argument. You are basically saying that I cannot criticize one adaptation because another adaptation also had flaws. Does one bad thing cancel out another bad thing? What is the purpose of these cheap apologetics? Do you honestly think that I would go through the effort of posting all of these quotes from Tolkien and Tolkien scholars just because I don't want to see minorities represented in media? If that is the case and you seriously ascribe that position to me, then there really is no need to argue about this because you have already determined my position to be in bad faith.

You are allowed to criticize the adaptation in anyway you desire. I just think it is silly and pointless to try and glimpse what tokien would have thought of this. That and the fact that changing the plot is way worse than casting a black elf. But plot will always change because it is an adaptation. It is inevitable.

My point is, instead of trying to pass judgement of the series now, people should wait and see.

[BigToast]

Right now there’s very little we know…

So why are people condemning it already?

Because there are people (specifically the incels on this board and others) who see a woman in a trailer and is immediately intimidated. Instead of embracing their own immaturity and weakness, they lash out at this "woke culture." And of course content creators jump on this bandwagon to get views.

[Dhrizzle]

I fear it's gonna be a cancel culture/woke serie...

Cancelled for being too woke? The casting has certainly riled up a lot of the easily offended parts of the internet.

[zEmini]

So much for authenticity. I am still cautiously hopeful.

[DarkAmbient]

Listen, I know that you think you are keeping the sanctity of the text by arguing this but in the end the only thing you are truly arguing for is the lack of representation for black people. You might think you are in a high horse, but it all boils down to: I don't want black elves. Which you have to agree, even in this case, is silly.

This is nonsense. Tolkien didn't create his work as a vehicle for representation and so it shouldn't be treated as such. In fact no art should be treated as such, unless the concept of the art requires it. You want to make a fantasy show that's all about reflecting the modern world then go ahead, there's plenty of room for it. Just don't call it Lord of the Rings.

[bledgor]

Because there are people (specifically the incels on this board and others) who see a woman in a trailer and is immediately intimidated. Instead of embracing their own immaturity and weakness, they lash out at this "woke culture." And of course content creators jump on this bandwagon to get views.

Or perhaps people are tired of Hollywood "adapting" works where they take the name then make countless changes to push an agenda they want instead of providing an as close/realistic portrayal of the story as possible, which is what people want. I mean they didn't even fucking bother to put a beard on the dwarf woman, Galadrial is now Xena warrior princess(also where is Celebron in all this, you know her husband?), Elrond... ugh, and the elves in general all looked like bad tier cosplay, not fucking LOTR elves.

Could it all still come together into some epic story, sure there is a chance. That being said, considering the things they showed us I have little faith, especially since this is basically the first project for the people chosen to develop the series (J. D. Payne and Patrick McKay). If Peter Jackson was at the helm I would have A LOT more faith (yes I realize he made changes, but most of the changes he made I was okay with, "I am no man" and all).

This is nonsense. Tolkien didn't create his work as a vehicle for representation and so it shouldn't be treated as such. In fact no art should be treated as such, unless the concept of the art requires it. You want to make a fantasy show that's all about reflecting the modern world then go ahead, there's plenty of room for it. Just don't call it Lord of the Rings.

Also this, there are plenty of works out there are that better reflect the modern world, and if none of them suit you, anyone is free to create one that does. Stop bastardizing old works to fit the whims of modern directors, I am interested in a faithful presentation of the stories I read, not your garbage vision of it Hollywood.

[Sluvs]

This is nonsense. Tolkien didn't create his work as a vehicle for representation and so it shouldn't be treated as such. In fact no art should be treated as such, unless the concept of the art requires it. You want to make a fantasy show that's all about reflecting the modern world then go ahead, there's plenty of room for it. Just don't call it Lord of the Rings.

Sure, if you single out a paragraph of my entire response, ofc you would think it was nonsense. My point are as following:

A) It is pointless to glimpse what Tolkien would have wanted or not wanted.
B) People are getting too hang up on the representation thing

And most importantly

C) People already decided this sucks by watching a single minute of footage.

And I think that is silly.

[bagina]

"Representation" is one of those nonsensical American inventions that serve no practical purpose. There's no need for black people to be "represented" in LOTR because it's a fantasy. You're not making a documentary about a multicultural country where accurate representation should be the objective. You can be represented by real life people that serve actual purpose, politicians, publicists etc. Putting non-white people when there's no reason to it's just pandering and lip service. A random character of a different race will always be jarring and people should stop pretending otherwise. A white dude in a Chinese tale would be just as out of place. Media don't need representation quotas and shouldn't have them.