Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[NotBigzo]

and yet you continue to not disprove or even talk about all the points me and several others have made, because you know we are right. You want to say the show can still be good, that is something you can argue, I won't agree with that given what we have been shown. You can't however say with everything we have been given basically being against what Tolkien wrote/not in what Tolkien wrote that it is accurate/faithful/a good adaptation. To do so is to shill, as it isn't true.



What? We know things aren't accurate, we have been given that information mate. It isn't an insult to prove a show isn't being accurate/faithful to the source, especially when they deviate SO FAR from what Tolkien created. Again people aren't asking for a 100% 1 to 1 adaptation, I at least just want something at 80-90%, something close that takes few liberties (which LoTR did).

When half the cast is brand new to the story, when you condense thousands of years down into a much shorter spawn, when characters do things they never did in the books (all things we know factually) it has already proven you aren't even close to accurate.

People don't insult everything that comes along, they just insult the work that is an insult to the person who created them (see Rafe I mean Wheel of time). People shouldn't just be happy they are given something, you should only celebrate it if it is good, like the Dredd film.

Honestly, I just wouldn't bother.

Tolkein's universe is about to get fucked by people who are too creatively bankrupt to create their shit, so they instead are going to shit on someone elses' shit.

Simps are gonna simp for it. It is what it is.

[Xath]

Michael B. Jordan gets a lot of credit from weird nerds in saying he'd not want to play a black Kal'el version of Superman - that there were black Kryptonians and he could play a Superman based on them if they wanted to develop it. That no one has developed it is pretty telling - black Kryptonians don't pull any weight, either in the comics or on film. They don't have the name/cache of Superman. I thought it would be interesting to put such a treatment on film. Same exact story as Kal'el - but he's a black Kryptonian, as is Jor'el etc. Suddenly, his upbringing, even him being adopted, takes on a much different tone. And yeah, if you like the saccharine sweet story of Superman, that still exists for you in Smallville, and literally every other Superman story ever. But that tonal shift, that story of a black man being raised by white farmers in the 50s/60s/70s hell even now in 2022.....would be an interesting (and important) story to tell. It would probably make Smallville and the Kents much bigger and more important characters. And considering what the story of Superman is - that he's a good man in spite of his powers - it would be fascinating to see how that would happen if he grew up black in rural Kansas.

But I guess that'd be woke pandering to you instead of, yanno, an interesting story to tell.

Uh yeah that would be in the same level as make Peter Parker black instead of you know having a Miles Morales movie which guess what Into the Spiderverse largely is and you know the Miles Morales video game as well. Michael B. Jordan unlike you has first hand experience with what happens when characters are race bended with FF4 tanking to hell and back because guess what the people who want to racebend characters instead of making new ones don't actually go see movies. So yes making the movie of Calvin Ellis who is honestly much more interesting than Kal-El has been basically ever would be awesome especially considering he was largely based on Barrack and is the President of the US on Earth-23. Just making Clark black would be a great way to tank the movie though. Comic book nerds do tend to be rather sticklers for following the comics; I realize you don't care about that.

[MCMLXXXII]

. Comic book nerds do tend to be rather sticklers for following the comics; I realize you don't care about that.

That's not hurting Marvel now, is it?

[Adamas102]

/snip.

So many words, and no substance to be found. You’ve written how many paragraphs in response to me now and in none of your posts do you ever reference whatever garbage source convinced you that these movies that you never even watched are terrible because of “wokeness”.

You’re still objectively wrong in your understanding of what the term “woke” even means, where it came from, and why your usage derives specifically from American political propaganda (something that would easily be cleared up with a simple google search).

When it comes to portraying Galadriel as a warrior you’ll dismiss what Tolkien wrote in his letter, but when it comes to casting elves it’s all about the unsaid expectations. “It was considered default at the time that all actors were white” is just about the worst excuse I’ve heard so far. You also going to argue that adaptations of Shakespeare’s works should have most of the female characters portrayed by men in wigs and Othello by a white man in blackface because “that was considered default at the time”? No, outside of historical dramas where race might actually mean something, there is no good reason to adhere to racially motivated exclusivity of olden times (especially in a fantasy setting where races are distinct in various other ways that have nothing to do with skin color).

You reference his scathing review of an unmade LotR adaptation, but fail to see the difference between the cohesive narratives Tolkien fleshed out (The Hobbit and LotR) compared to the rest which was only roughly sketched out. Much of Tolkien’s apprehension about adaptations also came from the fact that fairytales (something he based much of his works on) were undergoing a shift into more amusing tales geared towards children. Neither of these apply to this show, though. The seriousness with which the characters and story matter is handled would be something Tolkien would at least appreciate, and the show isn’t adapting one of his completed narratives.

“I would draw some of the great tales in fullness, and leave many only placed in the scheme, and sketched. The cycles should be linked to a majestic whole, and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama.”

The Lord of the Rings is one of the great tales that he drew “in fullness”. Outside the Hobbit, the rest was left to the “scope of other minds and hands”.

- - - Updated - - -

Michael B. Jordan unlike you has first hand experience with what happens when characters are race bended with FF4 tanking to hell and back because guess what the people who want to racebend characters instead of making new ones don't actually go see movies.

What the fuck are you talking about? F4 (2015) tanked because it had a dull, nonsensical plot, a drab, boring aesthetic, and multiple inconsistencies due to reshoots. It had nothing to do with Michael B. Jordan’s casting. The film would have still been shit no matter who was cast as Johnny Storm, but sure go ahead and pin it all on that .

To further the point, Michael B. Jordan also played a black version of John Clark in Without Remorse last year (a character previously played by Willem Dafoe and Liev Schreiber). I could go on and on about how that movie was a piss poor adaptation of the source material, but Clark being black didn’t harm the story in the least bit.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Uh yeah that would be in the same level as make Peter Parker black instead of you know having a Miles Morales movie which guess what Into the Spiderverse largely is and you know the Miles Morales video game as well. Michael B. Jordan unlike you has first hand experience with what happens when characters are race bended with FF4 tanking to hell and back because guess what the people who want to racebend characters instead of making new ones don't actually go see movies.

The idea that FF4 failed because they changed johnnys race is so fantastically stupid after we have had aura man and the new bat man do incredibly well when they also did the same, not to mention marvels movies doing it constantly.

The mass audience doesn’t give a crap if aqua man is Hawaii cat woman is black or Johnny storm is black all they care about is a movie being well written well acted and well shot.

[Orby]

The idea that FF4 failed because they changed johnnys race is so fantastically stupid after we have had aura man and the new bat man do incredibly well when they also did the same, not to mention marvels movies doing it constantly.

The mass audience doesn’t give a crap if aqua man is Hawaii cat woman is black or Johnny storm is black all they care about is a movie being well written well acted and well shot.

The only washing I don't like is the washing of the book covers of Lord of the Rings to the Rings of Power posters, which make no damn sense to the story being told, as well as the horrible Amazon sticker stuck on the book.

Netflix does that too. like they release these lovely designed book covers for the Witcher books and they have that horrible Netflix sticker engraved into the book. Ruined!

[Biomega]

Tolkein's universe is about to get fucked by people who are too creatively bankrupt to create their shit, so they instead are going to shit on someone elses' shit.

Common misconception.

It's not about lack of creativity. It's about FUNDING.

Imagine you're someone who wants to spend $40m on a film project. What do you go with? 1. a project based on an IP that has had multi-billion dollar films and sold millions of books and more millions of other franchise products to an established fanbase of millions of people. OR 2. a project based on an IP that some writer has newly come up with but that they promise REAL hard is going to be good, trust me.

[Dhrizzle]

1) it's hard to really describe as the magic system of middle earth isn't formulaic like almost every major fantasy franchise in existence today, you can't just take element A + element B and get element C, that's not how it works, in some instances it's very literal, in some cases it's extremely nuanced, for example the black speech of mordor is a total bastardisation of the elven language quenya, and as such was taken by sauron, and twisted like all things evil does it cannot create anew but corrupt and destroy that which was made by good, and when spoken in earshot of elves causes them physical distress and pain, the only word i could really come up with to describe how galadriel exists is 'magecraft' in that she uses the same kinds of techniques as others able to harness the magical power of middle earth where words have real power and can do extraordinary things, as well as using artefacts and objects of great power such as her mirror which is unique in all of middle earth, she can peer into the minds of those she encounters and speaks to them through this medium, she sows doubt and despair in foes through this kind of technique, honestly it's difficult to really describe properly due to the nuance of the whole thing.

That doesn't sound like magic the way the elves use it, in fact it sounds like "the deceits of the enemy." Intent is an important distinction when the races use "magic" and what you are describing is wilful deceit or even attempts to dominate other minds (one of the worst sins in Tolkien's world.) I don't think there are any examples of Elves using "battle-magic" in this way and a Mirror of Seeing doesn't sound useful in a fight either.

When elves fight they fight, their weapons and armour may have been made with mystical properites (as the making of items is a proper way for the fea to work through the hroa, though items of power can take something from the maker) but elven warriors use those items to hit things.

2) "I do earnestly hope that in the assignment of actual speeches to the characters they will be represented as i have presented them: in style and sentiment. I should resent perversion of the characters." -JRR Tolkein, this is a direct quote from the letter in question that you're trying to refer to, to translate for modern times:

'if you don't have the characters of your adaptation use the text i have written for them in my books, you will be hearing from my lawyers'

aka 'STRICTLY LOYAL TO THE SOURCE MATERIAL', he was very clear that if it wasn't as he wrote it, he would not be a happy bunny lets put it that way, i would hardly call that 'not blocking it from being made' as at that time i would expect the author likely held a lot more sway over a project and if they said 'do it as i say or else' then studios likely would bend to the request unlike now where the woke brigade is hellbent on appealing to a minority audience in the hope of scoring brownie points for how many politically correct boxes they can check off the bingo card.

obviously only Tolkein himself and those closest to him were privy to those kinds of conversations about potential projects and how they should be made, in his view, but based on what has been said historically it's a strong bet that if he were able to see this mess from beyond the grave he would likely be saying some very choice things and condemning it in every language of man.

If you're going to actually quote the letter it seems odd to leave out important parts and invent a different meaning of your own.

"I have at last finished my commentary on the Story-line. Its length and detail will, I hope, give evidence of my interest in the matter. Some at least of the things that I have said or suggested may be acceptable, even useful, or at least interesting... I earnestly hope that someone will take the trouble to read it.

If Z and other do so, they may be irritated or aggrieved by the tone of many of my criticisms. If so, I am sorry (though not surprised)."

Hardly a threat of legal action is it?

[bledgor]

I still can't believe they paid a billion dollars for the rights/cost of production for the series, and they left it in the hands of 2 newbie, blows my mind every time I think about it.

[Dhrizzle]

I still can't believe they paid a billion dollars for the rights/cost of production for the series, and they left it in the hands of 2 newbie, blows my mind every time I think about it.

Apparently Bezos is a big fan and wanted to hire people based on passion more then experience.

[Syegfryed]

i saw the trailer and to me it will look more like the hobbit movies crap, full of good effects, cgi and production(while i ahve some doubts about figurine), but bad and full of nonsenses overall

[Frontenac]

Couldn't one say the same thing about those people who push the series without any knowledge of it beyond what those who aren't in favor of it have?

I haven't seen anyone "pushing" the series here. What I've seen are people saying: "This looks promising. Let's wait and see if it's any good."

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I haven't seen anyone "pushing" the series here. What I've seen are people saying: "This looks promising. Let's wait and see if it's any good."

These people have a very binary view of things. They don't have any room for "Let's wait and see". They have decided in advance that it's an unholy travesty and if you don't agree...you are raping Tolkien's Corpse.

[bledgor]

These people have a very binary view of things. They don't have any room for "Let's wait and see". They have decided in advance that it's an unholy travesty and if you don't agree...you are raping Tolkien's Corpse.

There is a difference between a good show and a good adaptation, it could still be a good show, but considering basically everything they have given us/told us goes largely against Tolkeins books/lore it can't be a good adaptation. You have people wrongly arguing against that, which I have seen pushed.

[eschatological]

Is The Boys a good adaptation? It differs wildly from the comics. What about Game of Thrones? Even in the first four seasons which were pretty book accurate, some things, like Arya meeting Tywin Lannister, were made up for the show. The whole Ros storyline as well.

Usually, it being a quality piece of media, and following the themes and narrative through-lines of the original work, is what makes a show a good adaptation. Not it being a word for word translation onto the screen.

[bledgor]

Is The Boys a good adaptation? It differs wildly from the comics. What about Game of Thrones? Even in the first four seasons which were pretty book accurate, some things, like Arya meeting Tywin Lannister, were made up for the show. The whole Ros storyline as well.

Usually, it being a quality piece of media, and following the themes and narrative through-lines of the original work, is what makes a show a good adaptation. Not it being a word for word translation onto the screen.

Again no one has ever said it has to be 1 for 1, but like you admit the first 4 season of GoT which are the most loved were very faithful. They hit the sweet spot of an 80-90% accurate adaptation in my opinion, unlike say Rafe of Time which was like 70% AT BEST and failed both as a good adaptation and a good show.

The changes we already know have strayed from his narrative through-line a good amount for the show. If you don't want to follow the story then don't adapt it, make your own story.

[eschatological]

The Boys is probably, at best, a 70% adaptation. It had to be, it was written almost 20 years ago. Does that mean it's a bad adapatation?

What about Watchmen? Largely faithful, but with a massive change at the end. Is that a good adaptation? What about HBO's Watchmen show by Damon Lindlelof? It follows the comic ending, but takes place 30 years after the events of the comic and extrapolates what that world would look like. Is that a good adaptation? Personally, I think they were both fine adaptations (the HBO show is masterful, imo), though the ending of the movie was a bad one for me, but probably easier to understand for the basic movie-going audience.

Also, I've not read WoT nor seen the show, so I've got no opinion on whether that show is a good adaptation.

[bledgor]

The Boys is probably, at best, a 70% adaptation. It had to be, it was written almost 20 years ago. Does that mean it's a bad adapatation?

What about Watchmen? Largely faithful, but with a massive change at the end. Is that a good adaptation? What about HBO's Watchmen show by Damon Lindlelof? It follows the comic ending, but takes place 30 years after the events of the comic and extrapolates what that world would look like. Is that a good adaptation? Personally, I think they were both fine adaptations (the HBO show is masterful, imo), though the ending of the movie was a bad one for me, but probably easier to understand for the basic movie-going audience.

Also, I've not read WoT nor seen the show, so I've got no opinion on whether that show is a good adaptation.

I never read The Boys, so can't say. Watchman the show? Never watched, the movie was accurate till the end, which was a large change, but I think was still an enjoyable movie, the large change makes it a rougher adaptation. Also have the different media aspect of The boys/Watchman vs Rings of power, they are both comic adaptations vs a novel(s).

However in the context of what I am saying, for Rings of Power it is being produced by Amazon. Amazon recently made WoT, which was bad on both fronts (objectively as a adaptation, subjectively as a show), and they have two newbies running the Rings of Power, like they did with Rafe and wheel of time. Add in that basically everything they have shown/said has indicated a bad adaptation, and you are left with a track record that makes me feel it will be a bad show.

If people want to argue it can be a good show despite all the changes/differences from its source, it is certainly possible, but again to me the reason they choose to adapt LoTR is the fan base/deep history/stories Tolkein wrote. So if you are going to adapt it, why make such grand changes already, it COULD be better sure, but you then have to try and be a better story teller than arguably the greatest fantasy writer of all time. Good luck.

[eschatological]

Is it the same person who (in your opinion) ruined WoT that's running the RoP adaptation?

No? Then I don't know how you draw any conclusions about Rings of Power's quality, and, as I said, quality is a big part of whether it's a good adaptation. For all of D&D's faults as original creators in the last few seasons of GoT, they were newbies at running big shows (and their writing credits on movies was horrendous) and managed to make 4 great seasons of an adapted work.

People love to conflate this idea that these massive publishers like Amazon or Disney or whoever have some sort of singular will to adapt things in a certain way. Amazon has also published The Boys. It has published lots of good television like The Terminal List, which people are praising on this forum right fucking now. It publishes Invincible, Critical Role's Vox Machina, Reacher, these last few seasons of The Expanse, The Man in The High Castle, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, Patriot, which was a great fucking spy show, and so on, and so forth. I'd say their track record is actually pretty good. Maybe WoT is the exception, not the rule, but again, I haven't seen it.

[Xath]

The idea that FF4 failed because they changed johnnys race is so fantastically stupid after we have had aura man and the new bat man do incredibly well when they also did the same, not to mention marvels movies doing it constantly.

The mass audience doesn’t give a crap if aqua man is Hawaii cat woman is black or Johnny storm is black all they care about is a movie being well written well acted and well shot.

Aqua-man is not a hero people give a damn about FF4 is a bit different. Who do you think writes the reviews that ends up creating a fervor in the mass audience when it comes to comic book movies hint it's comic book nerds who grew up and became the writers of the "geek section" of reviews. There is a difference between changing headline characters and changing secondary ones. Marvel has largely kept headliners fairly comic accurate. It doesn't matter how well a movie is written if you can't get people to come see it. Solo is a great example of this it is probably the second best of the disney set behind rogue one but people didn't even bother going to see it because of what TLJ did to a beloved property.

- - - Updated - - -

Is it the same person who (in your opinion) ruined WoT that's running the RoP adaptation?

No? Then I don't know how you draw any conclusions about Rings of Power's quality, and, as I said, quality is a big part of whether it's a good adaptation. For all of D&D's faults as original creators in the last few seasons of GoT, they were newbies at running big shows (and their writing credits on movies was horrendous) and managed to make 4 great seasons of an adapted work.

People love to conflate this idea that these massive publishers like Amazon or Disney or whoever have some sort of singular will to adapt things in a certain way. Amazon has also published The Boys. It has published lots of good television like The Terminal List, which people are praising on this forum right fucking now. It publishes Invincible, Critical Role's Vox Machina, Reacher, these last few seasons of The Expanse, The Man in The High Castle, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, Patriot, which was a great fucking spy show, and so on, and so forth. I'd say their track record is actually pretty good. Maybe WoT is the exception, not the rule, but again, I haven't seen it.

It's the same studio which is the issue. The Boys was a largely hands off venture at least at first, rafe of time by all accounts was not and I would say it's extremely likely that lotr will also not be. Reacher again very hands off and pretty much followed the major beat points of the books as well as casting that actually fit the books particularly in the case of Reacher. Thad was an interesting casting choice but actually fit Reacher unlike Cruise. Giving a property like LoTR to relative newcomers means there will be massive oversight. Quality matters but so does following the original work of the author and this feels like another author is dead so we can do w/e the fuck we want like RoT.