Again, the biggest tv spectacle of the past 2 decades was a fantasy show, the main difference to the current quality of similar genre tv shows being churned out is that it was well written, well acted and respected the source material, which it followed pretty darn closely until that source material ended and the writers had to come up with getting from plot point to plot point on their own (shockingly that's when its quality started to drop) - massively different to the latest couple of Amazon offerings. Take HoD for example, by all accounts that's grown its viewership as the episodes have dropped compared to RoP losing viewers. What's the difference between the 2? Could it be that one is following the formula that made GoT successful and one isn't???Seriously your not watching it, you cant help yourself with nonsense like slurp down any old tripe.
You have made your views known, I heavily disagree with them.
I have posted why I believe I do with why, you don't, you just post a view as if your some kind of expert.
Again, fantasy is not a highly demanded area. GOT resparked that and led to an inevitable rush for franchises that could be used. None are great interpretations, they are all basically middling.
Going hardcore geek will make that worse not better, hardcore geek fantasy isnt going to achieve high levels of general public support, GOT didn't get that because it was fantasy, it got it because it was based on good books, that had real emotion and scene setting and character development, and the shock moments that many hadnt seen in books of that kind until that point. Far more are like that now. Millions on millions is nothing, if you want a successful show you need mass general support not to pander to a few geeks.
Geeks across all genres are the worst, they become too invested in trivial details often and can't accept that for many writers and authors they change things.
Not to have to go over old ground again, but for example the Balrog stuff debated on here.
All the recent fantasy shows had more potential, but alas they haven't as yet delivered. Maybe they will improve some. The best parts of the best episodes were really actually good, but the bad bits of the worst episodes were really bad. Like most series. Its getting the good bits to far outweigh the bad bits thats the key.
Take SG1, I loved that, but over the whole series there were episodes I thought were guff, there were plot holes and all sorts of problem, plus at times LOL moments, and yet its one I would watch again.
And again, history shows us that series that don't get decent viewing aren't suddenly transformed, they get canned, completely.
I would rather even poor fantasy than none, thats my view, I would 100% rather see WOT and ROP as they are now, than see yet more drivel (IMO) like dancing on ice and stuff like that.
Its hard to counter criticism when the criticism is delivered in the same manner as a 3 year old throwing a temper tantrum in the sweets isle in Tesco.
There is from what I can tell a feeling in this thread from those that watch it with an open mind that the few who don't, don't really want to be engaged with at all.
When the standard response is to accuse someone who merely enjoys it as loving it and slurping down any old tripe, and having low standards etc then your not setting yourself up for an open debate at all, your just demonstrating a closed mind thats already made up, all IMO.
Again, the biggest tv spectacle of the past 2 decades was a fantasy show, the main difference to the current quality of similar genre tv shows being churned out is that it was well written, well acted and respected the source material, which it followed pretty darn closely until that source material ended and the writers had to come up with getting from plot point to plot point on their own (shockingly that's when its quality started to drop) - massively different to the latest couple of Amazon offerings. Take HoD for example, by all accounts that's grown its viewership as the episodes have dropped compared to RoP losing viewers. What's the difference between the 2? Could it be that one is following the formula that made GoT successful and one isn't???
What in your mind is 'hardcore geek'? The debate about how many balrogs there were? or the fact they've thrown away Tolkiens lore regarding that particular balrog being woken up in the 3rd age under Durin IV? What was the point of using a balrog? Did it add to the story in your opinion? or was it a bad attempt to pull a bit of viewer recognition to PJ's original trilogy?
Commentating in a thread about an IP I love, where the vast majority of my posts have been criticism about either changes to the lore/ bad writing/bad acting have just been met with, by in large, either pathetic personal digs or hand waving away valid points as "but there's magic and elves", as if that explains obvious glaring plot holes. It's almost as if people who watch and 'enjoy' the show and then feel the need to comment on those that are critical but cant come on up with valid points to refute said criticism so they go down the route of personal attacks, I don't know about you but that's the real childish behavior imo.
So the fact that Got was a massive success was pure fluke? Not because it had a baked in audience of millions of fans from the off thanks to the series of books that were looking forward to the show, coupled with a production team that prioritised it being well written, hiring great actors, and closely following the established lore of the novels? sure they changed a few things, the direwolves weren't so much of thing in the show as they were in the book 1, the children were aged up a touch etc. Almost all were added so that it would flow better as a tv show - almost every single change PJ made was for the same reason.The biggest tv spectacle was successful not because it was fantasy. But it also adapted far more easily to current times. Tolkiens works are harder, and yes PJ did a tremendous job. The prior attempt made one film, got canned, was what 3 decades previously?
Even then lots of changes were made.
And he changed plenty, and yet he had the most robust of the books in order to do so, reasonably one book to a film, roughly, with the most known and familiar lore, over a short time frame.
You won't 'debate' me because you are unable to, no other reason.Anyway I am done, I don't see the point in debating someone who isn't even watching it. How they honestly can believe they are forming a valid impression from some memes and clips is beyond me.
Spoke to Maccy already, but thanks for your concern.@C Kent Right, so all you're actually doing is repeating other peoples opinions?
I suggest you take notice of this.
So the fact that Got was a massive success was pure fluke? Not because it had a baked in audience of millions of fans from the off thanks to the series of books that were looking forward to the show, coupled with a production team that prioritised it being well written, hiring great actors, and closely following the established lore of the novels? sure they changed a few things, the direwolves weren't so much of thing in the show as they were in the book 1, the children were aged up a touch etc. Almost all were added so that it would flow better as a tv show - almost every single change PJ made was for the same reason.
You won't 'debate' me because you are unable to, no other reason.
Forming an opinion on the show from clips and reading other people's complaints about said show whose views I know align with my own is a perfectly valid way to form an opinion. For example, I don't need to watch the show to know the writing is ******* terrible thanks to scenes like daddy harfoot making a stupid speech about warning Gandalf the not Gandalf because they don't leave friends behind even though they've spent multiple episodes showing how harfoots leave you behind if you are slow.. that's top tier writing right there!
But yet you carried onSpoke to Maccy already, but thanks for your concern.
@C Kent Right, so all you're actually doing is repeating other peoples opinions?
I suggest you take notice of this.
Don't post in this thread again.Spoke to Maccy already, but thanks for your concern.
Last episode in a nutshell....
Plot armor protects most of the main character's from pyroclastic flow, they range from 200C to 700C, but sure, ok.
For reasons not clear, everyone is covered in chetto dust, which is meant to be ash, some people burnt to a crisp, buildings on fire, horse on fire, most of the main cast however are all fine even though they were all in the same location. No explanation given as to how, because there isn't one that would make any sense, I guess. Woman survives pyroclastic flow but gets blinded by some random embers, sure.. ok
Somehow debris from the volcano lands near the Harfoots destroying one tree, even though they're over 200 miles away, again, no explanation. There's some drama over the lack of food for reasons I don't understand, it's one tree, the rest looked fine. not-Gandalf does some magic to save the tree then leaves...
Some emo people arrive, stupid Harfoot talks to them, and they get their belongings burnt, stupid Harfoot and Lenny Henny go to warn not-Gandalf about the emo people......
Beta male Elrond and dwarf get refused access to mine Mithril, they do it anyway despite risks, got caught.... King reseals mine but first throws in the leaf, which lands and awakens something.... Ends with some expensive CGI... The end.
probably botox,I always like how she tries to speak without moving her lips as if she's doing a ventriloquist act.