The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power (Prime)

Fubsy said:
So everything is about what she is rather than what she can do.

Basing everything on a group identity, so very inclusive. Is this what we (society) do now, just focus on sections of identity as if there are all we are?

:(

Edit: Read some more of that article...



Yes...but it's Middle Earth not actual ****ing Earth. Stop projecting this worlds problems on to another, just have the imagination to create it's own issues and not mirror ours for the sake of 'awareness'.
Click to expand...

This is all they're interested in, Tolkien is merely an inconvenience to be "improved upon".

Nothing will stand in the way of woke propaganda, not Lore, not logic, not reason not anything - it is a cult of cultural vandalism. They talk about "cultural appropriation" that is exactly what they have done to Tolkien. These people are lunatics, everything is race and gender nothing else matters.

You look at the trailers released so far, virtually every "powerfu" carahcter or anyone with any agency is female, and mor often than not a diverse female. Oh apart from the bad guys who are all, of course, white males.
 
C Kent said:
Less than that, more like 2 million people, for the whole series. 10 episodes, each one on average 50 minutes .
Click to expand...

According to this, the first three episodes got a watch time of 1.16 billion. Impossible to accurately convert that to viewer numbers since not everyone watched all three, and not everyone watched a whole episode, and it tells us nothing about how many people were watching at the time, but using a massively crude approximation (divide by running time) and assuming 60 minutes/episode, we get 1.16 billion / 180, or a viewership of somewhere around 6.5 million.
 
Mr Jack said:
According to this, the first three episodes got a watch time of 1.16 billion. Impossible to accurately convert that to viewer numbers since not everyone watched all three, and not everyone watched a whole episode, and it tells us nothing about how many people were watching at the time, but using a massively crude approximation (divide by running time) and assuming 60 minutes/episode, we get 1.16 billion / 180, or a viewership of somewhere around 6.5 million.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how you measure or frame it really, it made zero cultural impact, no-one talked about it, amazon claimed it was amassive hot for them, no-one outside of a tiny bubble even cared, most people won't even have head of it.
 
My wife loves WoT (book series), but didn't want to go near the the show due to potentially not sticking to the lore and how she imagined the characters.
 
I will watch it, if I enjoy it I will watch it all
If I dont like ik then I will turn it off

I don't care about woke, I don't care about lore, I care about entertaining TV
I am glad "lore" people don't get to control the narrative that would make for dreadful TV guaranteed.
At least with the current people producing there is a chance I will like it, I know for sure with "lore" people in charge it would make lousy TV.

I like WOT books, I like the show, it wasn't great must watch TV but was fine. I just compartmentalise them.
This will be the same for me.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
I will watch it, if I enjoy it I will watch it all
If I dont like ik then I will turn it off

I don't care about woke, I don't care about lore, I care about entertaining TV
I am glad "lore" people don't get to control the narrative that would make for dreadful TV guaranteed.
At least with the current people producing there is a chance I will like it, I know for sure with "lore" people in charge it would make lousy TV.

I like WOT books, I like the show, it wasn't great must watch TV but was fine. I just compartmentalise them.
This will be the same for me.
Click to expand...
So the LotR jackson trilogy is lousy?, 1st 4 GoT seasons were lousy?
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
I will watch it, if I enjoy it I will watch it all
If I dont like ik then I will turn it off

I don't care about woke, I don't care about lore, I care about entertaining TV
I am glad "lore" people don't get to control the narrative that would make for dreadful TV guaranteed.
At least with the current people producing there is a chance I will like it, I know for sure with "lore" people in charge it would make lousy TV.

I like WOT books, I like the show, it wasn't great must watch TV but was fine. I just compartmentalise them.
This will be the same for me.
Click to expand...
So the LotR trilogy was dreadful? Its not controlling the narrative, it's creating a film/TV show based on books. Why change pretty much everything to include everyone? thats not what these stories are about. If anything, the producers of this tv show are controlling the narrative,
 
C Kent said:
So the LotR jackson trilogy is lousy?, 1st 4 GoT seasons were lousy?
Click to expand...

Jackson changed lore, changed who did what etc.
GOT had lore changed, changed who did what etc. GRRM even directed episodes that had changes in them.

Exactly my point. So the most successful films and TV series of the genre literally had things changed that broke the lore.

All your into from that point onwards is the massive grey area where one person thinks X is super important to lore and yet another thinks Y is.
Personal opinion is that.

Would I rather a series was made of GOT or WOT or for example the Joe Abercrombie* series that I like, hell yes.
Would I rather that remain as close to lore as possible. Of course.
But it still remains that that isn't going to happen in the real world, at least evidence of what gets funding shows us thats the way so far.
* I mention this as it would simply require more changes than either of the others due to the level of violence etc.

Straight adaption doesn't appeal to the majority, it never will.
Do I want to see things that I will enjoy destroyed by nerds, nope.
There is a reason that there is a saying "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good"

If you guys think there is a massive high demand for your vision put your money where your mouth is and make it happen.
I suspect you would be wrong and hence happy to see something, rather than nothing you would likely manage to produce.
I would love you to prove me wrong, which if your views are right should be pretty darn easy to achieve. No?
 
I'm still very disheartened by this series. How can they call it LOTR and not stick to the lore? They may as well just call it something different and start a different fantasy series....

I think that all the people complaining about it is actually a good thing. LOTR fans are very committed to the books and they would have acted the same about the movies if Peter Jackson had of made such a titanic effort to stay true to the lore. He was in fact hailed for it and won many many Oscars for his adaption of the books.

Will this be remembered in such a way? I very much doubt it and although I will watch it, it will grind on my horribly every time they stray from the lore. I doubt I'll last that long.....
 
Droolinggimp said:
Ok you have a slight point on 'lore' changes for the trilogy, but they were purely for the screenplay aspect, ie, to make the movies work. Not changed to be inclusive.
Click to expand...

Its not a slight point its the total point
Once you accept ANY change to lore then all your doing is applying personal bias and subjectivity to something.

I don't care if a hobbit is green, black or blue. It really matters little to me if I enjoy watching the TV series.
Others will find the colour of a hobbits skin a massive issue and for them it will be unwatchable.

I for example disagreed with the changes to the ford when Arwen was added was necessary. It wasn't, there was no issue filming that exactly as per the books. Many others would be fine with that.
Was there no actor to play Glorfindel at all, is that why it needed to be changed?
Oh no wait it was to introduce the love angle differently. So its ok to do that but not change someones skin colour for example?

Eg https://screenrant.com/10-controversial-changes-made-lotr-original-books/

I agree with all these in some cases massive deviations from the lore than in most cases seem just why would he do that to me.

I liked the very old live action fellowship of the ring film, but clearly it was a flop as it was never followed up.

I actually just about enjoyed the hobbit films, but they were very different to the books. But the the hobbit was a childrens book.
I guess converting Piglets big adventure to a R15 might require some changes as well ;)
 
It does make me laugh people saying how respectful Jackson was to the lore. He changed plenty of things! I'm going to assume most of these people are only fans of the films and are annoyed about changes from that rather than the books.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Once you accept ANY change to lore then all your doing is applying personal bias and subjectivity to something.
;)
Click to expand...

I suppose the talking point is that, whilst changes to the Lore are always going to happen with any adaption, some changes (Jackson) are seen as respectful to the Author whilst other changes (Amazon) are considered disrespectful.

As someone who has never read a LOTR book, and only fully watched the rotoscoped 80's version which scared the bejesus out of me (not seen Jacksons films, just snippets, not really my cup of tea) I'm ambivalent to Jacksons changes but can see that, whatever decisions were made, Jackson made them "in good faith", respecting the Authors wishes whereas from the Amazon cast interviews previously the desire seems to be "I want change LOTR into what I want it to be and you can't stop me" which is just a very narcissistic way of thinking for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom