Got any examples or links? COuld do with a chuckle
Folks generally link to external sources if they are commentating on them..
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power (Prime)
- Thread starter LiE
- Start date
99% of the stuff I'm seeing is from 6 months ago? The most recent comment about it was approx 2 weeks from a dude asking why a race that lived underground for the vast majority of their life span had melanin in their skin? Fair question considering people want certain aspects of the real world interjected into the show is it not?
How is it a fair question!?
The trees walk and talk, and a gold ring speaks to people and controls them, yet you think it is reasonable to complain that a certain tiny part of human biology in the real world doesn't work the same......on races that are not even human?!
It is an absurd thing to take objection to, hence my original post.
Permabanned
What do we want!? A well made fantasy show with orcs n stuff that is well grounded in science!
WHY WAS THE ARMY OF THE DEAD IN LORD OF THE RINGS GREEN. THEY CLEARLY DID NOT HAVE ANY CHLOROPHYLL IN THEM!
Again, if people want to see representation that reflects real life with black dwarfs/elves or whatever, then you can expect people to apply real world logic to the scenario. The showrunners and people like yourself that call for DiVerSiTy anD rEprEsEntATion to be seen in fantasy tv shows should be expected to be questioned how it fits into said world. You can't have it both ways, unless you are, and to quote a fellow forum user, telling people to 'shut up and consume'
shame that isn't this one then isn't it
I think they'd probably care more about new subs to the service on the back of it wouldn't they rather than folks that already have prime and tune in? Viewing figures seem to be in freefall compared to the 1st episode anyway, they should be grateful that someone like Darujhistan watches it to boost the numbers
I understand people not liking dialogue (no one, not even the biggest Stans can defend the whole stone floating thing) or the weird scenes with the horse riding or cheesy action sequences but I don't think I'll ever grasp the side of the argument that is annoyed there are black/brown I'd (go on and say 'green and whatever' but it seems green is already accepted) characters on screen.
If they're there, they are there. The show isn't going to be a success or failure because they have diversified the cast. That'll be all down to the writing and the jury is still out.
Hypothetically, lets say the PJ trilogy released today but had a 100% black cast. Everything else remains the same. The writing, themes and the actors performances were exactly as the PJ Trilogy. Would people have had an issue and kept going on about it even though it was the exact same film?
If they're there, they are there. The show isn't going to be a success or failure because they have diversified the cast. That'll be all down to the writing and the jury is still out.
Hypothetically, lets say the PJ trilogy released today but had a 100% black cast. Everything else remains the same. The writing, themes and the actors performances were exactly as the PJ Trilogy. Would people have had an issue and kept going on about it even though it was the exact same film?
Caporegime
I think the race thing is a bit of a red herring. The vast vast vast majority of the criticism is related to characterisation, portrayal and the writing. When there are a lot of small things that annoy people they then start nitpicking. I don't know if you saw the twitter thread a little while ago about fan baiting but it covers a lot which relates to RoP.
Do I have an issue with them casting black actors in a series about Tolkiens work? No. If you go by his words then all your actors are white for the main races and there are POC races amongst the different tribes of men. Is changing that a big deal? No. Doesn't really make a scooby.
Its enough to get a few racists whinging about it and then you have the perfect excuse to dismiss any criticism as coming from a racist/sexist or whatever other place you want to. Thats the crux of it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 8,501
Hardly Hobbits at all, and certainly not what JRR would have imagined them as I'm sure. As for Smeagol, you mean the one who murdered another after coming into contact with the ring?
I don't think that's indicative of Smeagol prior to that day do you? If it was it would be pretty poor story-telling when you're trying to show how the ring corrupts...don't you think?
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 8,501
Then why not refer to Twitter/Reddit explicitly when posting on this forum?
It is pretty obvious that people are going to think that you are commenting on the content of this thread.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 8,501
Precisely.
Beofre screening a lot of people were concerned by the casting choices, there are some aesthetic problems with it IMO, and much more so it showed what the motivation of the creators were, and how shows/movies generally turn out when they are politicised as we have seen for the last 5-6 years, particularly when the creators and cast would not shut up diversity and representation, and shill media articles and the propaganda began.
And here we are, the show isn't very good and anyone who says says it's rubbish is just an 'ist or 'phobe...absolutely textbook studio behaviour.
Soldato
Only if you actually bother listening to them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 8,501
I think they'd probably care more about new subs to the service on the back of it wouldn't they rather than folks that already have prime and tune in? Viewing figures seem to be in freefall compared to the 1st episode anyway, they should be grateful that someone like Darujhistan watches it to boost the numbers
I'm doing my bit!
Maybe in later seasons, they learn from the mistakes they have already made.
Soldato
Who has said that?