I love the movie. Wasn't aware they made a series. What network or streaming service is it on?
The TV Series discussion thread
- Thread starter xSamhainx
- Start date
Same. It's AMC, so US only at the moment I think.
JFarrell71
SasqWatch
Nah, life's too short and there are too many books. Back in the day, I started The Two Towers multple times but never got very far.
That's a shame because the movie trilogy pales in comparison to the books.
JFarrell71
SasqWatch
I read the entirety of Return of the King. It's not like I don't know what the books are like.
It is possible that I would appreciate them more if I read them now. That was well over 30 years ago, to be fair. But like I said, there are too many books. I feel no need to revisit them.
It is possible that I would appreciate them more if I read them now. That was well over 30 years ago, to be fair. But like I said, there are too many books. I feel no need to revisit them.
Then you already know they're vastly superior to the films.
Not that the films were terrible. I think FotR is pretty good. I wasn't as impressed with the other two, but they're decent popcorn entertainment.
The Hobbit trilogy otoh was pretty hard to stomach.
Not that the films were terrible. I think FotR is pretty good. I wasn't as impressed with the other two, but they're decent popcorn entertainment.
The Hobbit trilogy otoh was pretty hard to stomach.
It's hard to beat a book with a movie, especially when it's so well written. I may be tempted to read it again, but it's not a small book...
It's rare that I read a book several times, I think the only exception is Stephen King's It.
It's rare that I read a book several times, I think the only exception is Stephen King's It.
Very true. I think Jackson did an ok job except for a few parts, but the films still fell way short of the images Tolkien created in my mind.
Amazon's series though barely resembles what Tolkien wrote about the Second Age in The Silmarillion.
Ripper
Зичу Вам успіхів
- Joined
- November 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,085
Yeah, it might sound like a weird comparison, but I sort of see the Silmarillion and the appendices as being a bit like the Old Testament to LOTR, with epic events occurring in a kind of rarefied, unreal, domain, that perhaps don't lend themselves too well to literal depiction.
That's why I was thinking of a new story - a sort of Game of Thrones in the Second Age - depicting some new drama in a more grounded way, with the epic as a kind of background.
That's why I was thinking of a new story - a sort of Game of Thrones in the Second Age - depicting some new drama in a more grounded way, with the epic as a kind of background.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,085
Ripper
Зичу Вам успіхів
- Joined
- November 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,085
Just to expand on that a bit, I thought the movie Noah was not really successful, but the way in which they handled the creation story I thought was absolutely brilliant. There's a time when a bit of art-house style is exactly what you need to make something work.
View: https://youtu.be/FFCXHr8aKDk
And if you look at the opening sequence of the LOTR animation, I thought they made a similar kind of choice, just in the way possible on a shoestring budget. Still very effective, IMO.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AT18OJEPU9Q&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC
It's that sense of mythic gravitas that I'm looking for, if you get where I'm coming from.
And if you look at the opening sequence of the LOTR animation, I thought they made a similar kind of choice, just in the way possible on a shoestring budget. Still very effective, IMO.
It's that sense of mythic gravitas that I'm looking for, if you get where I'm coming from.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,085
JFarrell71
SasqWatch
When Danutz (I think it was) was asking me about reading the LOTR novels earlier, I almost posted that when I read them as a kid, it felt like reading the Bible: long lists of names amidst very formal language. I have a copy of the Simlarillion because somebody gave one to me, but I'll never read it in anything more than tiny chunks because it's like that x100.
Trying to translate that directly to the screen would make for a terrible show. People may not think it would, but it would.
That's the feeling I had, even though I've only read parts of it (for that very reason). Someone who wants to make a series out of that material has to be creative, which can't be done without hurting some fans.
I don't know if they had a lore expert to advise them, otherwise it must be a daunting and foolish undertaking. There are thousands of pages of it, and not always easy to read.
The problem is that the showrunners seem to lack any great degree of creativity.
No one is saying it had to be a 1:1 translation of the book, but the show doesn't even come close to portraying the same sense of epicness.
With as many liberties as they've taken, I find it hard to believe there was any kind of lore expert involved. If there was, they must have been largely ignored.
You're relentless.
We'll have to agree to disagree on some points, though I wouldn't go as far as saying it's great.
I'm not attempting to oppose your viewpoint. I'm just echoing a sentiment shared by many.You're relentless.
We'll have to agree to disagree on some points, though I wouldn't go as far as saying it's great.
Out of curiosity, what would you disagree with? You said that you've only read parts of the book.
I know, and I respect your viewpoint as well.
To be clear, I'm by no Tolkien expert, so perhaps it's less annoying to me. I know that other series like the Expanse or GoT sometimes irritated me a little because they made changes that I thought were not necessary. Now I'm just thinking that it must be normal for an artist to adapt other's work.
So about lore: I've tried to search a little about elves, skin colour, the origin of mithril and a few other topics that were criticized, and I've watched a few video like those exchanged earlier, but I didn't find anything offending. I first missed the fact about "the lost silmaril" and the origin of mithril in Khazad-dûm... I agree it wasn't necessary to add that part about the song - which may or may not be a pure invention, I don't know but I guess so. In general it doesn't shock me more than what I saw in other series inspired by books.
About the races: I'm fine with them. Maybe elves aren't all as magical as I expected but all races have their own style, without being overdone (vs Legolas sliding down the elephant's trump in TLotR and the elf running on falling stones in The Hobbit...).
About epicness: Numenor and Khazad-dûm are impressive enough, it must have been quite the masterwork for those people. But Lindon looks less dramatic partly because it's eco-friendly, but also it falls short of what Jackson's movies showed of elves' greatness. The path Galadriel is following is something too, so is Adar's and what Celebrimbor set out to do. All that is only being developed but I'm expecting more to come.
About acting: They're not top actors, nothing great but I wouldn't say it's bad either. I wasn't bored by the slow start, I prefer that rhythm to something rushed if they planned 5 seasons.
I don't think it's just about the changes to established lore for most people. It's the overall quality of the show. For a series that has one of the largest budgets in television history, many people expected more from it.
Personally, I don't care who they cast as long as they fit the part and can act. That said, the cast is pretty meh. I don't mind that they're not big-name actors, but the performances are average at best. Again, in comparison to the budget, it's disappointing.
As for skin color, Elves were described as "Tall, fair-skinned people". I think diversity is great, but why cast Black actors as elves when there multiple other races to cast them as? It's like they said "Ok, we have to have at least one Black actor for every race." Why not just cast more as humans, dwarves, etc?
If they had been described as "Tall, dark-skinned people" by Tolkien, and they used Caucasian actors, the controversy would be much bigger.
That's not really what I meant by epicness. It goes beyond just the visual representation. It's also about the way the stories are told, the actions of the characters, the way they spoke, etc.
To me, it's obvious they just tried to appeal to as wide of an audience as possible. For example, hobbits are a big part of the show, but hobbits are never even mentioned in Tolkien's stories about the Second Age of Middle Earth.
However, a large part of the mainstream associates anything Tolkien related to hobbits for obvious reasons, so the showrunners felt like they had to shoehorn in a bunch of hobbit silliness to appeal to more people.
Considering the budget, maybe they didn't have a choice.
Overall, it doesn't feel anywhere near as grand as Tolkien's writings. I realize it's naive to have expected otherwise, but there are just so many things they could have done better.
Carnifex
SasqWatch
House of Dragons continues to be good, seven episodes in now for me and I think the only gripe I have is with the pacing, they could take a breath and develop the characters a bit more. It's like these seven episodes have had two series worth of content so far, not really a complaint when you consider what a slog-fest many other show are. Once again, from a show that I wasn't expecting much from, this one is delivering the great goods.
All branches? I see that Arondir is a Silvan elf, they are "hardly distinguishable from the Avari", which already show differences like dark hair and eyes. I didn't find the exact reference for the fair-skinned people, but it looks like a generalization. But it's true that they wanted to show the characters more like people of our world, so that's probably a deliberate choice to disregard some characteristics.
I did touch a bit about the story but they're just getting started so that's something I'd look more in depth later. I don't think that people should ooze epicness in their everyday's life when there's no reason to. For ex. Galadriel seeks Sauron pretty far when everyone else want to give up, finally comes back to speak to Gil-Galad, then instead of retiring to Valinor as she's told, she leaves the boat and swims all the way back to continue, convinces the Queen regent to send her to the Southlands with a sizeable group of soldiers. They're not all like that, of course.
That's right, I didn't know that. I suppose that nothing says they weren't there either, so it's an invention or a big extrapolation to make the show more varied with a new thread.
We could go on, but let's not. No, it doesn't feel as grand as Tolkien's books, but there wasn't greatness on every page either and the show is not finished yet.
I see why you don't like it, but those issues simply don't bother me that much.
The question is "why?". It's not about people of our world, and I can't imagine that many fans of fantasy want the characters to be less fantasy-like.
Yeah, I get that everything can't be epic. They made some odd choices though on which things are. Galadriel is a perfect example. Their portrayal of her as some kind of mighty warrior single-handedly slaying hordes of Orcs is laugh-out-loud absurd.
I don't have as much of a problem with hobbits being in it as much as I do with the way they're being portrayed. The manner in which they act and talk (those accents!) it's almost as if they were included for comic relief.
I don't begrudge others for enjoying it though, and I'm glad that some people are. I was still watching it until last week, and I'll probably watch that last episode when I get my power and cable restored. For me though, House of the Dragon has proved to be vastly more enjoyable.