Amazon's THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RINGS OF POWER (2022) 5 5

[I like pie]

Finale was spectacular. Made me want to watch the series from the start again immediately. 

[sfcityduck]

On 10/17/2022 at 10:58 AM, drotto said:

Amazon has already said that season 2 may take a few years.

Has Amazon issued a release saying that?  All I have seen was a three word incomplete quote in an article in the Hollywood Reporter with a contradictory statement preceding it, and nothing more. No verification or even context for the less than definitive quote.  But the haters sure are handwringing.

Edited October 17, 2022 by sfcityduck

[sfcityduck]

On 10/17/2022 at 10:45 AM, ianh said:

 

I fall into the side of Tolkien did not want his characters changed or his story as he thought it was a perversion and only hoped his stories would inspire others to create their own stories not re-write his which is exactly what they did.

 

Did he ever say that?  Not that I know of.  But on the eve of publishing LOTR he wrote to his publisher Milton Waldmanthat his goal was: "to make a body of more or less collected legend, ranging from the large and cosmogonic to the level of romantic fairy-story....  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."

He succeeded.

Also worth noting:  Tolkien constantly changed and rethought his stories.  Constantly. As Guy Gavriel Kay recalled from his work helping to compile and write the Silmarillion:

Quote

I learned a lot about false starts in writing. I mean that in a really serious way. His [Tolkien’s] false starts. You learn that the great works have disastrous botched chapters, that the great writers recognise that they didn’t work. So I was looking at drafts of The Lord of the Rings and rough starts for The Silmarillion and came to realise they don’t spring full-blown, utterly, completely formed in brilliance. They get there with writing and rewriting and drudgery and mistakes, and eventually if you put in the hours and the patience, something good might happen. That was a very, very early lesson for me, looking at the Tolkien materials. That it’s not instantly magnificent. That it’s laboriously so, but it gets there. That was a huge, huge, still important lesson.

Tolkien wrote four "official" novels about Middle Earth.  There are maybe another 15 books of unfinished tales, most contradictory with the "official" books. Heck, just look at the origin of the orcs, that story was a constant evolution for 60 years going from Orcs being made of rock by Morgoth, to being corrupted elves, to part human, etc.  Tolkien saw there were lots of ways to skin a cat and he enjoyed trying out different versions of his stories. As the quote above demonstrates, he surely foresaw that his characters would go in directions he hadn't envisioned ... yet. He knew he would take his characters in different directions than he envisioned.

Edited October 17, 2022 by sfcityduck

[ianh]

If you look at what Tolkien said about the planned 1958 movie that never came to fruition he certainly cared about the perversion of his characters and changing them. I'd say this show changes them quite a lot but no one truly knows how he'd feel about it. He did say respecting the canon above all else was incredibly important to him and they certainly did not do that here. I'd even go as far as to say they disrespected it.

Respecting Canon. 

"The canons of narrative in any medium cannot be wholly different; and the failure of poor films is often precisely in exaggeration, and in the intrusion of unwarranted matter owing to not perceiving where the core of the original lies" 

On changing his characters

"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 (and do resent it, so far as it appears in this sketch) even more than the spoiling of the plot and scenery."

No one truly knows how he'd feel about the LoTR movies either though so it's an argument that no one can truly say how he'd feel about any of it. To say he'd love the movies and hate this would be inaccurate. We just don't know but I'm pretty sure any author would be upset at the magnitude to which they changed the story here though. It's significant changes not just a few things here and there for me that matter.

I take what he said about LoTR to his publisher to mean he wanted his stories to encourage others to write their own not change his stories.

[drotto]

On 10/17/2022 at 4:46 PM, ianh said:

If you look at what Tolkien said about the planned 1958 movie that never came to fruition he certainly cared about the perversion of his characters and changing them. I'd say this show changes them quite a lot but no one truly knows how he'd feel about it. He did say respecting the canon above all else was incredibly important to him and they certainly did not do that here. I'd even go as far as to say they disrespected it.

Respecting Canon. 

"The canons of narrative in any medium cannot be wholly different; and the failure of poor films is often precisely in exaggeration, and in the intrusion of unwarranted matter owing to not perceiving where the core of the original lies" 

On changing his characters

"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 (and do resent it, so far as it appears in this sketch) even more than the spoiling of the plot and scenery."

No one truly knows how he'd feel about the LoTR movies either though so it's an argument that no one can truly say how he'd feel about any of it. To say he'd love the movies and hate this would be inaccurate. We just don't know but I'm pretty sure any author would be upset at the magnitude to which they changed the story here though. It's significant changes not just a few things here and there for me that matter.

I take what he said about LoTR to his publisher to mean he wanted his stories to encourage others to write their own not change his stories.

Everything I have ever read, and seen Tolkien scholars talk about say he was very protective of his works and world. I even saw it reported that he thought his books may be unadaptible.  There is a report of him seeing some of the early adoptions done in the 60's and early 70's before he passed away, and he was reported as not appearing pleased.

 

Honestly, I think all of the adaptations to this point in his eyes would be disappointing to various degrees.  

[sfcityduck]

On 10/17/2022 at 1:46 PM, ianh said:

If you look at what Tolkien said about the planned 1958 movie that never came to fruition he certainly cared about the perversion of his characters and changing them. I'd say this show changes them quite a lot but no one truly knows how he'd feel about it. He did say respecting the canon above all else was incredibly important to him and they certainly did not do that here. I'd even go as far as to say they disrespected it.

Respecting Canon. 

"The canons of narrative in any medium cannot be wholly different; and the failure of poor films is often precisely in exaggeration, and in the intrusion of unwarranted matter owing to not perceiving where the core of the original lies" 

On changing his characters

"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 (and do resent it, so far as it appears in this sketch) even more than the spoiling of the plot and scenery."

No one truly knows how he'd feel about the LoTR movies either though so it's an argument that no one can truly say how he'd feel about any of it. To say he'd love the movies and hate this would be inaccurate. We just don't know but I'm pretty sure any author would be upset at the magnitude to which they changed the story here though. It's significant changes not just a few things here and there for me that matter.

I take what he said about LoTR to his publisher to mean he wanted his stories to encourage others to write their own not change his stories.

Those quotes are about his finished works.  Not about the Second Age where he only wrote the barest of sketches.  They have no application to this project. I'm sure he would have been disappointed in aspects of LOTR (especially) and the Hobbit as they took some significant liberties with a story that was fully cast in stone.  Here, there is not much story at all to change.  And Tolkien knew that.

[sfcityduck]

On 10/17/2022 at 3:05 PM, drotto said:

.

Honestly, I think all of the adaptations to this point in his eyes would be disappointing to various degrees.  

I can't disagree.  For an author, seeing someone else taking over your baby must suck. Look at what's its done to the author of GoT - he can't even figure out how to finish his series.

[drotto]

On 10/17/2022 at 10:41 PM, sfcityduck said:

Those quotes are about his finished works.  Not about the Second Age where he only wrote the barest of sketches.  They have no application to this project. I'm sure he would have been disappointed in aspects of LOTR (especially) and the Hobbit as they took some significant liberties with a story that was fully cast in stone.  Here, there is not much story at all to change.  And Tolkien knew that.

I do not think it is a stretch to assume however that he would have similar feelings about all his work, finished or unfinished.  It is a jump in logic to say he would care deeply about changing the first and third age, but the parts second age that he did outline, not so much. He would also definitely not approve of pulling things out of the third age and placing them in the second.  Plus, he did set some things in stone about the second age, I think he would be very adherent to those items. For instance he stated Galadriel was married had a child and was ruling her realm. Here they implied he was dead (I think this is a bait and switch), because that messes up a ton of stuff in the third age. Or that Galadriel would have feelings for anyone other than her husband. He also clearly states that Sauron lived with and manipulated the Elves disguised as an Elf for many years, and the rings took about 90 years to forge. So the corruption of the rings was a long term manipulation, not the brief scene, when he was also shown as a man. Hobbits were not important in the second age (Harfoots are called a subset of Hobbits by Tolkien).  Yet here they are. The Wizards arrived in Middle Earth at the start of the Third age, when they sensed Sauron was rising again, not the meteor man who is exactly who everyone thinks he is.  There are just so many things that were clearly changed from what is spelled out, and based on what I have read, Tolkien would not have liked those changes. This does not even start pulling apart the mess created by so drastically condensing the timeline.

 

These are just a few examples of things they clearly changed, after the showrunner swearing they were going to be adherent to Tolkien's word.  Many Tolkien fans felt betrayed by those statements when they started to see the final product. You can argue that changes were needed to adapt, or tell the story they wanted to tell.  If you like those changes fine, but you can not deny they are significant changes.  Yes, go back to when Jackson's movies came out (not the Hobbit, that trilogy is a mess), he was criticized by a fair number of fans for the changes made.  Most of those people excepted the changes once they saw the films, because Jackson managed to still captured the essence of Tolkien. You are correct in saying however, that Tolkien would likely have found fault with many of the changes, but the overall changes did not fundamentally alter the story, underlying themes, or messages. My opinion (and it is shared by many), the changes made to RoP, even taking into account the less developed material, alter the foundation of his work. They also change the events or perception of events that happen in the third age, which Tolkien clearly would have hated. RoP fails to capture the essence of Tolkien. That is the primary difference  and most important difference from the LOTR trilogy. 

Edited October 18, 2022 by drotto

[I like pie]

Like it or not, there is movie/television canon, which often is separate from literature canon. If the LotR films were the original source material, Rings of Power would blend well with it.

[jsilverjanet]

I’m sure if Marvel|Disney were the ones making this, the source material argument would be thrown out the window like it has been for anything they’ve made the past 15 years 

[sfcityduck]

On 10/17/2022 at 8:17 PM, drotto said:

I do not think it is a stretch to assume however that he would have similar feelings about all his work, finished or unfinished.  It is a jump in logic to say he would care deeply about changing the first and third age, but the parts second age that he did outline, not so much. 

You are guessing at what JRR would have thought.  But there is no need to guess. He told us what he thought and wanted.  He felt he was creating a non-Christian mythology, like Greek and Roman and Norse mythology, but with a uniquely English feel that others could pick up and embellish. That was his stated goal and ambition.  He wanted his mythic structure to outlive himself and remain relevant through the further development of others. This is not in dispute.  You can read his words on this point.

He specifically differentiated between the fully developed stories in what he called his grand cycle and the many sketches and unfinished tales he referenced in the main works. JRR admitted that many loose ends he referenced that he thought others could develop were not at all developed by him.  
 

The classic example of such a completely undeveloped tale was the origin of Hobbits.  Tolkien provided a sketch that referenced their long migration north and west but said nothing about their history beyond that their backstory was lost to the fog of history. That is exactly the sort of story that Tolkien thought others could explore.

Similarly, Tolkien’s notes and unfinished tales reveal that the story of the Istari was far from the simple tale you discern from the Appendixes of LOTR which were portrayed by Tolkien not as infallible but instead as Bilbo’s scholarship - a conceit that left the door open to different versions of the facts.

Indeed the unfinished tales and notes present various versions of the tale of Galadriel and Celeborn including versions in which he discusses Sauron’s admiration for Galadriel.  The RoP staff has taken a much deeper dive into the many volumes of “apocrypha” written by Tolkien and are mining material that only the most hardcore fans have read. 
 

You may not think RoP as being in Tolkien’s vision but that is the point. His vision changed many times and he was to use his words willing to let LOTR venture out into the world without his protection or guidance.

 

 

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by sfcityduck

[drotto]

You can't accuse me of guessing,  you are clearly guessing, because you can't know either.  There is far more evidence and Tolkien experts who support my viewpoint. Plus, how can you argue with a very clear statements like Hobbits are if the third age, or Galadriel was married. The showrunners are justifying things by saying Tolkien did not expressly say it did not happen it could have, and over interpreting small snipets or even one word. They are grasping at straws, and ignoring a firm timeline, and items that were clearly spelled out. Especially, when they are the clearly pulling from the third age.

Several recognized Tolkien experts were fired from RoP, and Jackson was ghosted. It seems they knew and were being told what they were doing was not faithful, and despite what was said publicly, they did not care.

[The Commissioner]

Maybe we can all agree that the books are better and go about our merry ways 

[sfcityduck]

On 10/18/2022 at 4:51 AM, drotto said:

You can't accuse me of guessing,  you are clearly guessing, because you can't know either.  There is far more evidence and Tolkien experts who support my viewpoint. 

You are wrong.  The letters I am referencing are core to Tolkien scholarship - so much so that they are among just a handful featured on the official Tolkien Estate website.  I am not guessing I am quoting.

Who are these Tolkien experts and what do they say to support your position?  You are making bald assertions. What is your evidence that Tolkien did not want others to pick up his mythology and run with it?

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by sfcityduck

[shadroch]

On 10/17/2022 at 11:58 AM, I like pie said:

Finale was spectacular. Made me want to watch the series from the start again immediately. 

Too bad there are laws against that sort of thing.  I plan on watching it over, on the off chance I like it better but I'm not hopeful.

[sfcityduck]

On 10/18/2022 at 4:51 AM, drotto said:

 Plus, how can you argue with a very clear statements like Hobbits are if the third age, or Galadriel was married. 

First, Tolkien did not ever assert that Hobbits were created in the third age.  What is your evidence for that?   The Shire was third age, but Hobbits existed and Tolkien treated their origin as being lost to the mists of time.

Second, no one is arguing Galadriel had not met and married Celeborn in the Second Age - not even the writers of RoP.  They instead are riffing on Tolkiens writings which show Galadriel and Celeborn separated at various points in time.  They are embellishing ideas Tolkien sketched in his notes about Galadriel and Sauron. They are filling in gaps that Tolkien left - vast holes in his story.  That is not contradiction - there is nothing definitive to contradict.  You are creating strawmen.

P.S. You have previously asserted Galadriel was a mother in the Second Age but that would contradict Tolkien writings which state Elrond first met Galadriel’s daughter in the Third Age.  Admittedly that writing also is presented as subsequent history which could be inaccurate but I am unaware of any contradictory writing.

Edited October 18, 2022 by sfcityduck

[bentbryan]

On 10/17/2022 at 10:45 PM, sfcityduck said:

I can't disagree.  For an author, seeing someone else taking over your baby must suck. Look at what's its done to the author of GoT - he can't even figure out how to finish his series.

I have zero sympathy for GRRM. The fact he can’t apply himself to finish books has nothing to do with a television series. Not to mention the absolute mountain of cash he has been paid for these projects. 

[sfcityduck]

On 10/18/2022 at 4:51 AM, drotto said:

The showrunners are justifying things by saying Tolkien did not expressly say it did not happen it could have, and over interpreting small snipets or even one word. 

Which is exactly what Tolkien explicitly stated is what he wanted to happen with his mythology.  That are being true to Tolkien’s vision.  

This has been going on since Christopher Tolkien and Guy Gabriel Kay wrote portions of the Silmarillion.  

However, it is different in kind from when Peter Jackson made major rewrites and edits of the LOTR and the massive reshaping of the Hobbit because those were not unfinished tales or sketches but Tolkien’s finished life's works.

Edited October 18, 2022 by sfcityduck

[sfcityduck]

On 10/18/2022 at 4:51 AM, drotto said:

They are … ignoring a firm timeline, and items that were clearly spelled out.

I agree that they are compressing the timeline of the Second Age as spelled out in the Appendix to the LOTR (which is not definitive and Tolkien himself contradicted in later notes and sketches) and if that bothers you so be it.  I do not know how a story that took hundreds of years to forge some rings could be filmed (and it seems like a ludicrously long timeline) so I cannot fault this choice.  It is a story adaptation, like the LOTR movies, not a dissertation on real history. So artistic license is allowed.

if it bothers you there is the option to stop watching. It causes me no problem because I do not view that compression as ruining the story in any material way. It is a choice which makes it possible to tell the story on film.  Maybe someday someone will write a book fleshing out the Second Age which details the hundreds of years of ring forging.  In the meantime you might enjoy the chapters of Moby Richard (short form) on the details of whale hunting.

Edited October 18, 2022 by sfcityduck

[sfcityduck]

On 10/18/2022 at 4:51 AM, drotto said:

 

Several recognized Tolkien experts were fired from RoP, and Jackson was ghosted. It seems they knew and were being told what they were doing was not faithful, and despite what was said publicly, they did not care.

Jackson was “ghosted”? 

First, WETA FX did the special effects.

Second, it was not Jackson’s project. He has his own priorities.

Third, Jackson butchered the LOTR and Hobbit, finished books cast in stone, far far more than anything RoP has done to the sketches and unfinished tales and notes which are its source material - so why would you want him involved if you are such a purist?