Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Books also leave more open to interpretation. We the reader add voices to the characters, sometimes informed by descriptions. We visualise stuff differently to one another.

Heck, to use Discworld as a theme? The cover artists for the majority drew central characters very differently to how they’re described, and how PTerry envisaged them.

For instance, Granny Weatherwax has notoriously great skin, smooth and unblemished much to her chagrin. On the covers? Warts and all. Vimes? Typically drawn as a Clint Eastwoodalike. But PTerry is on record saying he’s more Pete Postlethwaite. Just an Everyman, not the chiselled chin type.

I guess there is a further line, and that would be ‘Inspired By’.

The Watch is less an adaptation of Discworld Night Watch stories, and more “inspired by”. Significant changes are made to character backgrounds, the feel of Ankh Morpork and like the Stallone Judge Dredd movie took various bits and bobs from across those novels and blended them up into a newish thing.

And whilst I think The Watch is a dreadful take on its source material? As a show, viewed purely in its own context? It’s actually completely fine, possibly a smidge better than merely average.

So whilst I’m in the possibly enviable position of only being able to see The Rings of Power stand or fall on its own merits, The Watch is what I need to recall when readers have criticism of this show.

Yeah, it still might be an adaptation but if it veers too much from the source material then I consider it a bad adaptation. And if the source material means a lot to me I won't tolerate a bad adaptation, even if it is otherwise good.

 Da Boss wrote:
I suppose I draw the line in a different place to you when it comes to what I consider adaptation. I am fine with cutting Tom Bombadil from adaptations of LOTR for example, but not okay with changing main characters so that they are essentially entirely different people.

I mean... that is what Peter Jackson's LotR did. Both things. Tom never showed (fine). But Aragorn is an entirely different person. As are Legolis and Gimli and Gandalf the White (who somehow got more serious than the Gray when in the books after he returns as the White he doesn't seem to take ANYTHING seriously anymore).

Yeah I can't enjoy those films any more either. Peter Jackson's LOTR fails for me because it coarsens and worsens many of the characters. The most serious one from my POV is Frodo, but yeah pretty much every character except maybe Boromir is changed for the worse compared to the books. Some of those changes were needed to do the adaptation, others are just egregious in my view.

I'm slowly but surely recovering from the dreaded corona virus but managed to catch the three episodes they put out all at once with a friend. May go into deeper analysis later, but so far I like what I saw.

I don't neccesarily think it means we can be confident in the quality of the rest of the show this season - I think season 1 started rather strong and got weaker as the episodes got progressively more focus groupy, but a good start is a good start.

Once again the highlight of the show is that score by Bear McCreary and its use of leimotif throughout. I'll go more in depth on individual episodes later when I find the energy, but as it stands right now, the broader elf/Suaron story is naturally taking center stage, Numenor continues to feel like an unpleasant diversion, and I continue to love Nori and Young Gandalf's excellent adventure.

So far though, the dwarves have been the scene stealers. They're more or less exactly the same as the first season: different flavours of short, stubborn, grumpy hillfolk with hearts of gold.

 AduroT wrote:
Now that we know who Sauron is, I’m really enjoying paying attention to his dialogue and how he never technically lies to anyone.

Imma disagree with you on this one, there's at least one major scene where Sauron seems to be trying to chain combo lies by omission, but those are still lies too. Despite this, most of the time he uses regular every day lies.

On the broader subject of 'inspiration' vs 'adaptation' I think we've been well outside the latter for a while now. We've known that the Tolkien estate shopped the ideas around and that Silmarillion content was explicitly unavailable due to its wonky licensing situation so a number of the 'hard facts' of this story are already contradicting the books themselves (notably, the Three Elven Rings in the book were created last after Sauron's deception was discovered, whereas here they were created first, but Sauron didn't have a chance to corrupt them) and the overall feel of the show is that they're approaching the story in broad strokes like one would do when adapting something like a myth. It may, potentially, be serviceable as a prequel to the movies' version of events, but personally I think they'll be different in the same way you can have five different movies about Hercules or Robin Hood and they can kinda fit together, but don't really.

Yeah, he lies more in the later episodes, but they first one he was rather quite honest and just left it for the other to misinterpret.

 Lance845 wrote:


I mean... that is what Peter Jackson's LotR did. Both things. Tom never showed (fine). But Aragorn is an entirely different person. As are Legolis and Gimli and Gandalf the White (who somehow got more serious than the Gray when in the books after he returns as the White he doesn't seem to take ANYTHING seriously anymore).

While I'm not a fan of some of the narrative methods of illustrating his journey, about halfway through the trilogy film Aragorn arrives at the point where book Aragorn starts his journey. That's a far cry from being an entirely different person. I'm also not sure which version of the Lord of the Rings has stoner Gandalf the White.

I'll give you Legolas and Gimli being reduced to comedic relief and minor exposition vehicles, a major and oft repeated criticism of Jackson's adaptation.

On the creation of the three, I think this version actually makes more sense. When they found out who Anatar was I imagine their reaction would have been much like Elrond’s. Presented with the decision of “what to do with this suspicious and incredibly powerful technology given to us in secret by our deadliest enemy, a being known for his lies and deception?” I just can’t see how the logical answer would be to double down and make our own rings, with blackjack and hookers.

The half an episode I suffered through of season 2 was enough to re-assure me that it remains the same quality as season 1.

It’s just terrible, and 99% of that is due to the fan fic level writing.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:


I mean... that is what Peter Jackson's LotR did. Both things. Tom never showed (fine). But Aragorn is an entirely different person. As are Legolis and Gimli and Gandalf the White (who somehow got more serious than the Gray when in the books after he returns as the White he doesn't seem to take ANYTHING seriously anymore).

While I'm not a fan of some of the narrative methods of illustrating his journey, about halfway through the trilogy film Aragorn arrives at the point where book Aragorn starts his journey. That's a far cry from being an entirely different person. I'm also not sure which version of the Lord of the Rings has stoner Gandalf the White.

I'll give you Legolas and Gimli being reduced to comedic relief and minor exposition vehicles, a major and oft repeated criticism of Jackson's adaptation.

Honestly, I think making Aragorn more of a reluctant king and moving his acceptance of Anduril to later in the story are improvements to Tolkien's storytelling.

And that's why I'd personally never worry about complete fidelity to Tolkien's writing in other mediums, and can't understand those who seem to demand it. LotR is a singular and hugely influential work...but hardly literary perfection. It's really not even hard to criticize aspects of his writing and poke holes in some of the storytelling.

 gorgon wrote:

 His Master's Voice wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:


I mean... that is what Peter Jackson's LotR did. Both things. Tom never showed (fine). But Aragorn is an entirely different person. As are Legolis and Gimli and Gandalf the White (who somehow got more serious than the Gray when in the books after he returns as the White he doesn't seem to take ANYTHING seriously anymore).

While I'm not a fan of some of the narrative methods of illustrating his journey, about halfway through the trilogy film Aragorn arrives at the point where book Aragorn starts his journey. That's a far cry from being an entirely different person. I'm also not sure which version of the Lord of the Rings has stoner Gandalf the White.

I'll give you Legolas and Gimli being reduced to comedic relief and minor exposition vehicles, a major and oft repeated criticism of Jackson's adaptation.

Honestly, I think making Aragorn more of a reluctant king and moving his acceptance of Anduril to later in the story are improvements to Tolkien's storytelling.

And that's why I'd personally never worry about complete fidelity to Tolkien's writing in other mediums, and can't understand those who seem to demand it. LotR is a singular and hugely influential work...but hardly literary perfection. It's really not even hard to criticize aspects of his writing and poke holes in some of the storytelling.

I don't disagree. Aragorn in the books is a pretty unlikable ass hole for the majority of the trilogy. Making the character more sympathetic from the time they leave the Prancing Pony forward took someone who was a pretty miserable sad sack in the books into a fan favorite character in the movies. It was not a bad change.

I do with Gandalf the White was more silly though. It says a lot about how powerful he is that the entire army of Mordor is out there laying siege and he's like "Hahaha! Pranks!".

Episode 4 :

-Ents looked good, arguably better than the movies.
-Barrow-Wights looked good as well, though they did feth all. There was zero tension or sense of urgency.
-Tom Bombadil was pretty disappointing. Also why does dude have a fire burning in a brick house in the desert? I know it can get cold, but that would be an absolute sauna.
-Cirian Hinds as evil wizard is all I’m looking forward to. Dude forever has good credit with me for his Julius Caesar portrayal in HBO’s Rome.
-Galadriel is back to being insufferable.
-“There are nameless things in the deep places of the world” Lets eat it, after it just tried to eat us.
-Orcs have been the best thing in this show, but the random arrow hitting the elf was goofy.

Probably the best episode so far this season, but still cringe af.

Also:

Viewership is way down from season 1, according to a few sources cited in this article :

https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2024/09/05/very-bad-news-for-rings-of-power-season-3-as-season-2-viewership-plummets/

I keep getting Saruman vibes from the “Dark Wizard”, but that would then be very difficult to justify his position in the White Council.

I'm enjoying it more. The ents were pretty good, with some nice direction of their silhouettes in the half-light of the nighttime forest. and I don't mind Galadriel.
My pick for the evil sorcerer is that he is Khamûl, and while it would be depressing predictable that the Harfoots Big Friend is Gandalf I think it would be cool if he was Saruman.

I found season 1 painful to watch. Season 2, so far, has at least been an interesting, if not riveting, curiousity. Or maybe I've just lowered my expectations.

I didn't care for Peter Jackson's movies, but I don't think I'm impossible to please when it comes to Tolkien interpretations. I generally found the Shadow of Mordor / Shadow of War games' story and characters more interesting, better acted, and better written than those in the movies and Amazon series - and those game stories were essentially filler rather than an adaptation. The "Shadow" stories definitely weren't perfect, but there's no comparison between the excellent portrayal of Celebrimbor from those games and the just OK one from Amazon's series.

Season 2 is certainly seeming more to the point.

Season 1 was beautiful to watch, but I do remember a lot of “wait, who are you and why are you important”.

Which isn’t a criticism of the actors, who are all fine. It’s just not a story I was previously aware of. Season 2 is starting to provide context to a lot of stuff in Season 1 though.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Season 2 is certainly seeming more to the point.

Season 1 was beautiful to watch, but I do remember a lot of “wait, who are you and why are you important”.

Which isn’t a criticism of the actors, who are all fine. It’s just not a story I was previously aware of. Season 2 is starting to provide context to a lot of stuff in Season 1 though.

I mean. Thats the simirilian in a nut shell. Who are you? Lets begin every chapter with an ever growing list of lineage and deeds so you know who we are talking about. That list eventually growing to a page + long.

I have to assume you’re accurate there, as I’ve not read any Tolkien

This image I found is the start of one of the chapters in the book. Just read the first 2 paragraphs of that total nonsense and you will get an idea of what reading the silmarillion is like. haha



Also this...

I've tried to read The Silmarillion twice. On the second attempt I made it to page 8.

 Lance845 wrote:
This image I found is the start of one of the chapters in the book. Just read the first 2 paragraphs of that total nonsense and you will get an idea of what reading the silmarillion is like. haha



Also this...

What's meant to be difficult to read about this?

I guess he doesn't like genealogies in his fantasy?

The Hobbit book is plenty of people's intro to Tolkien and Tolkien's cultural osmosis makes criticism from people exposed to it who don't care for it inevitable.

No i LIKE the Silmarilion.

But just because i like something doesn't mean i cannot give it fair criticisms. When the Rings of Power is criticized for doing what the Silmarillion does (bunches of characters that kind of blend into each other with very similar names with long family histories) people get lost and lose interest.

Difference is, Silmarillion was never was never meant to be published, especially in raw form. You want to read the actual stories, you read the ones Chris expanded on and published.

Rings of Power has writers who seem like the only time they've touched a pen is when they drew a picture book.

Factually untrue. Silmarililon was pitched along with TLotR and was rejected by publishers. Tolkien continued work on it all the way up to his death but he definitely tended to publish it.

If it was only notes for his own history then that paragraph of cousins could have been more easily recorded as a flow chart.

It was unfinished, so it was never meant to be published. So, yes true.

I had the displeasure of being convinced by one of the friends I was visiting to watch the first few episodes of Rings of Power S2, so we could roast it on how bad it was and ummmm, yeah we ended up skimming it halfway through the second episode.

I don't get how we got from "Meat's back on the menu boys!" to "Please don't send me off into battle! Me wife's got eee a wee baby!" (Probably because the crazy people online saw Tolkien Orcs as black-coded for some reason?).

Then we have stellar dialogue like "He played me like a harp, but the melody was not one of my choosing", top tier writing right there. You would think that they would have went with something like “he played me like a harp, but the melody was to my benefit” or something to make it different from from pure manipulation/trickery, but nope instead they implied that “played me like a harp” is normally to the benefit of the one being tricked. If you are the harp being played, then of course the melody is not of your choosing. There's no "but" required. Did they get Tommy Wisseau to help them on the writing team?

Now like a chipmunk searching for his nut, I must continue to look for a good TV show elsewhere.

The greatest sin of all though was how boring it was to watch through, a slog where it wasn't worth the energy to keep roasting several dumb scenes we went through.

Lol I saw that orc wife and child scene on youtube and that was about enough to convince me to not watch it. I watched all of season 1 and didn't particularly care for it. And if the viewership drop off is that bad I can't imagine it being renewed for a 3rd season. It felt like big budget fan fiction.

I quit watching this show after having watched S2 E4, I just cannot take anymore of the horrible writing and acting.
Didn't realise there were threads on dakka for the show, I did enjoy S1 mind you but this season has been so cringe I just have to draw the line, when you no longer enjoy a show its time to move on.

The cliche's to the script were worse enough (bad guy/creature looming over someone and is killed by a backstab type stuff that has you pull out so much hair you end up looking like uncle fester within a single screening) but things like the multicultural paradise of chinese, indian and african hobbits living in a canonical ARABIAN setting (which it should've been portrayed as) is irredeemable, and putting together an elven party under galadriel the obnoxious' overvoicing elrond bad' which sports a single drow which is ofcourse the first to die is another thing that had me nearly flip my chair into my laptop, and no I don't care about drows being in this series no, its just the absurd cliche.

Besides that most characters are beyond unlikable, loathable even.. and that Orcs are now being portrayed as unwilling to pillage instead of being -THE- reprobable evil that the entirity of the realm is incited against (as they are meant to be the very force of anti-nature)..

(I am aware of all the coping concerning the so called orc family, which ISNT canon because of tolkien saying that they reproduce like all other races, as reproducing doesn't mean the same as having a family, the evil of orcs is that they pillage and abuse races (women included yes) against their will, you know the word I mean to use but won't because its probably a banned word' but that is the reprobate aspect of Orcs which invokes terror and disgust proccing man, dwarves and elves to do away with that -unnatural species-.
Removing this aspect of the Orc removes the entire reason for the fellowship, it has nothing to do with Sauron's ambitions but with the manifestation of it channeled through the horde's relentless, uncaring endeavor of destruction.

I could write a book about all the insufferability of this series concerning but will leave it at this.. really had to get it off my chest.
I hope this series dies quickly, gets canceled so hard that the next attempt to write a tolkien' inspired series it actually hires writers that care about it.

edit: actually let me rephrase that into: writers that aren't chatgpt as the "writers" of this shows script clearly is.

Tbf Tolkien gave multiple different origins for orcs and never really settled on one.