TV LOTR: Rings of Power - New Teaser [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

warty goblin

2022-07-14, 03:10 PM

It looks better than I was expecting based on what random images I've seen. The shot of the Trees is very good.

But I'm only secondarily concerned with looks. I'm mostly concerned with whether this feels like Tolkien. I think the LoTR movies did fairly well on getting the feel right - and remain pretty amazing pieces of film making even when they don't - while the Hobbit films get it... much less right. In no small part I suspect because there was a huge amount of time they had to fill in Hobbit movies, and nowhere near enough original material to do it with. Not surprisingly, where they stuck with the original stuff, the movies were excellent - Riddles in the Dark works perfectly for instance. But the new stuff in the Hobbit, charitably put, does not feel like Tolkien. It feels like, well, the sort of cheap modern drama people wrote to fill up time with exciting plot twists people can live-tweet about.

So I know this is a completely different team, and I I'm not holding the failures of the Hobbit films over them. But they have even less actually original Tolkien material to work with here, basically every single scene and line of dialog has to be written from what amounts to a pretty terse plot summary. I have limited faith in the ability of a team of modern writers doing that and successfully capturing the feel of Tolkien in the context of something as flexible and unconstrained as a novel. It's not impossible, but unless I know a lot about the specific people involved, I'm skeptical.

Which gets to the second area of concern; this isn't a novel, or even a movie. It's streaming TV. In recent times streaming TV tends to ingest good ideas and mulch them into Processed Entertainment Paste Product*. You all know what I mean, you get a bunch of characters all having super dramatic plots and revelations all over the place, and yet the story has almost no cohesion, seems to go nowhere, and if you actually look at the whole thing it makes no sense and comes up less than the sum of its parts.

After all, the point isn't the actual show, that's just an advert for keeping you subscribed to the service. And all that requires is that the value of all the Processed Entertainment Paste Product on offer is like $15 a month.

So maybe this is good. I'm not going to pre-hate it. But I'm going in very, very skeptical.

*To be fair, it also mulches bad ideas into virtually indistinguishable Processed Entertainment Paste Product.

Zevox

2022-07-14, 04:09 PM

What is this based on? The Silmarillion?
There's clear references to The Silmarillion near the start of the trailer - the two trees and the lines "The world was so young there had not yet been a sunrise. But even then, there was light," which are a direct reference to the Two Trees of Valinor, a central part of The Silmarillion's backstory. So, whatever the rights status may be, yes, there's clearly some Silmarillion in there. Though it's theoretically set during the Second Age, and given the title one would presume is about the forging of the Rings of Power and Sauron's rise, and potentially the Fall of Numenore thereafter.

Personally... eh. Trailer's not bad, but it doesn't sell me on the series either. Just feels like any other generic trailer, if I'm being honest. Galadriel looking and sounding so younger than in the films does kind of bother me though. A little irrationally I guess, but though she is younger here than in LotR, she is still thousands of years old, so it seems to me she should already have hit the point where she stops appearing to age (by human standards) by this point.

Of course, I also don't have Amazon Prime, so I won't be watching it either way. But as it stands, they're not really making me wish I did.

Fyraltari

2022-07-14, 04:23 PM

I have the same problem I do with all of these expansionary prequels: we know not-Blanchett is right, that war is coming, and how it ultimately ends. Much like Star Wars, I'm ready to explore what things are like after the big conflict - and while that can be risky (see the ST) sometimes it can be extremely rewarding (Mandalorian).

I appreciate the conscious effort to include POC - including elves! - though.
Trust me, I get it.

However, Tolkien's works are not public domain yet, which means the only new "Tolkien content"*, outside of non-profit fanworks (and even then) that can be made needs the Tolkien Estates official stamp of approval unless it is based specifically on Lord of the Rings or The Hobbit whose adaptation rights have already been sold (and even then there probably are various clauses regarding mediums and such).

The Tolkien Estates just isn't going to give anyone the right to use the names "Gondor", "Baggins", etc. to write the sequel to lotr that the Professor never wrote. I guess they could go for an adaptation of The New Shadow, but there's only like seven pages of manuscript for that one and much of it is a philosophical debate.

*I felt dirty typing that.

Saph

2022-07-14, 04:35 PM

Which gets to the second area of concern; this isn't a novel, or even a movie. It's streaming TV. In recent times streaming TV tends to ingest good ideas and mulch them into Processed Entertainment Paste Product*. You all know what I mean, you get a bunch of characters all having super dramatic plots and revelations all over the place, and yet the story has almost no cohesion, seems to go nowhere, and if you actually look at the whole thing it makes no sense and comes up less than the sum of its parts.

After all, the point isn't the actual show, that's just an advert for keeping you subscribed to the service. And all that requires is that the value of all the Processed Entertainment Paste Product on offer is like $15 a month.

This is my guess as well. Given how mediocre a job Amazon did with Wheel of Time, I can't see much reason to expect their version of LotR (which is much harder to adapt than WoT) to be any better.

Trafalgar

2022-07-14, 04:58 PM

This is my guess as well. Given how mediocre a job Amazon did with Wheel of Time, I can't see much reason to expect their version of LotR (which is much harder to adapt than WoT) to be any better.

I was very excited when Amazon took over the Expanse. But the new seasons have been so-so. I expect the new LOTR to be mediocre.

Saintheart

2022-07-14, 11:12 PM

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

Indeed, I'm not personally satisfied until a minimum of three people have thrown themselves from the balcony in despair at any social gathering I attend. When I'm online I don't hold myself to that standard.

But I really don't think there's much other than despair warranted when all we're really being served up here is a long fanfilm of a long fanfilm. They're not ripping off Tolkien, they're ripping off Peter Jackson. (Not forgetting that Peter Jackson himself only made three good fanfilms, pouring much of his malice, his cruelty, and his desire to dominate all life into them ... as evidenced by the soulless celluloid of the Hobbit films that followed them.)

Emmerlaus

2022-07-14, 11:22 PM

Indeed, I'm not personally satisfied until a minimum of three people have thrown themselves from the balcony in despair at any social gathering I attend. When I'm online I don't hold myself to that standard.

But I really don't think there's much other than despair warranted when all we're really being served up here is a long fanfilm of a long fanfilm. They're not ripping off Tolkien, they're ripping off Peter Jackson. (Not forgetting that Peter Jackson himself only made three good fanfilms, pouring much of his malice, his cruelty, and his desire to dominate all life into them ... as evidenced by the soulless celluloid of the Hobbit films that followed them.)

Kinda agree with you there. The Hobbits movies didnt give me hope for this serie. And somehow, Amazon Prime wont let me watch the Hobbit momies either on Amazon (using Brave and Chrome, it doesnt work on either of them) so I dont think I'll be watching this one either, for several reasons. Even for the Hobbits movies, it was like... a bad fad food restaurant. You go back years later to see if it was as bad as you remember it to be, thinking it cannot have being... and yet you fooled yourself. DOnt get me wrong, there is stuff I like in them but considering the movies lenght, most scene I like are not worth my time... and the Goblin King song... OMG I cant listen to it. It irritates me too much and I dont know why.

Catullus64

2022-07-15, 11:18 AM

The Dwarf women don't have beards, 0/10, a monstrous betrayal of Tolkien's vision.

More seriously, I yawn at this. I find it rather hard to get as bent out of shape about it as some, but the only thing I find remotely interesting is some of the glimpses we seem to get of the First Age, like the Two Trees, and what I presume to be Galadriel's memory of the War of Wrath... but from what we know about the story and the licensing situation, these are unlikely to be anything but minor flashback moments in the show. So we've got a couple of images I've always wanted to see filmed, combined with a story that doesn't interest me. For me, this is essentially the world's most expensive set of desktop wallpapers.

Ramza00

2022-07-15, 11:50 AM

Indeed, I'm not personally satisfied until a minimum of three people have thrown themselves from the balcony in despair at any social gathering I attend. When I'm online I don't hold myself to that standard.

But I really don't think there's much other than despair warranted when all we're really being served up here is a long fanfilm of a long fanfilm. They're not ripping off Tolkien, they're ripping off Peter Jackson. (Not forgetting that Peter Jackson himself only made three good fanfilms, pouring much of his malice, his cruelty, and his desire to dominate all life into them ... as evidenced by the soulless celluloid of the Hobbit films that followed them.)

Everyone is ripping off someone ever since Paradise Lost and John Milton introduced time travel into fiction. Why does the ringwraiths look like that? Because John Milton conceived Death that way.

Thus the thing we are complaining about is not ripping off of those who ripped off someone else, again and again. It is because we can trace the apparent lineages on the surface of things, with only a cursory knowledge of details. Everyone knows Rings Of Power is connected to 20 year old LOTR movies, and 60 year old books. That is what we are complaining about.

Yet perhaps this was inevitable with mass image society where it is so easy to reproduce, recreate, and only surfacely modify art. Thus our systems of ritual and authority are messed up, we feel the past haunting the present without a recreation that feels earned? But hey this is not new, we had people pointing out the tech of the 1880s made this inevitable when they were writing in the 1930s.

Metastachydium

2022-07-15, 12:18 PM

Everyone is ripping off someone ever since Paradise Lost and John Milton introduced time travel into fiction. Why does the ringwraiths look like that? Because John Milton conceived Death that way.

Thus the thing we are complaining about is not ripping off of those who ripped off someone else, again and again. It is because we can trace the apparent lineages on the surface of things, with only a cursory knowledge of details. Everyone knows Rings Of Power is connected to 20 year old LOTR movies, and 60 year old books. That is what we are complaining about.

Yet perhaps this was inevitable with mass image society where it is so easy to reproduce, recreate, and only surfacely modify art. Thus our systems of ritual and authority are messed up, we feel the past haunting the present without a recreation that feels earned? But hey this is not new, we had people pointing out the tech of the 1880s made this inevitable when they were writing in the 1930s.

I wouldn't be so rash to conflate respectable forms (and even traditions) of transtextuality (regardless of its degree of subtlety) with the consumeristic production of painfully bloated franchise-style properties unpleasantly reminiscent of what can be best termed as carcinogenesis.

Ramza00

2022-07-15, 12:42 PM

I wouldn't be so rash to conflate respectable forms (and even traditions) of transtextuality (regardless of its degree of subtlety) with the consumeristic production of painfully bloated franchise-style properties unpleasantly reminiscent of what can be best termed as carcinogenesis.

But they are linked! When one crafts things out like a machine the difference between cancer and planned growth is barely a distinction. And the want to say a distinction between A and B is the ego wish, the desire as a want to say there is a high / superior culture and a low / inferior culture in regards to art and entertainment. This is understandable but I do not think this is really what is going on.

Whenever things are so common, so everyday with its ubiquitousness and many things like it in a culture, well this changes how humans approach art and we say one is superior vs inferior. What makes something unique? What makes A have a special Aura?

Well ritual does that, the ritual which starts as a personal investment which transforms into small group cult investment that becomes cultural investment over time due to spillovers. But a reproduction, a spin-off is also unmoored from time and space of the original so it feels out of place, it feels like it is haunting the present. Likewise the opposite thing is occurring, since it feels out of place we compare it to everything else (the common) and this produces an uncanny and unflattering experience. The thing is both not unique, and also it is very common, it is an ugly chimera and not it’s own thing with a cult investment.

Things no longer feel earned for we are displacing our old feelings into the new, likewise those feelings have not been earned by the new, and we can feel this mismatch. While other forms of inspiration and transtextuality as you say are not put into those frameworks of mind, they get to earn their own successes, and thus everything is more subtle. Works which you are not aware of their origins on the surface of things feel fresh even if they are old as stories themselves.

Psyren

2022-07-15, 01:37 PM

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-15, 02:11 PM

I was very excited when Amazon took over the Expanse. But the new seasons have been so-so. I expect the new LOTR to be mediocre.
I feel that expectation is quite optimistic :P

However, nothing presented so far - some nice looking set pieces aside - makes me hopeful this will achieve even mediocrity. And if some of the rumours floating around turn out true, well, this may end up a mess that will make people appreciate the Hobbit as an adaptation...

Ramza00

2022-07-15, 02:14 PM

Can we stop saying 800% more women? It is kind of a real valid criticism to say that LOTR and The Hobbit have almost no women. Likewise we actually have more Women Tolkien characters in The Silmarillion (aka Zero and First Age).

Now the 2nd age notes and appendixes barely have any women characters just like LOTR, but they are talking about Male Primogeniture cultures and just who was ruling at the time. No day to day life, no pathos doing the driving motivation, such a bird eyes view it is useless. Thus it will be natural for a Second Age show with vibrant cultures to have both men and women in it. :smallsigh:

HeyHoWhatUpYo

2022-07-15, 02:22 PM

Can we stop saying 800% more women? It is kind of a real valid criticism to say that LOTR and The Hobbit have almost no women. Likewise we actually have more Women Tolkien characters in The Silmarillion (aka Zero and First Age).

Now the 2nd age notes and appendixes barely have any women characters just like LOTR, but they are talking about Male Primogeniture cultures and just who was ruling at the time. No day to day life, no pathos doing the driving motivation, such a bird eyes view it is useless. Thus it will be natural for a Second Age show with vibrant cultures to have both men and women in it. :smallsigh:

Do we need more women in LOTR? Do we need more male protagonists in Sex and The City? Can there be such a thing as media that appeals to not every single identity out there?

I'm still upset that there weren't more Carebears in the Smurfs. Muh inclusiveness.

warty goblin

2022-07-15, 02:27 PM

I'd say Wheel of Time has more of a reason to exist, i.e. being the anti- Game of Thrones - a gynocratic high-magic setting to counter GoT's grittier sexism, coupled with bringing our collective imaginations to life on screen through the bigger channeling moments. Falme, Dumai's Wells, Rhuidean, The Fall of the Stone - there are a lot of splashy set-pieces I'm looking forward to seeing them bring to life with Amazon's deep pockets.

This LotR show by contrast feels like "Say, did you like a bunch of people riding horses across sprawling New Zealand landscapes? Here's more of that. Now with 800% more women!"

Yeah sure in theory I'll buy WoT as inverse GoT. In practice the WoT show was boring as hell. I love me some fantasy nonsense, and it was just mind-crushingly dull, in exactly the sort of overplotted but structureless way I was talking about upthread.

(GoT drove right the hell off a cliff don't get me wrong, but the first seasons were really good TV. I managed I think four episodes of WoT before giving it up for more engaging activities. Like flossing. )

And I don't think it's really fair to say what the LoTR show feels like, because we've seen about 300 seconds of it. It's a teaser trailer, and teasers are unrepresentative as all getout. Remember the first Fellowship of the Ring teasers being all "you will find adventure or adventure will find you?"

Psyren

2022-07-15, 02:36 PM

Can we stop saying 800% more women? It is kind of a real valid criticism to say that LOTR and The Hobbit have almost no women.

I completely agree that it's a valid criticism :smallsmile: I was poking fun at the source material, not Amazon's (welcome) efforts to increase inclusivity.

Do we need more women in LOTR?

Yes.

Yeah sure in theory I'll buy WoT as inverse GoT. In practice the WoT show was boring as hell. I love me some fantasy nonsense, and it was just mind-crushingly dull, in exactly the sort of overplotted but structureless way I was talking about upthread.

I think scenes like the Blood Snow and the Children of the Light stuff showed the potential this series has to not only elevate the source material, but to be uniquely appealing TV in its own right.

(GoT drove right the hell off a cliff don't get me wrong, but the first seasons were really good TV. I managed I think four episodes of WoT before giving it up for more engaging activities. Like flossing. )

Welllll... between starting great and ending in the toilet, vs. having a rockier start due to COVID and going uphill from there, I know which one I'd pick personally.

Kareeah_Indaga

2022-07-15, 02:53 PM

Can we stop saying 800% more women? It is kind of a real valid criticism to say that LOTR and The Hobbit have almost no women.

Disagree, Eowyn’s “I am no man!” moment would have been a lot less powerful if half the army had been female and she’d just been lucky enough to fight the guy who can’t be killed by humans with a Y chromosome. It removes a challenge for her to overcome, so instead of being determined (not giving up when she was told no) and clever (to sneak onto the battlefield by disguising herself) and skilled in combat (to kill the Ringwraith) she would only be able to show she was skilled in combat. Which being already true of half the cast, would in turn make her less of an interesting character.

Tl:dr - Lord of the Rings has exactly as many women as it should have.

The Hobbit trilogy was just terrible and adding more women would not have fixed that. Less filler might have though.

Ramza00

2022-07-15, 02:59 PM

Do we need more women in LOTR? Do we need more male protagonists in Sex and The City? Can there be such a thing as media that appeals to not every single identity out there?

I'm still upset that there weren't more Carebears in the Smurfs. Muh inclusiveness.

{Scrubbed}

Disagree, Eowyn’s “I am no man!” moment would have been a lot less powerful if half the army had been female and she’d just been lucky enough to fight the guy who can’t be killed by humans with a Y chromosome. It removes a challenge for her to overcome, so instead of being determined (not giving up when she was told no) and clever (to sneak onto the battlefield by disguising herself) and skilled in combat (to kill the Ringwraith) she would only be able to show she was skilled in combat. Which being already true of half the cast, would in turn make her less of an interesting character.

Tl:dr - Lord of the Rings has exactly as many women as it should have.

The Hobbit trilogy was just terrible and adding more women would not have fixed that. Less filler might have though.

Minas Tirith and any city of several thousand people would have more women in it even if they are in the background and doing jobs / labor that is not tied to war but just support.

When Rohan / Edoras was evacuated for Helms Deep we barely see any women in the books even if these refugees would have lots of women and children. Likewise the same in the peaceful elf cities Lothlórien and Rivendell.

Now we got two women in the shire with Rosie, Sam's love interest, and Lobelia Sackville-Baggins who terrorized two generation of "likely" queer hobbits. :smalltongue:

It makes sense to see less women in Gondor for men do send women away during times of war. Much like The Lion The Witch and The Wardrobe by fellow Inkling Lewis takes place during WW2 when parents send their kids to the countries when the Axis powers were using V-1 flying bomb and V-2 Rockets to bomb London. But the lack of women in the everday places of LOTR is noticeable even if they were just "background" characters.

I still like Tolkien but we can critique the things we adore :smallsmile: And yes I do have passionate joy whenever I read / see Eowyn’s best Macduff in Macbeth.

Metastachydium

2022-07-15, 02:59 PM

When one crafts things out like a machine

That is a problem in itself.

Things no longer feel earned for we are displacing our old feelings into the new, likewise those feelings have not been earned by the new, and we can feel this mismatch. While other forms of inspiration and transtextuality as you say are not put into those frameworks of mind, they get to earn their own successes, and thus everything is more subtle. Works which you are not aware of their origins on the surface of things feel fresh even if they are old as stories themselves.

That train of thought misses the point by leagues. Originality only became a privileged criterion of assessing art quite late, and its stint at that position was arguably not particularly long either. Think of the principle of imitation or classical postmodernism. Making the origins or, rather, hypotexts (in a broad sense, of course) of an artistic creation evident is often enough part of the point. The Aeneid or the Eclogues didn't resonate so well with their audiences and the posterity because those failed to recognize the tradition of the Trojan Cycle or Theocritus and his followers behind them. Same goes for the Pharsalia and, even more markedly, the whole epic poetry of, say, the Baroque. The literary antecedents are what gave the hypertext its prestige. The same goes for the French Classicists or much of the non-avantgarde Modernist prose.

The trick is not hiding the antecedents. The trick is using them well. In the olden days, this was called emulation, the practice of challenging the forebearers and trying to rise equal them while paying hommage to the paradigm they established. What gave us The Hobbit trilogy was at best hubris (i.e. the notion that the adaptation could surpass the adapted original) or, more likely, a half-hearted and uninspired attempt at capitalising on the commercial success of a superior work, trying to mimic its structure and scope in working with material that couldn't possibly support such an expansion. And at this point nothing was yet said about the quality of the means meant to achieve this end. They say nature abhors vacuum, but filler might be even worse.

gynocratic

Gyn(a)ecocratic.

It is kind of a real valid criticism to say that LOTR and The Hobbit have almost no women. Likewise we actually have more Women Tolkien characters in The Silmarillion (aka Zero and First Age).

Well, yes, but in the Trilogy, those few women make quite the impact and "fixing" the issue in The Hobbit gave us the painful and cringeworthy Tauriel subplot.

Psyren

2022-07-15, 03:01 PM

Did I miss something? No one is changing the Trilogy or The Hobbit, and this show isn't set during either anyway.

Ramza00

2022-07-15, 03:19 PM

That is a problem in itself.

That train of thought misses the point by leagues. Originality only became a privileged criterion of assessing art quite late, and its stint at that position was arguably not particularly long either. Think of the principle of imitation or classical postmodernism. Making the origins or, rather, hypotexts (in a broad sense, of course) of an artistic creation evident is often enough part of the point. The Aeneid or the Eclogues didn't resonate so well with their audiences and the posterity because those failed to recognize the tradition of the Trojan Cycle or Theocritus and his followers behind them. Same goes for the Pharsalia and, even more markedly, the whole epic poetry of, say, the Baroque. The literary antecedents are what gave the hypertext its prestige. The same goes for the French Classicists or much of the non-avantgarde Modernist prose.

I disagree but I think we are in parallel tracks.

1) The problem is not that a work is derivative, for everything is derivative I argue.
2) The problem is the work did not seduce you.

I wish people talk more about #2 and complain less about #1.

The trick is not hiding the antecedents. The trick is using them well. In the olden days, this was called emulation, the practice of challenging the forebearers and trying to rise equal them while paying hommage to the paradigm they established. What gave us The Hobbit trilogy was at best hubris (i.e. the notion that the adaptation could surpass the adapted original) or, more likely, a half-hearted and uninspired attempt at capitalising on the commercial success of a superior work, trying to mimic its structure and scope in working with material that couldn't possibly support such an expansion. And at this point nothing was yet said about the quality of the means meant to achieve this end. They say nature abhors vacuum, but filler might be even worse.

I disagree though I once had this belief. We can't be seduced every time, that is the hedonic treadmill. We are seduced for something resonates in us with the work.

Much of life is going to be filler for there is no perfect formal way to always create bangers. How many Pixar movies are there now? Something like the mid 20s now? Are all those movies bangers? Are some of those Pixar movies "fillers" ?

Well, yes, but in the Trilogy, those few women make quite the impact and "fixing" the issue in The Hobbit gave us the painful and cringeworthy Tauriel subplot.

The problem of the Tauriel subplot is not Tauriel for if we put any elf there we would have the same problems. Legolas 2.0 instead of Tauriel would be the same problem. Likewise 30 to 40% of the troubles of The Hobbit Trilogy was trying to do filler time and filler plots for there is not enough book there for 8 hours and 38 minutes of movies. Yes the 3 movies are almost 9 hours long for their extended editions (and almost 8 hours long for their theater cuts.)

DavidSh

2022-07-15, 03:42 PM

There are a few set pieces I yearn to see if they can pull off. How exactly does Numenor sink? Is there some monster breaking wave, as Faramir dreamt?

Catullus64

2022-07-15, 03:55 PM

One thing I do hope that we get is a more thorough treatment of the Dwarf-rings. Of all the rings of power, the Seven are the ones which receive the least attention in the books; even if the appendices and the Silmarillion give a little more info, they lack the same degree of thematic attention and narrative import that is given to the Three or the Nine, to say nothing of the One. Under what circumstances the Dwarfs accepted these rings from Sauron, and how they came to be eaten or reclaimed by Mordor is something I would like to see. (Frankly, I would be hugely on board with this whole series if it was just about the Dwarfs. And had Dwarf-women with proper beards!)

Metastachydium

2022-07-15, 04:11 PM

I disagree but I think we are in parallel tracks.

1) The problem is not that a work is derivative, for everything is derivative I argue.
2) The problem is the work did not seduce you.

I wish people talk more about #2 and complain less about #1.

1. How's "for much of literary history, originality was not considered a criterion of paramount importance, but what made (to use your term) derivative creations work was not people failing to notice what they derived from [with examples]" a complaint about anything and everything derivative?
2. That's a weird choice of a term there, but I'll let that slide. More pertinently, I recognize the importance of cubism, structuralism and areferential postmodernism as currents in the history of art or philosophy, and by extension, I recognize the merit of individual works belonging to such currents to a varying degree, although I don't neccessarily enjoy them. Meanwhile, I genuinely enjoyed watching Drive Angry and the first three Underworld movies, but I have difficulty ascribing true artistic merit to them.

I disagree though I once had this belief. We can't be seduced every time, that is the hedonic treadmill. We are seduced for something resonates in us with the work.

Like I said, I do not ascribe to this "theory of seduction".

Much of life is going to be filler for there is no perfect formal way to always create bangers.

That's beside the point. Sitting on the toilet won't have any more or less artistic merit just because people owning a toilet do it all the time. Meanwhile, showcasing banality, front and center, can be a really powerful tool if done right.

How many Pixar movies are there now? Something like the mid 20s now? Are all those movies bangers? Are some of those Pixar movies "fillers" ?

I suppose you could say that, after a fashion.

The problem of the Tauriel subplot is not Tauriel for if we put any elf there we would have the same problems. Legolas 2.0 instead of Tauriel would be the same problem.

Indeed. I'd go further yet: shoehorning Legolas so aggressively into the story was by far a worse decision. My point is, you can add a major female OC to an adapted work and make the adaptation's overall quality decrease. Not bothering beyond ticking off boxes can easily defeat the purpose of ticking those same boxes off.

Likewise 30 to 40% of the troubles of The Hobbit Trilogy was trying to do filler time and filler plots for there is not enough book there for 8 hours and 38 minutes of movies. Yes the 3 movies are almost 9 hours long for their extended editions (and almost 8 hours long for their theater cuts.)

Which is exactly what I said in the same post you responded to (and what you replied to with something about Pixar products).

Psyren

2022-07-15, 04:24 PM

Indeed. I'd go further yet: shoehorning Legolas so aggressively into the story was by far a worse decision. My point is, you can add a major female OC to an adapted work and make the adaptation's overall quality decrease. Not bothering beyond ticking off boxes can easily defeat the purpose of ticking those same boxes off.

However Tauriel ended up, I don't think it's fair to declare that the intent behind her was to tick off a box. Movies go through a lot of hands and challenging realities between concept and what we eventually get on screen, and any creative choice in an adaptation has the potential to decrease its quality. That's not a reason to never try.

HeyHoWhatUpYo

2022-07-15, 05:24 PM

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

My beliefs and values are that sometimes people make art that isn't intended for everyone. This is commonly known. We have even a built in system that represents this, that being the rating system on movies and television programs. Saying that everything needs to appeal to everyone at all times in all media, is simply not correct and something that will never happen. Some people like cucumbers pickled, some don't. I simply asked a question, it seems in a roundabout way you answered.

Ramza00

2022-07-15, 05:32 PM

My beliefs and values are that sometimes people make art that isn't intended for everyone. This is commonly known. We have even a built in system that represents this, that being the rating system on movies and television programs. Saying that everything needs to appeal to everyone at all times in all media, is simply not correct and something that will never happen. Some people like cucumbers pickled, some don't. I simply asked a question, it seems in a roundabout way you answered.

Wait we were talking about women in movies, and you brought up whether something is rated G, PG, PG-13, or rated R? That is where you took the conversation?

{Scrubbed}

HeyHoWhatUpYo

2022-07-15, 06:03 PM

Wait we were talking about women in movies, and you brought up whether something is rated G, PG, PG-13, or rated R? That is where you took the conversation?

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}

I didn't take the conversation here, people were already talking about this. I used a currently in place metric of determining what types of media are accessible to audiences to illustrate that media that isn't friendly for every audience can and does still thrive in the market. The idea that all media must be friendly to, accessible for, or representative of everyone is a fiction. I think many artforms would be done a lot of favor without people telling them what they must have in them. Just my opinion, of course.

Ramza00

2022-07-15, 06:14 PM

I didn't take the conversation here, people were already talking about this. I used a currently in place metric of determining what types of media are accessible to audiences to illustrate that media that isn't friendly for every audience can and does still thrive in the market. The idea that all media must be friendly to, accessible for, or representative of everyone is a fiction. I think many artforms would be done a lot of favor without people telling them what they must have in them. Just my opinion, of course.

Who said anything about tv or movies must have X? You brought it up. I said valid criticism how literally women are not part of Tolkien’s world or society in LOTR with a few exceptions, literally you can count the number of women in the books and movies on one hand both with name characters and background characters. In a way that literally does not make sense for a world to feel lived in.

HeyHoWhatUpYo

2022-07-15, 06:19 PM

Who said anything about tv or movies must have X?

Well in a way you did. I said that not all media has to meet some kind of nebulous metric of inclusivity and you reacted as if I'm some kind of... I don't even know what. I'm glad you see me, hopefully you can hear what I'm actually saying and not instantly lump me into some identity group.

Ramza00

2022-07-15, 06:23 PM

Well in a way you did. I said that not all media has to meet some kind of nebulous metric of inclusivity and you reacted as if I'm some kind of... I don't even know what. I'm glad you see me, hopefully you can hear what I'm actually saying and not instantly lump me into some identity group.

You are the one who brought up the smurfs and smurfette, that and movie ratings when we were talking the second age of the lord of the rings. I hear your logics, but they are not dispassionate instead the opposite (you have strong feelings on it.)

HeyHoWhatUpYo

2022-07-15, 06:41 PM

You are the one who brought up the smurfs and smurfette, that and movie ratings when we were talking the second age of the lord of the rings. I hear your logics, but they are not dispassionate instead the opposite (you have strong feelings on it.)

I never mentioned smurfette and my first reply was just that, a reply. I believe that what I said is true, if you want to call that strong feelings so be it. I think we've veered just far enough outside the realm and scope of the thread at this point.

snowblizz

2022-07-15, 07:08 PM

What is this based on? The Silmarillion?

It is based on whatever mentions the 2nd Age gets in the LotR book trilogy. Amazon does not have the rights to use the Silmarillion. Which is a bit of an odd decision when making something set/about the 2nd age.

DavidSh

2022-07-15, 07:59 PM

Mechalich

2022-07-15, 08:24 PM

"The Akallabeth" and "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" don't add that much Second Age material beyond what is already in the appendices. Not using them is minor, compared with the reports of massive time compression to keep from having to throw out the human characters (and actors) as the centuries pass.

There's really only two things of consequence that happen in the Second Age: the forging of the Rings of Power and the War of the Elves and Sauron that immediately follows; and the Fall of Numenor. It seems that the show is smashing these things together - probably by having the Numenorean king who saves the Elves during the War of the Elves and Sauron simply be Ar-Pharazon or his immediate predecessor (and since they have cast Trystan Gravelle to play a character named 'Pharazon' this seems likely to be exactly what they've done). That's...at least partially defensible. 'Numenor grew gradually more corrupt over a thousand years' really isn't the sort of thing you can easily put on TV.

The thing that worries me is that the Fall of Numenor, which is the big event of the Second Age and the one most ready made for TV, the corruption and downfall of a mighty and decadent civilization is something Hollywood is actually quite good at, is an almost entirely Human-based event (plus Sauron) and yet a huge amount of the promotion material including this trailer is heavily focused on the Elves. They've also decided to throw in some stuff about the Dwarfs and Hobbits which is going to have to be made up completely whole cloth. Everything points to a sprawling, undirected mess full of shots of people riding around in New Zealand but not actually doing anything important.

warty goblin

2022-07-15, 09:58 PM

I think scenes like the Blood Snow and the Children of the Light stuff showed the potential this series has to not only elevate the source material, but to be uniquely appealing TV in its own right.

I've watched Blood Snow on YouTube, and it's a decent fight scene, but no more than that. Flashy, kinda low impact, and the choreography doesn't even really hide how very polite the bad guys are. Witcher does this sort of thing way, way better.

If this was the high point of the series, all I can say is ouch.

Psyren

2022-07-15, 10:21 PM

I've watched Blood Snow on YouTube, and it's a decent fight scene, but no more than that. Flashy, kinda low impact, and the choreography doesn't even really hide how very polite the bad guys are. Witcher does this sort of thing way, way better.

If this was the high point of the series, all I can say is ouch.

Cinematography-wise it was a high point, because they used a high-speed Bolt camera to capture Shaiel's moves - which very few tv shows can afford.

As for the Witcher, eh, couldn't care less. It might even buck the Netflix odds and hit season 3 :smallamused:

warty goblin

2022-07-15, 10:48 PM

Cinematography-wise it was a high point, because they used a high-speed Bolt camera to capture Shaiel's moves - which very few tv shows can afford.

As for the Witcher, eh, couldn't care less. It might even buck the Netflix odds and hit season 3 :smallamused:

So I guess its a decent action scene shot with a fancy camera. That means they have deep pockets, not that the scene is particularly well made. Which was sort of my feeling on the four or five episodes of WoT I watched; vast amounts of money spent to make really sharp looking mediocrity. More Processed Entertainment Paste Product!

I didn't like Season 2 of the Witcher all that much either, it was definitely turning into overly-plotted and under developed stuff happening but going nowhere. First season was a ton of utterly and unrepentantly schlocky fun though. It knew exactly what it was, and it was the show with the undead fetus that eats people and goddamn if it didn't have fun with that.

Mechalich

2022-07-15, 11:33 PM

So I guess its a decent action scene shot with a fancy camera. That means they have deep pockets, not that the scene is particularly well made. Which was sort of my feeling on the four or five episodes of WoT I watched; vast amounts of money spent to make really sharp looking mediocrity. More Processed Entertainment Paste Product!

Myself, I've become super-leery of trailers that show lots of impressive landscape photography integrated with CGI/model sets as if that's something impressive. It was back when Peter Jackson did it the first time twenty years ago, but it's pretty ordinary stuff now, something even crummy shows can put together.

I didn't like Season 2 of the Witcher all that much either, it was definitely turning into overly-plotted and under developed stuff happening but going nowhere. First season was a ton of utterly and unrepentantly schlocky fun though. It knew exactly what it was, and it was the show with the undead fetus that eats people and goddamn if it didn't have fun with that.

That's partly the source material. The Adventurers of Geralt of Rivia, slayer of monsters and wooer of sorceresses, are glorious schlocky dark fantasy. The grand history of the continent and the destined child of the elder blood not so much (which is why Lady of the Lake, the final 'saga' book, is comparatively despised). The show actually used up a lot of Geralt's adventuring in season one, so they basically have to focus on the main plot more, which is a downgrade whenever it doesn't throw up an action set piece.

Psyren

2022-07-16, 12:38 AM

I didn't like Season 2 of the Witcher all that much either, it was definitely turning into overly-plotted and under developed stuff happening but going nowhere. First season was a ton of utterly and unrepentantly schlocky fun though. It knew exactly what it was, and it was the show with the undead fetus that eats people and goddamn if it didn't have fun with that.

Riveting. Best of luck!

Metastachydium

2022-07-16, 01:45 AM

However Tauriel ended up, I don't think it's fair to declare that the intent behind her was to tick off a box. Movies go through a lot of hands and challenging realities between concept and what we eventually get on screen, and any creative choice in an adaptation has the potential to decrease its quality. That's not a reason to never try.

No it isn't. That is correct. Nevertheless, that is largely immaterial. My point wasn't "Tauriel was horrible, so having women in a movie is bad". My point was that adding 800% more women to the story is not intrinsically a good thing or an improvement. Whether it is or isn't is, rather, a function of what they do with these additional female characters. Since it would seem that, among other things, the series will give us another interspecies romance (not a problem in itself, mind you) involving the creators' OCs and we've seen how that played out in The Hobbit films, I remain skeptical regarding the notion that the answer will be "marvelous things that will make the series better". I'm jaded like that.

warty goblin

2022-07-16, 08:05 AM

That's partly the source material. The Adventurers of Geralt of Rivia, slayer of monsters and wooer of sorceresses, are glorious schlocky dark fantasy. The grand history of the continent and the destined child of the elder blood not so much (which is why Lady of the Lake, the final 'saga' book, is comparatively despised). The show actually used up a lot of Geralt's adventuring in season one, so they basically have to focus on the main plot more, which is a downgrade whenever it doesn't throw up an action set piece.
I liked the Witcher books, particularly the ending, I thought it fit very well with the series' overall tone of taking very standard fantasy things and twisting them about 45 degrees out of normal. It wasn't going for quite the amused feel of the short stories, but I liked it as a riff on Ye Olde Heroe's Queste plot, right down to the bleak, pointless ending.

Riveting. Best of luck!
Hey, still more fun than the show about the goat dudes eating people!

Peelee

2022-07-16, 09:28 AM

Do we need more women in LOTR? Do we need more male protagonists in Sex and The City?

You mean aside from Big, Harry, Steve, Richard, Jerry, Aiden, and arguably Stanford? And those were just the biggest ones. SatC did not suffer from a lack of male characters.

Psyren

2022-07-16, 11:32 AM

My point was that adding 800% more women to the story is not intrinsically a good thing or an improvement.

I never said it was. I was poking fun at the fact that adding even a handful of named female characters would be a dramatic increase given their paucity in the original. (And in case it wasn't clear, the statistic was totally made up, it's not like I sat down and calculated how many more the series will have than the movies.)

Obviously the impact those characters have on the story will depend on what is done with them narratively.

t209

2022-07-16, 02:09 PM

Just call it Forgotten Realms and use that license.
I mean they already had Dark skinned Dwarves and Elves...Non-Duergar and Non-Drow (though Gold Dwarf and Sun Elves are arrogant, the latter starting five genocidal wars because "my feeling got hurt over my persecution instigated by a demonic infiltrator").
Even if Wizards is already planning one.

Metastachydium

2022-07-16, 04:23 PM

I was poking fun at the fact that adding even a handful of named female characters would be a dramatic increase given their paucity in the original. (And in case it wasn't clear, the statistic was totally made up, it's not like I sat down and calculated how many more the series will have than the movies.)

Don't worry, I'm aware.

Obviously the impact those characters have on the story will depend on what is done with them narratively.

Glad we agree, then.

Psyren

2022-07-16, 06:14 PM

Glad we agree, then.

We agree that it has the potential to go either way, but I'm a bit more bullish on the attempt than you appear to be.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-16, 06:56 PM

Aedilred

2022-07-16, 08:15 PM

Saintheart

2022-07-16, 10:24 PM

Let's be fair, he made four good fanfilms: the three Lord of the Ringses and King Kong.

I prefer to call it Ring Wrong, but whatever.

Metastachydium

2022-07-17, 03:05 AM

We agree that it has the potential to go either way, but I'm a bit more bullish on the attempt than you appear to be.

Well, these are bearish times, and

I'm jaded like that.

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-17, 04:35 AM

Seems like she sees the evil thing exists and is trying to convince other people, which is one of the most generic plots available for a female lead.

She's like 3,000 years old, she's not the stifled princess downtrodden by society, she's royalty and a sorceress who commands respect and deference. Hope they don't waste time with a 'no one will listen to me so I have to do it myself 'plot. Elrond shouldn't be speaking like that to his mother in law, even if he disagrees he would do it more respectfully.

And that fake Irish accent from the Hobbits hits me like nails on a chalkboard and I don't know why.

I think she'd be closer to 4000 at this point. Not like it makes much of a difference, since I agree with the rest of what you've said. Though I saw plenty of comments along the lines of "this Galadriel is young, so..." which all made me go WTF?

Remind me, what was the budget for this mess again? Obviously printed shirts don't give me "huge money" vibes...
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/970026723125116958/997920561034436619/unknown.png

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-17, 06:23 AM

1 billion includes 250 million for the rights, and it's for all five seasons and marketing. It's still a very expensive show, butn selling us that figure has backfired on them hard.

warty goblin

2022-07-17, 07:02 AM

That honestly seems more like an issue with the costume design than the budget, where somebody decided to use scale for the base layer and they got into trouble because scale is bulky and can't do things like armpits. Clearly they had no issue with fabricating absolute gobs of scaled material for everything else.

Vinyadan

2022-07-17, 03:13 PM

Can we stop saying 800% more women? It is kind of a real valid criticism to say that LOTR and The Hobbit have almost no women. Likewise we actually have more Women Tolkien characters in The Silmarillion (aka Zero and First Age).

In the case of the LotR, I don't think it is. When Tolkien was at the front, while he thought of and wrote to Edith, the fighters around him were all men. And books about military expeditions will almost exclusively have men as fighters, because that has historically been a man's thing. I don't feel like dumping on the Iliad or the Anabasis or Red Cavalry because they didn't have enough women in the ranks. I don't feel like critiquing a book because it followed literary predecessors and the author's experience to lend some substance and realism to the story. For example, Sam was inspired by Tolkien's batman. Scenes like Imrahil checking Eowin's breath or an exhausted Sam suddenly falling asleep while hiding in a ditch were probably close to things he had seen. This, for me, is the main reason: literary and moral quality (as in, adherence to a certain idea) do not overlap (the way they are attributed is also quite different, and manifest different instabilities). It's why in school they sometimes give simple new books to the kids to read, because they carry certain values, even if they aren't literary masterworks. Those are a different category, which does make people grow, but by giving them the means to understand (understand what? A lot of stuff.).

Another reason is that LotR actually starts in a world where men wielding power are almost always inadequate. Isildur did not destroy the Ring, Theoden got duped, Denethor went insane, Saruman joined Sauron, Lotho was a murdered Quisling. (btw, all arguably alienated men without a wife to support them -- Isildur hadn't seen his since he had left Imladris years earlier). Outsiders have to pick up the pieces. These outsiders can be tiny Hobbits, mysterious vagrants with secret resources, or women: why does Eowin have to fight and defeat the Nazgul? Because a man -- Denethor -- was on a murder-suicide rampage, and the angelic being who was about to fight the Witch King had to go stop Denethor instead. And, in the Shire, it's Lobelia that acts bravely and attacks Sharkey's men, and is immediately imprisoned.
With this I don't mean that Tolkien really envisioned a man vs woman divide. But "while the great are otherwise busy, the rest have to act" is a strong message in the book, and its value cuts across different groups.

Reason number three is that, outside of warrior roles, you do meet women. Minas Tirith had been evacuated before the Battle of the Pelennor Fields, yet a number of brave women decided to stay and help the war effort as nurses. It's the sort of courage Tolkien would have seen in enlisted women in WW1. When the learned men get derailed by lore contests, it's a woman that has the Kingsfoil stored. The Shire has lots of women. The Elves, too. They are not protagonists, but they are there. Outside military life, the only people explicitly without women are the Ent, and that's a big deal for them. It means that they are on the wane. And, while Fangorn does critique the Entwives (an orderly life = do as I say), it's clear that they have been pivotal figures for mankind, given that they taught men agriculture. Fangorn's critique is, in itself, interesting: living apart from them, he has never understood them. He expects that the Ents will have to lose their lands, before they can find a new one where the Entwives can be happy with them. In the letters, Tolkien explained that he expected no such reunion; even in the possibility of surviving Entwives (but he found more likely that they were all dead), short of a common revolt against industrialisazion, they would have become even more estranged from the Ents. (I also can't help but wonder if, had the two groups stayed together, they would have survived against Sauron).

Finally, the two most respected entities mentioned in the book are Galadriel and Elbereth. It's what makes me go "uh?" when people say that there aren't women in LotR. They are there, and are borderline divine figures. They are not protagonists, but they are bigger than the protagonists. Tinuviel is also somewhere there.

When Rohan / Edoras was evacuated for Helms Deep we barely see any women in the books even if these refugees would have lots of women and children. Likewise the same in the peaceful elf cities Lothlórien and Rivendell.

Women are actually mentioned a few times with refence to Rohan. Gandalf suggests they take refuge, Gamling informs Theoden that they have taken refuge, and, after the battle, they come out of Helm's Deep; then again in chapter 3 of RotK, and they later weep at Theoden's burial. In Lorien the maidens of Galadriel have made with her the cloaks for the Fellowship, and accompany her when the Fellowship leaves.

Mechalich

2022-07-17, 04:50 PM

Reason number three is that, outside of warrior roles, you do meet women.

This is key. Tolkien's works describe quasi-historical societies with a strong divide in gender roles, something found in both the scholarship of the time and in the literary sources he derived from heavily (most of which were many centuries old). He then chose to focus the detail of his stories on warfare, a sphere that was male-dominated to a greater degree than almost any other. Basically every male character in LotR ends up in battle at some point. That the Silmarillion has more female characters fit this expectation, because it has proportionally less warfare and more political and domestic sequences (Tolkien had no issue with female rulers, in addition to Galadriel and other elves, Numenor had multiple ruling queens).

The Amazon series could keep the strong gender role aspects of Middle-Earth societies and still have lots of highly significant female characters. This is especially so given that the Second Age really isn't about great wars. There's one big war in the Second Age - War of the Elves and Sauron (https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/War_of_the_Elves_and_Sauron), in which the Elves and the Dwarves of Khazad-Dum (Moria) get thoroughly whupped until the Numenoreans show up and absolutely curbstomp Sauron's forces. This war will presumably happen in the show, because Celebrimbor is listed as a character in the show and in addition to making the Rings he is the war's most notable casualty.

But that's it. There are no other significant wars during the Second Age save the conflict of the Last Alliance against Sauron (the Prologue of Peter Jackson's LotR films) which probably won't appear or will be the final episode. Everything else is politics. If there's going to be 5 seasons of show, figure the War consumes most of Season Two. Beyond that, there's not going to be a lot of armies in battle. So there is absolutely room for, and should be, important female characters even if the traditional gender role of only males as soldiers is retained.

Vinyadan

2022-07-17, 05:48 PM

So there is absolutely room for, and should be, important female characters even if the traditional gender role of only males as soldiers is retained.

There is Erendis, the wife of the Numenorean king Tar-Aldarion. Aldarion was a great ship-builder and sea-traveller, which was instrumental for Numenor's building of alliances and contacts in Middle-Earth, but which made him an absentee husband and father. They lived separate lives full of grudges, and their daughter Acalime became the first Reigning Queen of Numenor. It's actually a pretty ugly story, with "my daughter, not your daughter", and both acting unyeldingly until the relationship is completely broken. Their daughter also turned out to be cold and controlling in family matters. It's a sad story about inflexible temperaments destroying familiar harmony, and a fairly long one (from the Unfinished Tales).

Silmarien instead was the first daughter of a Numenorean king. She did not inherit the throne, was instead given Andunie in Numenor, and her descendants (the Lords of Andunie) included Amandil, Elendil, and Isildur. I don't think there's much material about her, but I believe fans would enjoy seeing a version of her story.

Fyraltari

2022-07-17, 06:01 PM

There is Erendis, the wife of the Numenorean king Tar-Aldarion. Aldarion was a great ship-builder and sea-traveller, which was instrumental for Numenor's building of alliances and contacts in Middle-Earth, but which made him an absentee husband and father. They lived separate lives full of grudges, and their daughter Acalime became the first Reigning Queen of Numenor. It's actually a pretty ugly story, with "my daughter, not your daughter", and both acting unyeldingly until the relationship is completely broken. Their daughter also turned out to be cold and controlling in family matters. It's a sad story about inflexible temperaments destroying familiar harmony, and a fairly long one (from the Unfinished Tales).

I really love this story, out of all the tales of this universe it stands out in how mundane it is. There's no dark lord, no terrible Oaths made before the thrones of gods, no great war, just two people who thought they were right for each other and weren't. Just a failing marriage between two flawed individuals.

runeghost

2022-07-17, 11:54 PM

And what we're getting from Galadriel is already a bit weird

Seems like she sees the evil thing exists and is trying to convince other people, which is one of the most generic plots available for a female lead.

She's like 3,000 years old, she's not the stifled princess downtrodden by society, she's royalty and a sorceress who commands respect and deference. Hope they don't waste time with a 'no one will listen to me so I have to do it myself 'plot. Elrond shouldn't be speaking like that to his mother in law, even if he disagrees he would do it more respectfully.

The little we've seen so far with Galadriel's role is pretty in keeping with the Legendarium...

depending on precisely which version of Galadriel you go with (Tolkien kept re-writing her backstory and it was never really a consistent whole). She founded Eregion, and was then ousted by Celebrimbor, and left, eventually ending up in Lorien. She and her younger cousin Celebrimbor obviously weren't unfriends, even with the whole leadership change in Eregion, since he kept making her potent magical items, which she in turn accepted. (I.e. The Elessar and Narya.) But the whole core of their spat seems to be "This guy Annatar is Bad News, Coz." "No way, he's totally awesome and I really like him and his ideas."

And she's not Elrond's mother-in-law yet. This version of her hasn't even met her husband yet. Elrond is basically the young punk of "old elvish nobility" in the Second Age. He doubtless thinks he's been through some heinous stuff - and to be fair, he totally has: the destruction of his home and loss (if technically not death) of his parents, being raised by a tormented and anguished mass-murderer, the War of Wrath, and the separation and eventual loss of his brother. But compared to Galadriel's experiences that's small potatoes. She starts with the Darkening of Valinor, the repeated betrayals of Feanor, the crossing of the Helcaraxe, the long defeat of the Siege of Angband and the deaths of all her brothers at the hands of Morgoth's servants, all Three Kinslayings, the ruin of Beleriand and Doriath, and finally seeing the lands she'd fought for for centuries, that her brothers and uncles and cousins had died for, broken and sunk beneath the waves and called a "victory". (No wonder she told the Valar to take their forgiveness and shove it.)

"No one will listen to me and I'll do it myself" is Galadriel's plot in the Legendarium, repeatedly. In addition to "This Annatar guy is bad news, you shouldn't listen to him" (to be fair, Cirdan, Gil-galad, and Elrond did agree with her - but the people of her own realm did not). Some other examples:

"I want to leave, too, but Feanor is bad news and you shouldn't put your faith in him."

"Attacking the Teleri is wrong, and will give everyone involved bad karma."

"We shouldn't hide everything from Thingol and especially Melian, someone should go level with them, even if we don't share all your wickedest secrets."

"I know the Host of the Valar and the Lords of the West say this is over, but it's not. Shove your amnesty, I'm staying."

"This Necromancer is bad news, we need to team up against him. Btw, Gandalf should take point on this, he's better suited for it than Saruman."

Psyren

2022-07-18, 12:13 AM

Well, these are bearish times, and

I never said you weren't jaded (obviously you stated you are), rather I was adding a bit more context to the thing we supposedly agree on.

I think she'd be closer to 4000 at this point. Not like it makes much of a difference, since I agree with the rest of what you've said. Though I saw plenty of comments along the lines of "this Galadriel is young, so..." which all made me go WTF?

Remind me, what was the budget for this mess again? Obviously printed shirts don't give me "huge money" vibes...
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/970026723125116958/997920561034436619/unknown.png

I mean, 4000 for a Calaquendi is right out of diapers... right? :smallbiggrin:

(Kidding, kiddng! Tolkien scholars please don't shred me)

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-18, 05:46 AM

It's hard to tell. Going by book lore, Celebrian was born early second age, but the show isn't following book lore, they're compressing the timeline. Which is fine, it's a creative choice.

We don't have much by way of info yet, but they appear to be trying to push Galadriel as both the veteran who has seen some things and the young upstart no one listens to.

It might work, but it's also a very generic plot for a female lead. Can't have our protagonist be a mother with a child, can we? We've got to be diverse, but not too far.

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-18, 05:58 AM

Arguably a compressed timeline should be even more of a reason for Celeborn to be there (after all Isildur is around, so anything goes...) with Galadriel. But that would undermine what seems to be their (generic) plot, so he'll be mysteriously absent.

Tyndmyr

2022-07-18, 09:03 AM

We don't have much by way of info yet, but they appear to be trying to push Galadriel as both the veteran who has seen some things and the young upstart no one listens to.

It might work, but it's also a very generic plot for a female lead. Can't have our protagonist be a mother with a child, can we? We've got to be diverse, but not too far.

That's a strange mix, especially given the canonical lifespans of elves. When you've got an elf that's seen some things....its a ton of things compared to most.

The trailer had a lot of pretty scenery, but not an awful lot of compelling plot. Showing off the CGI budget, I guess? So far, I'm fairly pessimistic. The things we are being shown are not exceptionally good signs.

Vinyadan

2022-07-18, 11:21 AM

I wouldn't say the young upstart, more like the extremely old person anchored to memories of a world the others haven't seen, with the result that they cannot understand why she acts that way. The scene with the bodies suspended in a sea of fire could have been the Dagor Bragollach, where two of her brothers died. Or it could be the Kinslaying at Alqualonde, with fire from battle lighting the water red.

Plus, she simply didn't have the authority to impose her politics on other elf rulers, since they were all beneath High King Gil-galad. Which makes discussions among peers not unlikely.

Mechalich

2022-07-18, 05:01 PM

That's a strange mix, especially given the canonical lifespans of elves. When you've got an elf that's seen some things....its a ton of things compared to most.

The trailer had a lot of pretty scenery, but not an awful lot of compelling plot. Showing off the CGI budget, I guess? So far, I'm fairly pessimistic. The things we are being shown are not exceptionally good signs.

I find the focus on the Elves alongside the addition of Hobbits (and to a lesser extent Dwarves) to be worrying, especially compared to the relatively limited amount of time spent on the Human characters particularly worrying. The Second Age is defined by the actions of the Numenoreans, the 'special' humans with enhanced physiques, lifespans, and abilities, and by Sauron. Everyone else is very much not central to events as they unfold. The Elves are weakened, the Dwarves are isolated, and the non-Numenorean humans are largely enslaved to Sauron (though not openly).

The show is apparently to be five seasons, mashing all the significant events of the Second Age together. That means season one should have two major plots: Sauron (as Annatar) seducing the elves of Eregion and ultimately leading the design of the rings (the forging of the One Ring ought to be the final scene of the season); and Ar-Pharazon's rise to power. That way in Season Two you could do the War of the Elves and Sauron and conclude with the Numenoreans showing up at the end and Sauron surrendering to Ar-Pharazon. Seasons Three would be about the zenith of Numenor, its growing corruption, and the spread of darkness across Middle Earth (including the corruption of the Seven and the Nine). Then Season Four would be the Fall of Numenor and Season Five would be about the assembly of the Last Alliance.

At least that's how I would do it, but rumors swirling around the show suggest Amazon has decided otherwise and they aren't even introducing Sauron in Season One at all (supported by the fact that no one has been cast to play Sauron/Annatar). I find that extremely troubling. Epic melodrama needs a great villain. Sauron in the Second Age is a fantastic role for the right actor and seems like an obvious way to go, but it seems this team thought otherwise.

Zevox

2022-07-18, 05:07 PM

(supported by the fact that no one has been cast to play Sauron/Annatar).
:smallconfused: They haven't? What? How on earth can you do a show set in the Second Age without Sauron? That's kind of his whole era, when he's at his peak and is more active than he ever was at any other time in history. What are they even doing if he's not the main villain?

JadedDM

2022-07-18, 05:19 PM

:smallconfused: They haven't? What? How on earth can you do a show set in the Second Age without Sauron? That's kind of his whole era, when he's at his peak and is more active than he ever was at any other time in history. What are they even doing if he's not the main villain?

The current fan theory, to my understanding, is that Sauron won't be introduced until season 2.

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-18, 05:24 PM

Some rumours floating around claim
Halbrand
is actually Sauron. Obviously take it with a mountain of salt.

And returning to the topic of age, the internet never disappoints. Or always does.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/897825422836920320/998716032334180472/unknown.png

Zevox

2022-07-18, 07:26 PM

The current fan theory, to my understanding, is that Sauron won't be introduced until season 2.
Which leaves season 1 doing, what? There's not a ton of conflict in the Second Age that doesn't revolve around Sauron. Are we going to be spending the whole season on Numenorean politics or something?

Some rumours floating around claim
Halbrand
is actually Sauron. Obviously take it with a mountain of salt.
*looks up who that is* My only question would be: but why though? We know the guise he takes to get close to the Elves, and that's not it, so why introduce another one that would seem to be being used for the same purpose, if that's really him?

And returning to the topic of age, the internet never disappoints. Or always does.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/897825422836920320/998716032334180472/unknown.png
"Young Sauron." Yeah, unless we're getting the Music of the Ainur here, that is such a misnomer. Though I guess your average, not-Tolkien-nerd person can't be expected to know that... although the fact that Sauron is around in a series set thousands of years before The Lord of the Rings should be something of a hint... :smallsigh:

Ramza00

2022-07-18, 07:26 PM

That's a strange mix, especially given the canonical lifespans of elves. When you've got an elf that's seen some things....its a ton of things compared to most.

The trailer had a lot of pretty scenery, but not an awful lot of compelling plot. Showing off the CGI budget, I guess? So far, I'm fairly pessimistic. The things we are being shown are not exceptionally good signs.

This may drive some Tolkien canon fans nutty, but isn’t the solution to this is the Elves reincarnation which we have limited info from Tolkien and thus if they go this route they have the freedom to do lots of things (and thus some fans will be big mad.). Galadriel can be a being who recently rejoined a physical location never having died, or perhaps recently died and reincarnated.

One of the big lore facts is the second age is when the Hall of Mandos / Recrafting a body is possible but near the end of the 2nd age with the fall of Númenor the creator god Ilúvatar stepped in and said no more reincarnation, that the elves can rejoin the Valar and the lands of the west, yet it is a one way trip.

——

Likewise we can talk about the Elves lifecycle and how their childhood of the first 100 years is curious and mysterious, they have an adulthood, and then a third cycle where they are full of knowledge, wisdom, but also ennui while the second cycle younger adults still have the excitement the older / third cycle elves no longer have.

My point is what we are describing with Galadriel with why she is the young upstart pointing to evil can be cultural, and the nature of Elvish culture will be different than our 2020s humans culture, yet while it is not familiar it should make its own form of sense and logics.

Corvus

2022-07-18, 09:00 PM

I'm rather ambivalent about the whole thing - it being from Amazon doesn't help.

I'm not sure how they can get 5 seasons out of a handful of footnotes at the back of the books. The Hobbit got so much padding out and suffered as a result. This will just take it up to another level. Maybe it will work. Maybe not. We'll just have to wait and see.

On Galadriel, at this point she is just about the oldest and most powerful elf still running around Middle Earth. The High King Gil-Galad is younger than her, having been born in First Age after the Noldor left Valinor - Galadriel had been born in Valinor. I can't recall any of the named characters besides Galadriel born in Valinor who were still around in the Second Age. Cirdan was older, but he was Sindar and had never been to Valinor. She met Celeborn in Doriath in the First Age, as he was a kinsman of Thingol, the King of Doriath. So Celeborn she be in the picture in the Second Age.

And Gil-Galad is canonically the first of the Eldar to have mistrusted Annatar (aka the disguised Sauron.) So having Galadriel trying to warn others about Annatar when the High King already mistrusted him is going way off canon.

Mechalich

2022-07-18, 09:28 PM

I'm not sure how they can get 5 seasons out of a handful of footnotes at the back of the books. The Hobbit got so much padding out and suffered as a result. This will just take it up to another level.

These are 8 episode seasons, so they aren't actually that long. At an average of 45 minutes per episode you've only got six hours per season. If you have A, B, C, and D plots that's only 90 minutes per plot per season - and four plots makes sense: Elf, Human, Dwarf, and Hobbit.

Now, it's true that the source material is very thin on the ground, but it's enough to serve as a rough outline. For example, the War of the Elves and Sauron summarizes out in a handful of paragraphs, but you can sort than into a handful of events to fill a season easily:
Episode One: Sauron and the Elves martial their forces, Sauron's armies march from the East to the West
Episode Two: Gil-Galad sends Elrond as reinforcement. Word is send to Numenor for aid. Early skirmishes in Eregion
Episode Three: Fall of Ost-in-Edhil and the capture of Celebrimbor - a big action set piece
Episode Four: Torture of Celebrimbor, Refugees flee Eregion, debate in Numenor
Episode Five: Elrond surrounded by Sauron, elves flee to Kazad-Dum, the dwarves martial their forces to face Sauron and are joined by Galadriel
Episode Six: the dwarves and Galadhrim battle with Sauron, Elrond breaks out to what will become Rivendell, the gates of Khazad-Dum are shut
Episode Seven: Sauron's forces overrun Eriador, Elven forces driven to make a last stand at the River Lhun. Sauron acquires the Seven and the Nine
Episode Eight: The Numenoreans arrive, the Battle of the Gwathlo - a titanic action set piece, Sauron's armies destroyed

There, outline completed. Now, you still have to actually write out these episodes and put the various characters into place, deal with the fantasy logistics, and decide where you wish to put the bulk of the money (for example, I would stage the Fall of Ost-in-Edhil as a mess of fire and destruction as Sauron's forces sack the city and keep the fighting to small heroic stands to save set piece money for the Battle of the Gwathlo later), and so forth, but that's a viable season of TV.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-20, 08:05 PM

It's not surprising that Sauron wouldn't be using his actual name, maybe 'who was really behind all this' will be the big reveal of season 1.

Galadriel is older and has seen more, but the First Age isn't ancient history to the others, some of them were around for it. Going to be very difficult to make this timeline work. She can't impose her will, but it is still weird that they chose a scene of her being talked down to as a trailer shot.

Aedilred

2022-07-20, 10:13 PM

It's not surprising that Sauron wouldn't be using his actual name, maybe 'who was really behind all this' will be the big reveal of season 1.
But he already had a false name in the legendarium: Annatar. That was the name under which he presented himself as all-friendly-like to Celebrimbor and Numenor and created all the Rings. So either Sauron isn't in this season or they've given him a different, or bonus, fake name just for the lolz. Or I guess they just haven't announced the casting because they're keeping it under wraps: honestly not the worst idea but entirely counter to normal marketing strategy.

Mechalich

2022-07-21, 04:28 AM

But he already had a false name in the legendarium: Annatar. That was the name under which he presented himself as all-friendly-like to Celebrimbor and Numenor and created all the Rings. So either Sauron isn't in this season or they've given him a different, or bonus, fake name just for the lolz. Or I guess they just haven't announced the casting because they're keeping it under wraps: honestly not the worst idea but entirely counter to normal marketing strategy.

Concealing the casting would make sense if they structured the season so that Sauron didn't appear until later on, like episode 6 or later, but that would be a pretty strange choice on its own.

Vinyadan

2022-07-21, 05:42 AM

Psyren

2022-07-21, 09:37 AM

These are 8 episode seasons, so they aren't actually that long. At an average of 45 minutes per episode you've only got six hours per season.

Can I just gripe about something for a second? Which cursed algorithm decided 8 episodes is the optimal length for these things?

You'd think all these shows that are chasing Game of Thrones' coattails would at least try following their playbook. Game of Thrones Season 1 got 10 ~hour-long episodes, and that barely allowed them to cover book 1 with a bunch of stuff cut out. It was a smash hit. Why then is everyone, and by everyone I mean Amazon, concluding that 8 episodes is all you need to establish one of these??

hamishspence

2022-07-21, 09:51 AM

Also, Sauron wasn't even his real name, and he did not allow his people to use it. It means "the detestable".

Maybe not internally - but in communication with non-allies, his agents routinely used the term. One is "The Mouth of Sauron" after all. And the messengers to the Dwarves in LOTR use it.

Peelee

2022-07-21, 10:20 AM

Can I just gripe about something for a second? Which cursed algorithm decided 8 episodes is the optimal length for these things?

You'd think all these shows that are chasing Game of Thrones' coattails would at least try following their playbook. Game of Thrones Season 1 got 10 ~hour-long episodes, and that barely allowed them to cover book 1 with a bunch of stuff cut out. It was a smash hit. Why then is everyone, and by everyone I mean Amazon, concluding that 8 episodes is all you need to establish one of these??

It's more 6-10 episodes, but there's a few reasons - it does allow for tighter, more focused stories, as well as easier and more assured consistent audience engagement. And with them hiring more big-name actors for star power, they cuts into both the budgets and also the scheduling, since they tend to want shorter runs so they dont have lengthy commitments and are free to do other things as well. But mostly it's because of how syndication has changed in the on-demand era and how streaming platforms don't really care about a show having a huge number of episodes.

Psyren

2022-07-21, 10:29 AM

It's more 6-10 episodes, but there's a few reasons - it does allow for tighter, more focused stories, as well as easier and more assured consistent audience engagement. And with them hiring more big-name actors for star power, they cuts into both the budgets and also the scheduling, since they tend to want shorter runs so they dont have lengthy commitments and are free to do other things as well. But mostly it's because of how syndication has changed in the on-demand era and how streaming platforms don't really care about a show having a huge number of episodes.

I get that but my point is, GoT was a much bigger gamble at the time than any of these and that gamble clearly paid off. Amazon can afford the risk of 10 episodes.

Granted this is less straight adaptation than it is a spin-off, so 8 might be all they need, but mostly I'm bitter about the mistake they made with rushing WoT.

EDIT: Speaking of which, WoT just got renewed for Season 3 as well!

Vinyadan

2022-07-21, 01:50 PM

Maybe not internally - but in communication with non-allies, his agents routinely used the term. One is "The Mouth of Sauron" after all. And the messengers to the Dwarves in LOTR use it.

True that, and the Mouth of Sauron calls him "Sauron the Great". Now I wonder if it had more to do with creating a taboo that only his elite could break, than with disdain for the name.

Another explanation has to do with Sauron's linguistic policy. He devised the Black Speech to be the language of all his servants. It's possible he expected them to use his (unknown) Black Speech name, and "Sauron", as its translation, was only allowed during sanctioned communication with outsiders in other languages.

Fyraltari

2022-07-21, 02:24 PM

Also, Sauron wasn't even his real name, and he did not allow his people to use it. It means "the detestable". Mairon would have been is first known name, although it's Quenya, so probably it's not his original name.

I think our main source for that is Aragorn and it's possible he's info is just a bit out-of-date? Sauron tried to hide his surviving after the Last Alliance for a long while, so it would make sense for his servants to avoid using his name at the time.

Spacewolf

2022-07-21, 04:24 PM

Concealing the casting would make sense if they structured the season so that Sauron didn't appear until later on, like episode 6 or later, but that would be a pretty strange choice on its own.

They probably don't want a million youtube videos after the first episode saying 5 signs you missed that say this guy is Sauron so they can actually set up a twist.

Zevox

2022-07-21, 05:49 PM

They probably don't want a million youtube videos after the first episode saying 5 signs you missed that say this guy is Sauron so they can actually set up a twist.
If they're trying to control that, they're wasting their time. The only way to avoid that sort of thing would be to make a show that isn't based a nearly century-old set of stories with a dedicated fan base that already knows them all by heart.

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-22, 04:49 AM

As long as the show is even moderately popular, you'd get a ****ton of videos mentioned above even if it wasn't based on such stories ;)

Spacewolf

2022-07-22, 07:41 AM

True enough but the name change will at least keep them speculative rather than known fact. For example I think that Neds death in GoT would have had far less effect now than it did then simply because of how easy it is to be exposed to spoilers nowadays.

Keltest

2022-07-22, 07:53 AM

I think Sauron being involved in the forging of the rings is the biggest non-twist they could possibly have gone for if that was the plan. Trying to keep it secret is just... why? The only way to do that would be to totally abandon faithfulness to the original story at that point.

Fyraltari

2022-07-22, 07:56 AM

Keltest

2022-07-22, 07:57 AM

*Coughs*Shadow of Mordor/War*coughs*

Admittedly, those were fun enough that I was able to overlook their infidelity.

Saintheart

2022-07-22, 08:16 AM

*Coughs*Shadow of Mordor/War*coughs*

Hey, I liked Batman: Minas Gotham!

Peelee

2022-07-22, 08:27 AM

Arkham Middle Earth was delightful and I will brook no dissent!

Fyraltari

2022-07-22, 08:34 AM

Look, I respect people liking Ringman: Arkam Ithil, but sexy Shelob is not acceptable.

Edit:
Also,

I will brook no dissent!
Hey, new word!

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-22, 08:49 AM

It's not technically impossible Shelob could shapeshift in the lore, it's just very confusing that that is a thing she would do.

I've never played either game, maybe it's done well, but it seems unlikely.

runeghost

2022-07-22, 08:54 AM

Also, Sauron wasn't even his real name, and he did not allow his people to use it. It means "the detestable". Mairon would have been is first known name, although it's Quenya, so probably it's not his original name.

And Mairon is a masculinized form of maira, which means, "admirable, excellent, splendid, sublime... precious". :smallsmile:

Peelee

2022-07-22, 09:00 AM

Hey, new word!

It's pretty uncommon but it's great to use every so often, IMO. Almost always used as " [person] will brook no [thing]", where "[thing] is typically some form of opposition.

runeghost

2022-07-22, 09:08 AM

Maybe not internally - but in communication with non-allies, his agents routinely used the term. One is "The Mouth of Sauron" after all. And the messengers to the Dwarves in LOTR use it.

That his messengers and envoys would use it has always seemed very reasonable to me. Their job is to communicate with people for their boss. They probably don't report back and call him Sauron to his face, but when they're talking with outsiders they pretty much have to use Sauron or something equivalent (The Dark Lord, the Master of Barad-dur) or instead of being envoys, they're now participants in a Monty Python sketch.

"I come bearing words and gifts from Tar-Mairon. He desires-"

"From who?"

"Tar-Mairon, the Great Lord who rules of the greatest tower in Middle-Earth!"

"What? There's a king in Gondor again? And his name is Myron? When did this happen?"

"Not pathetic Gondor, fool, I speak for the Lord of an even greater land-"

"What, this Myron has supposedly reunited Gondor and Arnor? You're full of it!"

"No! I speak for the Master of Mor- oh, wait that means 'black land' and that's what the elves call it. I'll get fed to some beast if that end up in the transcript..."

KorvinStarmast

2022-07-22, 09:48 AM

I think she'd be closer to 4000 at this point. Whose skin care products does she use? :smallcool:

I've watched Blood Snow on YouTube, and it's a decent fight scene, but no more than that. And Children of the Light. Are these references to the Wheel of Time show? :smallconfused:

"I come bearing words and gifts from Tar-Mairon. He desires-"

"From who?"

"Tar-Mairon, the Great Lord who rules of the greatest tower in Middle-Earth!"

"What? There's a king in Gondor again? And his name is Myron? When did this happen?"

"Not pathetic Gondor, fool, I speak for the Lord of an even greater land-"

"What, this Myron has supposedly reunited Gondor and Arnor? You're full of it!"

"No! I speak for the Master of Mor- oh, wait that means 'black land' and that's what the elves call it. I'll get fed to some beast if that end up in the transcript..."
This got a chuckle out of me, +1. :smallsmile:

Pondering the implications of Galadriel (who is as hot at 7,000 in LoTR, as she is at 4,000 in this Second Age movie) as regards commercial endorsements.
Filthy rich, she would be.

Psyren

2022-07-22, 10:22 AM

Arkham Middle Earth was delightful and I will brook no dissent!

I mean it was! The Nemesis System was groundbreaking design.

They proceeded to ruin the franchise with lootboxes and greed but the first outing was stellar.

Whose skin care products does she use? :smallcool:

Maybe she's grown with it. (Maybe it's Maybelline.)

Are these references to the Wheel of Time show? :smallconfused:

I brought up WoT because it had a clear thesis statement outside of giving more stuff to existing fans of the IP. I'm not too convinced this does, but then again, that hardly matters since "fans of the Middle-Earth IP" are more than enough to carry a show on their own post-PJ, even an expensive one.

KorvinStarmast

2022-07-22, 10:24 AM

I brought up WoT because it had a clear thesis statement outside of giving more stuff to existing fans of the IP. I'm not too convinced this does, but then again, that hardly matters since "fans of the Middle-Earth IP" are more than enough to carry a show on their own post-PJ, even an expensive one. I enjoyed the 1st season of WoT and would like some more. I have amazonprime and will for sure be enjoying the LoTR show coming in September.

Saintheart

2022-07-22, 10:37 AM

Look, I respect people liking Ringman: Arkam Ithil, but sexy Shelob is not acceptable.

I agree.

It's SheHOT, not Shelob.

Psyren

2022-07-22, 11:09 AM

I enjoyed the 1st season of WoT and would like some more. I have amazonprime and will for sure be enjoying the LoTR show coming in September.

You're in luck then, because not only is season 2 of WoT dropping soon, season 3 was just confirmed at SDCC.

And yeah, I'll probably give LotR a try despite my concerns.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-22, 04:34 PM

New trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYnQDsaxHZU)

One of the first decent bits of marketing. "You have been told many lies of middle-earth", though? Uurgh. Meta subtext not subtle.

Zevox

2022-07-22, 04:43 PM

New trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYnQDsaxHZU)

One of the first decent bits of marketing. "You have been told many lies of middle-earth", though? Uurgh. Meta subtext not subtle.
Sudden Balrog at the end? That's odd, the only Balrog that we know to have survived the War of Wrath was Durin's Bane, and it wasn't awoken until the middle of the Third Age. Taking some liberties there, I see.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-22, 04:49 PM

I think at this point we might as well just give up on timeline issues, we know they're compressing it.

Think they could have been more creative with the Balrog design, it's ripped right out of Fellowship.

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-22, 04:50 PM

Sudden Balrog at the end? That's odd, the only Balrog that we know to have survived the War of Wrath was Durin's Bane, and it wasn't awoken until the middle of the Third Age. Taking some liberties there, I see.
Probably easier to list what they're not taking liberties with ;P And almost certainly that would be Durin's Bane, with the veins of silvery metal going through rocks in earlier shots...

Edit: is the hand-blowing guy right before the balrog bit Sauron?!

Fyraltari

2022-07-22, 04:59 PM

New trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYnQDsaxHZU)
You know that looks pretty good actually.

Until...

Sudden Balrog at the end?
Yeah, I'm a bit worried about that.

One of the first decent bits of marketing. "You have been told many lies of middle-earth", though? Uurgh. Meta subtext not subtle.
I mean, it seems to be sauron speaking, so...

Sudden Balrog at the end? That's odd, the only Balrog that we know to have survived the War of Wrath was Durin's Bane, and it wasn't awoken until the middle of the Third Age. Taking some liberties there, I see.
The hobbits didn't clue you in? Then again we were never told there weren't any Balrogs involved in the wars of the Second Age. We know of two of them dying in the First Age and one in the Third. Tolkien said there were
or seven of those at the maximum and Sauron is said to gathered all evil creatures for the LAst Alliance, so it's not absurd that he'd have a Balrog along with the ride (and probably a few dragons too). I just hop it's not a sign of the show leaning too much on fighting.

Vinyadan

2022-07-22, 05:14 PM

The Balrog need not show up on the surface. If Sauron managed to be accepted as a friend of Moria, I can totally see him observe the Dwarven propensity for greed, then go down beneath the earth because he knows some of his old friends might be hiding there, find a still uncooperative Balrog, observe that he's surrounded by mithril, and show the Dwarves the vein. It may take centuries for them to reach the Balrog, but they will, sooner or later, and then there will be one fewer fortress to conquer.

I actually liked what I saw.

Zevox

2022-07-22, 05:27 PM

Think they could have been more creative with the Balrog design, it's ripped right out of Fellowship.
:smallconfused: Why on earth would you want them to change the design?

The hobbits didn't clue you in?
Very little was written about the history of the Hobbits, so it's a lot easier for them to take liberties with that without it seeming completely out of place. A very weird choice, considering that part of the whole point with them is that prior to Bilbo they were a historical footnote as far as the entire rest of the world was concerned, but still possible.

Then again we were never told there weren't any Balrogs involved in the wars of the Second Age. We know of two of them dying in the First Age and one in the Third. Tolkien said there were
or seven of those at the maximum and Sauron is said to gathered all evil creatures for the LAst Alliance, so it's not absurd that he'd have a Balrog along with the ride (and probably a few dragons too). I just hop it's not a sign of the show leaning too much on fighting.
While theoretically possible, you'd think that with how powerful and terrifying Balrogs are, if any of them did owe allegiance to and fight for Sauron in the Second Age, they would've been mentioned at some point. They're not exactly the sort of thing that you can easily overlook. Instead, Sauron's only major lieutenants that we hear about are the Nazgul.

Fyraltari

2022-07-22, 05:32 PM

Very little was written about the history of the Hobbits, so it's a lot easier for them to take liberties with that without it seeming completely out of place. A very weird choice, considering that part of the whole point with them is that prior to Bilbo they were a historical footnote as far as the entire rest of the world was concerned, but still possible.

While theoretically possible, you'd think that with how powerful and terrifying Balrogs are, if any of them did owe allegiance to and fight for Sauron in the Second Age, they would've been mentioned at some point. They're not exactly the sort of thing that you can easily overlook. Instead, Sauron's only major lieutenants that we hear about are the Nazgul.

The Nazgûl appeared towards the end of the Second age, considering how devasted Eregion got in the War of Sauron and the Elves (long before then) it's not impossible for a Blarog to have been involved and Gil-Galad or Glorfindel or whoever to have killed him.

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-22, 05:41 PM

The Nazgûl appeared towards the end of the Second age, considering how devasted Eregion got in the War of Sauron and the Elves (long before then) it's not impossible for a Blarog to have been involved and Gil-Galad or Glorfindel or whoever to have killed him.

It still feels unlikely for them to be involved and not mentioned. "Those other balrogs? Yeah, I'll detail who killed them and when, but why would I bother for these?":smalltongue: It isn't like there were scores of them all over the place, so an appearance was something to note (if only due to the sheer power and terror.

Vinyadan

2022-07-22, 06:02 PM

The Nazgûl appeared towards the end of the Second age, considering how devasted Eregion got in the War of Sauron and the Elves (long before then) it's not impossible for a Blarog to have been involved and Gil-Galad or Glorfindel or whoever to have killed him.

This leads to an interesting question: if a Balrog is killed, should the hero also die in the fight? All three known defeated Balrogs died with their enemy (Glorfindel, Ecthelion, Gandalf). Would doing it again need to be avoided as repetitive, or ebraced as part of a wider theme?

Fyraltari

2022-07-22, 06:07 PM

It still feels unlikely for them to be involved and not mentioned. "Those other balrogs? Yeah, I'll detail who killed them and when, but why would I bother for these?":smalltongue: It isn't like there were scores of them all over the place, so an appearance was something to note (if only due to the sheer power and terror.

I mean the three deaths we have come from very detailed stories (The Fall of Gondolin and The Lord of the Rings). All we have about the wars of the second age are more like histories, the narrator doesn't list all who were present or slain.

Peelee

2022-07-22, 08:19 PM

This leads to an interesting question: if a Balrog is killed, should the hero also die in the fight? All three known defeated Balrogs died with their enemy (Glorfindel, Ecthelion, Gandalf). Would doing it again need to be avoided as repetitive, or ebraced as part of a wider theme?
Gandalf got better.

Ramza00

2022-07-22, 08:24 PM

Gandalf got better.

Same with Glorfindel, gotta love the reincarnation out :smallbiggrin:

Saintheart

2022-07-22, 09:42 PM

Guess who's back
Back again
Sauron's back
Tell a friend

Berserk Mecha

2022-07-22, 11:41 PM

Mechalich

2022-07-23, 12:04 AM

The trailers don't look half bad, but I'm trying to imagine what they look like to someone who is not familiar with the source material. It looks like most of us nerds in this thread are familiar with the fall of Númenor. But even I'm wondering who most of these characters in the trailers are. Sure, I recognize Galadriel and I can guess which character Sauron is. But how are these proto-hobbits going to factor into the narrative? What are the dwarves going to do? I can't tell if there are multiple plot lines because that is what producers think is necessary for a big fantasy series or if the producers are trying to fit hobbits into the narrative because they think that is what the audience expects.

The dwarves are much easier to include than the Hobbits. Khazad-Dum is an established realm that had long term relations with nearby Elven communities and a sub-plot where the Elves need to secure materials (mithril?) from the dwarves in order to actually forge the rings seems logical. The dwarves are also established in canon as participating in the War of Elves and Sauron, which allows for a significant role in that conflict which is presumably going to occupy a significant portion of the show. There's also the bit where the dwarves shut the Doors of Durin in the later stage of that conflict, which was presumably a matter of internal debate among the dwarves. The dwarf plot, whatever form it takes exactly, will need a lot of work, but there are at least seeds to work from.

Hobbits are much harder. There are no references at all to Hobbits prior to the Third Age. They presumably existed but had no contact with the Elves, which suggests they lived in the east and did not migrate west until later on (hypothetically, they may have been enslaved by evil men of the east in the service of Sauron and fled to the west following the victory of the Last Alliance). Worse, their absence from history largely precludes them from taking any substantial action during this series, since otherwise it would have been remembered.

I imagine Amazon wants to use a Hobbit as a viewpoint character who serves as an audience proxy because they would have no idea what is going on in Middle Earth in the same way that much of the audience would not. This isn't necessary, there are several other options for such as character, but I can see how the temptation would have formed.

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-23, 03:27 AM

I imagine Amazon wants to use a Hobbit as a viewpoint character who serves as an audience proxy because they would have no idea what is going on in Middle Earth in the same way that much of the audience would not. This isn't necessary, there are several other options for such as character, but I can see how the temptation would have formed.

I imagine it was far more simple than that.

- The movies had Hobbits, we need Hobbits.
- But...
- WE. NEED. HOBBITS.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-23, 05:19 PM

Why on earth would you want them to change the design?

My understanding of Balrogs was that they were no more bound to any one physical form than any other Maia, so they don't need to look the same. Even if this actually was Durin's Bane, it wouldn't have to look the same.

It's not that I don't like the design, I just think that using it here is cheap fanservice and piggybacking on other people's work.

The promo material keeps talking about how they wanted a blank canvas, if that's true, use it, create your own things.

Somthing weird, Miriel in the materials keeps being referred to as 'Queen-Regent', meaning that she's the ruling representative of someone else. So who is actually officially on the throne? Why haven't we seen them?

Pharazon is an adviser, so it's not him.

Either there's someone else, or they're just misspelling Queen-Regnant, in which case, fire your proof reader.

Mechalich

2022-07-23, 06:50 PM

Somthing weird, Miriel in the materials keeps being referred to as 'Queen-Regent', meaning that she's the ruling representative of someone else. So who is actually officially on the throne? Why haven't we seen them?

Pharazon is an adviser, so it's not him.

Either there's someone else, or they're just misspelling Queen-Regnant, in which case, fire your proof reader.

That is weird. There's basically two ways to have a regency - rule on behalf of an underaged child or rule on behalf of a disabled elder. Miriel does not, in canon, have any children, and because she needs to be unmarried prior to Pharazon forcing her into marriage she shouldn't have any in this story either. Possibly she could be ruling on behalf of a disabled Tar-Palantir, but Numenoreans aren't supposed to be subject to things like strokes, Alzheimer's, or the other common reasons for an aging monarch to lose power to a regency.

Zevox

2022-07-23, 06:51 PM

My understanding of Balrogs was that they were no more bound to any one physical form than any other Maia, so they don't need to look the same. Even if this actually was Durin's Bane, it wouldn't have to look the same.

It's not that I don't like the design, I just think that using it here is cheap fanservice and piggybacking on other people's work.
I'm sure they could prior to becoming Balrogs, but after? Well, we can only speculate, but my thinking would be that they probably couldn't. Things that Morgoth corrupted tended to be twisted physically into a mockery of something good (Orcs to Elves, Trolls to Ents, and so forth), and Balrogs are consistently described as beings of flame and shadow, and never mentioned to be shape-shifters. Plus if they were just Maiar who chose to serve Morgoth, they'd be more individual lieutenants like Sauron, rather than this separate group apart from him.

And I think it's silly to call using the design "cheap fanservice and piggbacking on other people's work." The use of a Balrog at all when there's no indication one was active during the Second Age, sure, that I think could warrant that kind of criticism, but not the use of the same design. It would generally be better to have consistency there rather than reinvent it just for the sake of reinventing it, given they are clearly intending this whole show to be based on the portrayal from the films.

The promo material keeps talking about how they wanted a blank canvas, if that's true, use it, create your own things.
If they wanted that, they shouldn't be making an adaptation of anything, but coming up with something entirely their own. Just the fact that this is a Lord of the Rings-based series means they don't have a blank canvas to work with from the start.

Palanan

2022-07-23, 09:03 PM

Originally Posted by Berserk Mecha
But even I'm wondering who most of these characters in the trailers are.

Just watched the new trailer—I hadn’t even realized there was a new one out. And yeah, apart from Galadriel I’m not entirely sure who most of them are, or what they'll be doing.

What I feel after watching this…is just exhaustion. Another grand Middle-Earth epic with orchestral themes and lavish visuals, but without any characters I actually care about. The first teaser at least looked lovely, but this is just a grind.

Aeson

2022-07-23, 11:16 PM

Possibly she could be ruling on behalf of a disabled Tar-Palantir, but Numenoreans aren't supposed to be subject to things like strokes, Alzheimer's, or the other common reasons for an aging monarch to lose power to a regency.
The Akallabeth suggests otherwise:

And Atanamir lived to a great age, clinging to his life beyond the end of all joy; and he was the first of the Numenorians to do this, refusing to depart until he was witless and unmanned, and denying to his son the kingship at the height of his days.
It rather sounds like Tar-Atanamir was senile and greatly enfeebled by age at the end of his reign; his son, Tar-Ancalimon, is described as "of like mind" and much of the remainder of the Akallabeth speaks to the increasing corruption of and fear of death among the Numenorians and their disaffection with the Valar, so I rather doubt that this age-related debility was unique to Tar-Atanamir among all the kings of Numenor or even the Numenorians generally.

Considering that Miriel's father Tar-Palantir is strongly suggested to be the most moral of the last several kings of Numenor, I have some doubts that he would have held onto life and power into his senility canonically - particularly since his somewhat-younger brother died only a few years prior to Tar-Palantir's demise and was considered to have died young - but it rather seems like senility and at least some of its associated ailments and disabilities are not without precedent among the Numenorians and their kings. If she's acting as Queen-Regent for her father, a more canon-compliant possibility than that he's gone senile would be that she's his regent during a period when he's off in western Numenor hoping to catch sight of a ship coming out of Avallone and doesn't want to be bothered with the problems of government.

Regardless, if Miriel's her father's regent, wouldn't she properly be a Princess-Regent rather than a Queen-Regent? Tolkien-nobility seems to mostly stick to the British model, so it'd be weird for Miriel to become a Queen of Numenor while her father remained King, and she ought to be unmarried until after Tar-Palantir's death so she shouldn't be a queen by virtue of being married to a king if Tar-Palantir's still around. For Miriel to be a Queen-Regent suggests that, whenever this occurs, it's during Ar-Pharazon's reign - perhaps while he's away from Numenor and seeking to subjugate Sauron, or, with a fair bit of timeline compression, perhaps when the Numenorian armies go to aid the elves at the tail end of the War of the Elves and Sauron.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-24, 09:39 AM

Pharazon is cast as one of Miriel's advisors, so he hasn't made his move yet when the show begins. Can't imagine they would not cover that in the show. Don't think there's a lore solution, fairly clear they're not following book lore with this.

Most likely either her father is the official ruler, and they have a ticking clock until he dies, or a young child original character she and Pharazon are playing angel and devil on his shoulders.

It is odd that we don't know, though. It's not like 'who is the official ruler of Numenor' could be a secret in universe.

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-24, 10:20 AM

Pharazon is cast as one of Miriel's advisors, so he hasn't made his move yet when the show begins. Can't imagine they would not cover that in the show. Don't think there's a lore solution, fairly clear they're not following book lore with this.
I wonder why they decided to mess up this - rather clear - part of the lore... Wait.... viziers are advisors, so they literally seem to be going with the evil vizier trope for Pharazon :smallamused:

Most likely either her father is the official ruler, and they have a ticking clock until he dies, or a young child original character she
Hopefully not the son they made up for show Pharazon...

Looking at some pictures, really shows how badly the various actors are cast in regards to their characters' ages. Celebrimbor looks way, way older than Galadriel, despite her being the far older one, and similiar is seen with the royal family of Numenor...
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/897825422836920320/1000784233314390178/unknown.png

Also not sure if they really captured how close Muriel and Pharazon are related, but that is a whole different can of worms...

Eldan

2022-07-24, 10:55 AM

Speaking of Balrogs... I'd actually quite like for them to go for a more book-accurate Balrog, if they have to use one. A shadowy, humanoid figure, less bestial and firey, more quietly threatening and magical.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-24, 11:00 AM

Oh, you're right, Pharazon has a son in this, I forgot about him. Doubt he'll be the ruler, though, otherwise Pharazon would be the Regent, not an advisor. Miriel seems too young to have a teenage son from a previous relationship, but... Numenorean lifespan, so maybe not.

I wonder why they decided she would be Queen Regent instead of Queen or Princess? What would be a good narrative reason for that change?

Aedilred

2022-07-24, 05:20 PM

Also not sure if they really captured how close Muriel and Pharazon are related, but that is a whole different can of worms...

Maybe Miriel gets her colouring from her mother...

This sort of thing is a perennial pitfall of the can of worms that is colourblind/colour-conscious casting, though: the best one can do is hope that they have at least thought about it and therefore that there will be some kind of consistency.

Regardless, if Miriel's her father's regent, wouldn't she properly be a Princess-Regent rather than a Queen-Regent? Tolkien-nobility seems to mostly stick to the British model, so it'd be weird for Miriel to become a Queen of Numenor while her father remained King, and she ought to be unmarried until after Tar-Palantir's death so she shouldn't be a queen by virtue of being married to a king if Tar-Palantir's still around. For Miriel to be a Queen-Regent suggests that, whenever this occurs, it's during Ar-Pharazon's reign - perhaps while he's away from Numenor and seeking to subjugate Sauron, or, with a fair bit of timeline compression, perhaps when the Numenorian armies go to aid the elves at the tail end of the War of the Elves and Sauron
Entirely speculative, but it was fairly common prior to the modern era in many countries to have one's heir crowned as co-monarch or a junior monarch of part of a wider kingdom (largely to help them secure themselves on the throne prior to the death of their predecessor). It was not common in England post-Conquest (with only one example, who predeceased his father) and therefore with our Anglocentric hats on we tend to forget that that the idea of having multiple (non-married) crowned monarchs simultaneously was not just a possibility but entirely normal for many monarchies.

So one might imagine a scenario where Tar-Palantir had Miriel crowned as queen prior to his own death (perhaps to attempt to forestall a coup by the King's Men) and they ruled together with himself as senior monarch, then as he lost capability Miriel took over the regency for him in addition to being a queen herself.

The only other scenarios I could see making sense are:

Miriel was somehow and unknown to existing texts crowned queen of somewhere else for some reason, now rules as regent for her father, and is styled "queen regent" out of respect for her existing title even though it's not a Numenorian one.
Tar-Palantir previously abdicated in favour of Miriel and a now-deceased husband, then took the throne back when her husband died (not implausible, since abdication was common among earlier Numenorian monarchs, though the tradition was long gone by this era, also, this would be entirely a show invention).
Miriel was married to a short-lived king of Numenor and now rules as regent for their otherwise unknown child (presumably a son as if daughters were to inherit, why wouldn't Miriel be queen in her own right?).
She is what we would term a "princess regent" but styled as "queen regent" because the writers, being American, don't understand this sort of stuff and didn't do any research on monarchical stylings.

Corvus

2022-07-24, 07:45 PM

Oof, sounds like they have messed up the whole full of Numenor pretty badly. Seriously, it had everything you needed already without needing to make changes.

Vinyadan

2022-07-24, 09:38 PM

Also not sure if they really captured how close Muriel and Pharazon are related, but that is a whole different can of worms...

Actually, it came to my mind that, according to the Unfinished Tales, some Druedain lived in Numenor and retained their distinctive characteristics for thousands of years, finally leaving and going back to Middle-Earth before the Fall. So Numenor wasn't a completely homogeneous population, and, if black Edain also lived there, it's not impossible that Miriel had one of them as an ancestor she didn't share with Ar-Pharazon.

sluggerbaloney

2022-07-25, 08:03 AM

Reminds me of the "Final Fantasy: The Spirits within" movie. An amazing visual effects tech demo (for it's time) that absolutely nobody cared enough about to actually watch.

How you pay millions of dollars for the rights to something, and then a billion dollars making a TV show about it, and purposefully decide not to target the existing fandom is beyond me.

KorvinStarmast

2022-07-25, 08:17 AM

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-25, 08:26 AM

Oof, sounds like they have messed up the whole full of Numenor pretty badly. Seriously, it had everything you needed already without needing to make changes.
Changes for the sake of changes seems to be a common theme nowadays....

Actually, it came to my mind that, according to the Unfinished Tales, some Druedain lived in Numenor and retained their distinctive characteristics for thousands of years, finally leaving and going back to Middle-Earth before the Fall. So Numenor wasn't a completely homogeneous population, and, if black Edain also lived there, it's not impossible that Miriel had one of them as an ancestor she didn't share with Ar-Pharazon.
Still, how common would be mixing of those two people? Druedain we see later on were rather... reclusive, and the descendants of Numenor apparently valued the purity of blood, particularly when it came to the royal line...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OuGOf_IGLA

That's an interesting discussion on the nature of the three elven rings, which will hopefully at least get passing mention even though they had to remain hidden once Sauron openly declared himself.
At this rate, I wouldn't be surprised if the show made them weapons of war, openly used against Sauron...

Fyraltari

2022-07-25, 08:36 AM

Still, how common would be mixing of those two people? Druedain we see later on were rather... reclusive, and the descendants of Numenor apparently valued the purity of blood, particularly when it came to the royal line...
Leaving aside that it's really silly to complain about the looks of fictionnal people who belong to a fictionnal ethnicity...

The Numenoreans are a people of mixed ancestry already. The people of Haleth's description in particular more-or-less matches Mediterranean phenotypes, so dark-skinned Numenoreans shouldn't be that uncommon.

runeghost

2022-07-25, 09:45 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OuGOf_IGLA

That's an interesting discussion on the nature of the three elven rings, which will hopefully at least get passing mention even though they had to remain hidden once Sauron openly declared himself.

Sharing some head-canon regarding the origins of the Three, particularly Narya.

The Three were made as a Celebrimbor's great work, the pinnacle of his craft. Everyone else making rings: Sauron, the other Jewelsmiths of Eregion, maybe even Saruman, made rings for themselves. Celebrimbor probably wasn't making three for himself. Obviously he was far from selfless, so Vilya, "the Chief of the the Three" was near-certainly made with himself as the intended wielder. And Nenya seems very likely to have been purpose-made for Galadriel, with who Celebrimbor had a complicated relationship. (In parts of the Legendarium, he leads a revolt that ousts her - presumably non-violently - as the ruler of Eregion, and also makes the Elessar for her afterwards. So making her a Ring seems pretty in-character.) But that leaves the question, who was Narya for?

It seems unlikely to me that he was putting so much of himself into a ring that he intended to give to some distant elven lord like Gil-Galad, Cirdan, or Elrond. Sure, that's where Vilya and Narya ended up once he realized the magnitude of his mistake, but I doubt that's where he intended them to go. Again, he obviously wasn't originally planning on leaving himself Ring-less - if Narya had been intended for someone else, he would have sent it to them, not held onto it and then sent it away at the same time as his own Ring. It's possible that Narya was intended for some character absent from the page, but that seems unlike Tolkien. There's also the point, as mentioned in the above linked video, that Narya seems different from Nenya and Vilya - it doesn't (that we see) do the time-changing, world-preserving effect of the other two. It kindles hearts, and may have an affinity for fire in its beneficial aspect.

To me, the conclusion seems obvious: Celebrimbor intended Narya as a surprise present for his good friend, Annatar. Narya was made for Sauron. Which makes for a very Tolkien-feeling symmetry when it ends up on the hand of a different Maia, one who is truly well-intentioned, and who uses it to aid the eventual overthrow of Sauron.

Fyraltari

2022-07-25, 09:48 AM

MTo me, the conclusion seems obvious: Celebrimbor intended Narya as a surprise present for his good friend, Annatar.

Oh man, now I'm sad.

Kornaki

2022-07-25, 01:22 PM

Oof, sounds like they have messed up the whole full of Numenor pretty badly. Seriously, it had everything you needed already without needing to make changes.

After having seen Ender's Game and Ready Player One in theater, I can confirm that sometimes change to fit the medium better is required. Let's see how it plays out.

Aedilred

2022-07-25, 06:01 PM

Leaving aside that it's really silly to complain about the looks of fictionnal people who belong to a fictionnal ethnicity...

The Numenoreans are a people of mixed ancestry already. The people of Haleth's description in particular more-or-less matches Mediterranean phenotypes, so dark-skinned Numenoreans shouldn't be that uncommon.

"It's fantasy/fiction" is a terrible excuse for bad worldbuilding. Especially when it comes to interpretations of Tolkien's work which was so extensively and carefully built.

And this is a question of world-building. It might not just be a question of that, and if people want to say "inclusion is more important than consistent world-building" then sure, I might disagree, but firstly, privilege, and secondly, at least that's being honest about relative priorities.

When it comes to skin coloration (and some other obvious markers of ethnic distinction) as a pure world-building exercise, I think there are a couple of points that are relevant:

These traits tend to develop at least initially in response to environmental pressures and therefore tend to be geographically distinct. It is unlikely that two groups of people with markedly dissimilar features will arise close to one another. Note that this applies whether the people in question have evolved naturally (as IRL) or have been created directly by divine agents (as in Arda) because unless the creator is being deliberately stupid, they won't create people whose adaptations are wrong for their environment (no fair-skinned gingers in a sun-baked desert, etc.).
Mixed groups will homogenise over time, within a few generations, unless there is a particular reason why the different groups haven't interbred.
Individuals tend to leave little visual trace on larger populations: in order to effect large-scale change to a population's appearance, the number of people involved must be significant.
People who are closely related tend to share at least some visual characteristics.

I don't think any of the above points are controversial, and we would expect them to apply in a fictional world just as in the real one.

With those in mind, let's look at Numenor. We don't know a huge amount about the origins of the Edain, as they arrived in Beleriand already identifiable (albeit in three houses). So far as I'm aware, it is possible that they were originally a single (broadly homogenous) people who divided into three tribes for essentially political reasons, or that they were a confederation of three heterogenous tribes from all over the place. In any case, the drowning of Beleriand will have led to peoples being displaced and moved around and it is safe to assume that the Edain who settled on Numenor could have been of mixed ancestry. So far so good.

But that was roughly three thousand years ago. Even accounting for long Dunedain lifespans, Miriel and Ar-Pharazon are roughly 25th-generation Numenorians (and while the Dunedain are long-lived, it is possible that the population at large does not benefit to the same extent from the extended lifespans of the descendants of Earendil, so the wider population may have another few generations in it). We would therefore expect the ethnic distinctions between the original Edain and/or Numenorians to have been almost entirely erased by this point in history.

We are not aware that there has been any significant, i.e. mass immigration to Numenor since its founding. Nothing that leaves a trace in the legendarium, anyway. While there may well have been individual immigrants or families, their descendants will by now have disappeared into the general mass of Numenorian faces. We would expect Numenor to look pretty homogenous.

And yet we have here two first cousins, one of whom is Whitey McWhite (or rather, Whitey ap White) and the other is mixed-race. I think it's reasonable therefore to ask, in the context of the setting, why.

The obvious (Watsonian) answer is that Miriel's mother was dark-skinned, since she is the unknown factor in their shared ancestry (and because of the way coloration works, if Pharazon were the exception in this respect, you would still expect his skin to be darker than it is). So who was Miriel's mother? The easy answer is "a foreign princess" - and royalty are often exempt from the individuals-not-leaving-much-of-a-trace rule, thanks to small sample sizes and a frequently high proportion of imported spouses. If this is the case, it would still be nice to know who that princess was, and if it's going to have any political implications, but it's an acceptable answer that doesn't require much adjustment of the setting as currently understood. This answer would however imply that the Numenorian population, Miriel is going to look relatively unusual, and given what we've seen in the trailers, I would be surprised if that's what we're going to see.

If Miriel's mother is a native Numenorian, or indeed if Numenorians do have a visually diverse population, this raises the question of why there are distinct population of light and dark-skinned Numenorians (as opposed to Black Numenorians, to be clear) so long after we would normally expect such differences to have been erased. That is something one would expect to have a plot explanation, because apart from anything else it suggests things about the shape of Numenorian society and politics.

The Doylist reasoning for this is obvious, and that's that the showrunners want the visuals of the show to reflect modern America/Britain. But I think we're entitled to ask for a Watsonian answer too - and indeed given which setting we're working with and the attention to detail Tolkien put into the building of it it seems almost disrespectful for there not to be one.

I'm not trrying to gotcha anything here. I hope there is an explanation and if there is a plausible one I will accept (and adopt!) it without argument. But "it's fiction so it doesn't matter" isn't good enough, and, for this setting at least, "inclusion so shut up" isn't really satisfactory either if the creators want me to fall for this show in the way I did for the books and movies.

Looking at some pictures, really shows how badly the various actors are cast in regards to their characters' ages. Celebrimbor looks way, way older than Galadriel, despite her being the far older one, and similiar is seen with the royal family of Numenor...
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/897825422836920320/1000784233314390178/unknown.png
Incidentally, while the beard and hair disguise it, the actor playing Pharazon is only a couple of years older than the one playing Miriel. I believe, too, that that is his natural hair and beard colour, based on other photos I've seen. If you can see past the grey, they look a lot closer in age than at first glance. And the guy playing Elendil is 15-20 years older than them, oddly enough.

Mechalich

2022-07-25, 06:42 PM

These traits tend to develop at least initially in response to environmental pressures and therefore tend to be geographically distinct. It is unlikely that two groups of people with markedly dissimilar features will arise close to one another. Note that this applies whether the people in question have evolved naturally (as IRL) or have been created directly by divine agents (as in Arda) because unless the creator is being deliberately stupid, they won't create people whose adaptations are wrong for their environment (no fair-skinned gingers in a sun-baked desert, etc.).

Also, we know this is how Tolkien set up Middle-Earth. The part of the continent we see in his stories represents the Northwestern region of a much larger landmass, one that is approximately parallel with Europe-Africa-Asia in overall geographical structure. And the people native to the northern regions are paler than those found further south. The distribution of these peoples is perfectly sensible, their allegiance gets nasty and political and we can't discuss it, but who lives where makes sense biologically.

We are not aware that there has been any significant, i.e. mass immigration to Numenor since its founding. Nothing that leaves a trace in the legendarium, anyway. While there may well have been individual immigrants or families, their descendants will by now have disappeared into the general mass of Numenorian faces. We would expect Numenor to look pretty homogenous.

There's a possible option here. Numenor had extensive colonies throughout Middle Earth, some of which reached quite far to the East and South, such as Umbar, and there's nothing to say Numenorean mariners couldn't have gone much further. Also, because the timeline is compressed, we also have the Numenoreans presumably deep into their corrupt phase by this point. Considering how colonization demographics tend to unfold, this could lead to a large population of people in Numenor who are of mixed ethnic descent, with a Numenorean parent (usually the father) and mother from one of the various peoples surrounding the colonial outposts.

Also, if this colonialist demographic shift is set sufficiently far enough in the past, and we presume the Numenoreans, despite being spectacularly corrupt are multiculturally tolerant (which actually, is something that Sauron would want since it would insert influences from cultures he controls into Numenor, so it's not as implausible as it sounds), then a fairly mixed Numenorean population, especially in major port cities, is not that unreasonable.

Now, one thing that it's important with this is that there shouldn't be just 'light' and 'dark' Numenoreans, but a complete range of skin tones reflecting every heritage, including mixed-blooded Numenoreans who trace their colonial ancestry to the more northerly populations in what would later be Gondor and Arnor.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-25, 07:14 PM

I suspect they just won't make them cousins to begin with.

Aedilred

2022-07-25, 07:16 PM

Also, we know this is how Tolkien set up Middle-Earth. The part of the continent we see in his stories represents the Northwestern region of a much larger landmass, one that is approximately parallel with Europe-Africa-Asia in overall geographical structure. And the people native to the northern regions are paler than those found further south. The distribution of these peoples is perfectly sensible, their allegiance gets nasty and political and we can't discuss it, but who lives where makes sense biologically.

Yes: "the Middle-Earth that we see is Europe but a different shape" is the obvious and, I think, correct answer to questions about why there isn't more diversity in the populations of the people we see on screen. Not that pre-modern Europe was entirely non-diverse, but it was still orders of magnitude less diverse than modern America or modern (metropolitan) Europe and particularly so in the positions of power that we see on screen.

That answer seems to be being deliberately set aside in the interests of inclusivity of people who are European/American but of variegated ancestry. And while when it comes to movies that purport to be historical I think that is inherently problematic, in a fantasy setting (even one which is supposedly kinda-Earth-but-not-quite) I think that that's ok, or at least that more is gained from doing it than is lost. But it does still require some in-setting justification in order to fly.

Berserk Mecha

2022-07-25, 07:55 PM

I suspect they just won't make them cousins to begin with.

I doubt they're going to shy away from incest. Especially not when the rival 'House of the Dragon' show is going to have a huge inbred family. Seems to be something that we've become desensitized to...

Mechalich

2022-07-25, 08:01 PM

That answer seems to be being deliberately set aside in the interests of inclusivity of people who are European/American but of variegated ancestry. And while when it comes to movies that purport to be historical I think that is inherently problematic, in a fantasy setting (even one which is supposedly kinda-Earth-but-not-quite) I think that that's ok, or at least that more is gained from doing it than is lost. But it does still require some in-setting justification in order to fly.

Modern multicultural populations are mostly due to a drastic increase in transportation technology. Something that we can see echoed historically in that the most multicultural regions like ancient Rome or Constantinople were positioned in on the Med, where geographic factors allowed people from distant lands to interact at disproportionately high levels. Given this, one potential justification for increased multicultural presentation in Numenor is positing that the Numenoreans (and to a lesser degree the Elves) have some kind of fantastical sailing tech that makes their ships faster, safer, and bigger than they have any historical business being (which, given the similar attributes Tolkien gave them in land-based construction is actually very reasonable) that allowed them to maintain a Victorian Era style globe-spanning Empire otherwise out of line with the tech level.

I doubt they're going to shy away from incest. Especially not when the rival 'House of the Dragon' show is going to have a huge inbred family. Seems to be something that we've become desensitized to...

Unlike sibling marriage, which is almost universally proscribed, first cousin marriage is subject to varying viewpoints and is legal in most nations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage#/media/File:CousinMarriageWorld.svg). Critically, when considering a Tolkien work, it is legal in the UK and was historically fairly common, especially among landed nobility and royal houses. Nothing in the dynastic history of Numenor suggests Ar-Pharazon marrying his cousin would have been the least bit controversial to the people, whereas the act of forcing her into the marriage, and usurping her right to the throne absolutely were.

Vinyadan

2022-07-25, 09:09 PM

If Miriel's mother is a native Numenorian, or indeed if Numenorians do have a visually diverse population, this raises the question of why there are distinct population of light and dark-skinned Numenorians (as opposed to Black Numenorians, to be clear) so long after we would normally expect such differences to have been erased. That is something one would expect to have a plot explanation, because apart from anything else it suggests things about the shape of Numenorian society and politics.

I don't think we should expect such differences to have been erased. If you have, let's say, one million black settlers in Forostar and one million white settlers in Orrostar, you shouldn't expect the two groups to completely melt into each other. It's just a matter of geography and the limits on movement we find in a preindustrial civilization, especially since Numenor seemed like a very rich country with little need for inner migrations. To make a real world example, Rome did create cultural unity over wide territories, but never caused the populations of the Empire (or even just Italy) to become physycally homogeneous, and, even if it had lasted 3,000 years, it probably still wouldn't have happened without massive progress. This in spite of colonies, forced resettlement, and slavery. Italy is actually a fairly good example of an area where populations with remarkably different phenotypes have existed side-by-side for as long as we can track, in spite of recurring political and cultural unity.

There's also another matter: let's assume that all black and white settler blend together. Would such a population actually look homogeneous, or would it instead have people that look very different from each other even within the same family? Tolkien does something similar with Boromir, who is quite different from his father and brother. ("He is not as other men of this time, Pippin, and whatever be his descent from father to son, by some chance the blood of Westernesse runs nearly true in him; as it does in his other son, Faramir, and yet did not in Boromir whom he loved best.")

Also, from letter 230:

With regard to Aragorn's boast, I think he was reckoning his ancestry through the paternal line
for this purpose; but in any case I imagine that Númenóreans, before their knowledge dwindled,
knew more about heredity than other people. To this of course they refer by the common symbol of
blood. They recognized the fact that in spite of intermarriages, some characteristics would appear in
pure form in later generations. Aragorn's own longevity was a case in point. Gandalf I think refers
to the curious fact that even in the much less well preserved house of the stewards Denethor had
come out as almost purely Númenórean.

Of course, coming back to Miriel, it's not that simple, both because of in-world reasons (that tiny portion of Middle Earth we see is located at the height of Europe, with Pelargir at Troy's latitude and Imladris at Oxford's, and the few black people that do show up get a description that to me shows what a rare sight they were to the Rohirrim: "out of Far Harad black men like half-trolls with white eyes and red tongues"; plus Tolkien uses "swarthy" in opposition to Numenoreans when discussing peoples within Gondor) and because of real-world reasons (royals tend to be furiously inbred, building a separate community that crosses the borders of the countries they singularly happen to rule, or, if they are forced to pick from within one people, they can end up creating a clan within it that is completely separate from local society).

Anyway, Miriel's father was Tar-Palantir, the last wise king in Numenor and the first Elf-Friend in charge in centuries. So it wouldn't be too odd, if he acted differently from other kings.

Interestingly, there is one man who could pass for a King Regent in Numenorean history, Tar-Anducal. First he married a reigning queen, Tar-Vanimelde, and ruled instead of her, because she had no interest in politics, then, after she died, he openly usurped the throne from his own son and ruled for 20 years, until he died.

Berserk Mecha

2022-07-25, 09:18 PM

Unlike sibling marriage, which is almost universally proscribed, first cousin marriage is subject to varying viewpoints and is legal in most nations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage#/media/File:CousinMarriageWorld.svg). Critically, when considering a Tolkien work, it is legal in the UK and was historically fairly common, especially among landed nobility and royal houses. Nothing in the dynastic history of Numenor suggests Ar-Pharazon marrying his cousin would have been the least bit controversial to the people, whereas the act of forcing her into the marriage, and usurping her right to the throne absolutely were.

Ehh... I dunno. Sure, cousin marriage was not unheard of among real-life nobility, but Numenorian nobility is not real-life nobility. Tolkien was fairly conservative but I doubt that he was cool with kissing cousins. The other example that I can think of in the legindarium of one cousin having eyes for another is Maeglin lusting for Idril. And Maeglin was a bit of a sociopath. And even if cousin marriage was respectable among the Numenorians, that does not mean that the readers are supposed to think that the marriage was healthy. Incest is certainly a lesser sin than forcing Miriel to marry him, but it is supposed to be seen as another sin on Ar-Pharazon's long list.

Aedilred

2022-07-25, 09:58 PM

Ehh... I dunno. Sure, cousin marriage was not unheard of among real-life nobility, but Numenorian nobility is not real-life nobility. Tolkien was fairly conservative but I doubt that he was cool with kissing cousins. The other example that I can think of in the legindarium of one cousin having eyes for another is Maeglin lusting for Idril. And Maeglin was a bit of a sociopath. And even if cousin marriage was respectable among the Numenorians, that does not mean that the readers are supposed to think that the marriage was healthy. Incest is certainly a lesser sin than forcing Miriel to marry him, but it is supposed to be seen as another sin on Ar-Pharazon's long list.

As Mechalich indicates, I don't see any reason why Tolkien wouldn't have been fine with cousins marrying each other or see any reason why he would take particular issue with it or would expect his readers to. In the early 20th century, in Britain, even if marrying your cousin was falling out of fashion it wasn't something that would have raised any eyebrows as improper. It is a common feature in the 19th-century literature which would have reflected and informed contemporary morals. Queen Victoria (still on the throne when Tolkien was born) married her cousin; so did George V, who was king when Tolkien was doing a lot of his world-building, and so did Elizabeth II for that matter, who was queen when the Silmarillion was published and indeed still is.

I think it may be a transatlantic culture divide: cousin-squick is just much less of a thing on this side of the pond generally than in the US: indeed, it's hardly a thing here at all, and I think has actually increased over time thanks to American cultural pervasiveness. Nobody would call it "incestuous", except perhaps in jest*. And particularly when it comes to the aristocracy and royalty, we might occasionally make fun of them for being inbred, but it's also just, you know, a thing that's taken for granted. In a fantasy world with an explicitly European basis, it is a feature that would be more remarkable by its absence than its presence.

It wasn't unique to the upper classes either, mind. Even well into the industrial revolution, rural people tended to remain fairly sedentary, which meant that a significant proportion of marriageable people within convenient geographic range would be related to you. It's only in the big urban melting-pots that you can really afford to be too fussy.

*Incidentally, while first-cousin breeding (and particularly repeated close-relative breeding a la the Spanish Habsburgs), generally isn't good genetically, there are (https://www.inverse.com/article/28971-cross-cousin-marriage-pair-parent-offspring-inbreeding) suggestions (https://geneti****eracyproject.org/2018/08/03/marrying-your-cousin-there-may-be-evolutionary-benefits/) that cousin-breeding is more genetically advantageous than between two unrelated parents.

Zekestone

2022-07-25, 09:59 PM

Saintheart

2022-07-25, 10:10 PM

First cousins, no. Hobbits, however, marry second, third, and fourth cousins a lot, as a look at the family trees reveals.

Frodo's parents, Drogo Baggins and Primula Brandybuck----great-grandchildren of Gundahar Bolger and Dina Diggle, Drogo through their son Adalgar (his maternal grandfather), Primula through their daughter Adaldrida (her paternal grandmother).

Merry's parents, Saradoc Brandybuck and Esmeralda Took---great-grandchildren of Gerontius the Old Took and Chica Chubb, Saradoc through their daughter Mirabella (his paternal grandmother), Esmeralda through their son Hildigrim ((her paternal grandfather).

Lotho Sackville-Baggins and Lobelia Bracegirdle----great-grandchildren of Mr and Mrs Grubb, whoever they were... Lotho through their daughter Laura (his paternal grandmother), Lobelia through their daughter Lavender (her maternal grandmother).

Fatty and Estella's parents, Odovacar Bolger and Rosamunda Took----great-grandchildren of Gerontius the Old Took and Chica Chubb, Odovacar through their daughter Donnamira (his maternal grandmother), Rosamunda through their son Hildibrand (her paternal grandfather).

Merry and his wife Estella are third cousins (great-great-grandchildren of the Old Took).

Aedilred

2022-07-25, 10:30 PM

The Silmarillion specifically says that it was illegal - the laws of Numenor did not permit the marriage, even in the royal house, of those more nearly akin than cousins in the second degree.
Not the Silmarillion, surely, since that finishes at the end of the First Age?

I've had a quick scout around based on what I could recall for other instances of cousins marrying in the legendarium. Most of the time, Tolkien doesn't record the names of king's wives, but when he does among the Numenoreans they are usually cousins in some degree. The clearest-cut instance anywhere is probably Nimloth and Dior, who are second cousins. Elrond and Celebrian were cousins a couple of times over as he's related to both her parents (through both of his). Aragorn and Arwen are of course first cousins, albeit many times removed (the foster-siblings thing is more of an issue, one would have thought!)

Mechalich

2022-07-25, 10:31 PM

The Silmarillion specifically says that it was illegal - the laws of Numenor did not permit the marriage, even in the royal house, of those more nearly akin than cousins in the second degree.

Huh, surprising. I wonder why Tolkien made that choice. I suppose, given that the initial Numenorean gene pool was comprised of survivors of the War of Wrath and might well have been tiny - Tolkien was generally fairly cagey about numbers (a wise trait in a fantasy author) but the number might have been only triple digits - that more restrictive than normal laws to prevent inbreeding would be necessary.

MinimanMidget

2022-07-25, 10:37 PM

After having seen Ender's Game and Ready Player One in theater, I can confirm that sometimes change to fit the medium better is required. Let's see how it plays out.

Are you really citing those two movies as examples of movies that successfully made changes to the books to fit the medium? Because Ender's Game would be a great example of...not that. Kind of the opposite of that. They repeat "the enemy's gate is down" like a mantra, but not only is the room almost always shown with a fixed perspective, it's a horizontal plane where the enemy's gate is not, in fact, down. They completely missed the point of the line they were parroting, and they missed a great opportunity to make full use of the medium of a movie as opposed to a book.

As for Ready Player One, my personal opinion is that it's a thoroughly mediocre movie, and that it's hard to think of a book more suited to being made into a movie and less in need of changes for the medium, but that's purely my opinion.

InvisibleBison

2022-07-25, 10:42 PM

Not the Silmarillion, surely, since that finishes at the end of the First Age?

That quote is from the Akallabeth, which was published in the book titled The Silmarillion even though it's not part of the Quenta Silmarillion proper.

GloatingSwine

2022-07-26, 05:40 AM

As for Ready Player One, my personal opinion is that it's a thoroughly mediocre movie, and that it's hard to think of a book more suited to being made into a movie and less in need of changes for the medium, but that's purely my opinion.

Presumably 50% of the putative "faithful" RP1 movie would be someone reciting lists.

(It *is* of course a thoroughly mediocre movie. It's also a thoroughly mediocre book though.)

Kornaki

2022-07-26, 06:42 AM

Are you really citing those two movies as examples of movies that successfully made changes to the books to fit the medium?

No. We agree Ender's Game is terrible.
The reason (imo) is because they tried to faithfully put every scene from the book into themovie without thinking about is. Anytime someone is like 'but they didn't go scene for scene from my favorite book' I remember this movie.

As for Ready Player One, my personal opinion is that it's a thoroughly mediocre movie, and that it's hard to think of a book more suited to being made into a movie and less in need of changes for the medium, but that's purely my opinion.

I contend if they had just copied everything from the book, it would have bombed There was way too much stuff going on, and it was way too esoteric. Remember, something like 10x as many people saw the movie theaters as read the book, and you don't have the luxury in theater to look up stuff you didn't get.

GloatingSwine

2022-07-26, 06:49 AM

and you don't have the luxury in theater to look up stuff you didn't get.

If you had to look things up you're a fake fan anyway. (I mean that's the whole theme of RP1...)

MinimanMidget

2022-07-26, 07:04 AM

No. We agree Ender's Game is terrible.
The reason (imo) is because they tried to faithfully put every scene from the book into themovie without thinking about is. Anytime someone is like 'but they didn't go scene for scene from my favorite book' I remember this movie.

I contend if they had just copied everything from the book, it would have bombed There was way too much stuff going on, and it was way too esoteric. Remember, something like 10x as many people saw the movie theaters as read the book, and you don't have the luxury in theater to look up stuff you didn't get.

Ah, ok. That makes a lot more sense. I can certainly see what you mean with RP1, too, even if I don't completely agree. It probably would've worked better as a TV series, thinking about it.

Vinyadan

2022-07-26, 08:29 AM

I think the RP1 movie was good. It really was about escape from reality in its many forms (gambling being there), with an interesting and passably solid setting, mixed with a search for the Grail plot. Plus Spielberg has had a long-time interest in videogames, as both writer and player, and I think it shows in handling themes like farming. And the Shining scenes were also a meditation on transmediality and how a new public may approach a great classic.

Actually, it's been a while, but I think that there's a lot in it to unpack.

GloatingSwine

2022-07-26, 08:32 AM

Actually, it's been a while, but I think that there's a lot in it to unpack.

Oh yes.

You could start with how a movie where the main consequence represented by the villains being corporate interest not respecting original creative vision climaxes by unashamedly and gleefully presenting the Iron Giant as a weapon...

Vinyadan

2022-07-26, 08:50 AM

You could start with how a movie where the main consequence represented by the villains being corporate interest not respecting original creative vision climaxes by unashamedly and gleefully presenting the Iron Giant as a weapon...

Keep in mind that it is set in a video game. Excessive simplification is pretty typical for the gaming environment, simply because there often isn't enough room to show all a character really is. Take Boromir in Battle for Middle Earth, he's just a guy with a sword.
And then you have players and modders, and perversion of character and misappropriation become the standard :smallbiggrin:

GloatingSwine

2022-07-26, 08:57 AM

Keep in mind that it is set in a video game. Excessive simplification is pretty typical for the gaming environment, simply because there often isn't enough room to show all a character really is. Take Boromir in Battle for Middle Earth, he's just a guy with a sword.
And then you have players and modders, and perversion of character and misappropriation become the standard :smallbiggrin:

A Thermian argument doesn't "unpack" anything though.

RP1 the movie is corporate gunge, RP1 the book is gatekeepy fanboy gunge.

Vinyadan

2022-07-26, 09:08 AM

A Thermian argument doesn't "unpack" anything though.

RP1 the movie is corporate gunge, RP1 the book is gatekeepy fanboy gunge.

I'd like to continue this conversation, but I didn't understand anything you just wrote.

GloatingSwine

2022-07-26, 09:18 AM

I'd like to continue this conversation, but I didn't understand anything you just wrote.

A Thermian Argument (from Galaxy Quest) is when you respond to real world critique about a work of fiction using the internal logic of the fiction.

The setting of Ready Player One does not matter, it does not exist. A real person in the real world decided which of their copyrights to use and how in the movie. They did so in a manner which, ironically, is exactly the thing the villains of their own movie are doing which is so terribly bad.

The movie exists for Warner Bros to shill properties it owns at you.

The book exists to validate the sort of fan who thinks there's such a thing as a "real" fan of things.

Vinyadan

2022-07-26, 09:49 AM

GloatingSwine

2022-07-26, 09:58 AM

?

If you are critiquing the content of a work of fiction, you can't ignore the content of a work of fiction. You can say "even accounting for the setting of the movie, the dissonance was excessive, as it evidenced WB in its role of big corporation etc", but you have to recognise it somehow.

The people making it do not live inside the world of it, the nature of that world cannot be used as a justification for their decisions. The world of the movie didn't reach out and control the minds of the WB executives and make them act like they were in charge of IOI. They're just like that because they don't know other way to be, and it makes for a delicious irony when they release something critiquing the very thing they are doing as part of the process of making it without a shred of self awareness.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-26, 10:17 AM

They know exactly what they're doing, they just don't care. Anti- corporate narratives make corps a lot of money.

Peelee

2022-07-26, 10:52 AM

They know exactly what they're doing, they just don't care. Anti- corporate narratives make corps a lot of money.

Can you extrapolate?

Thrudd

2022-07-26, 10:55 AM

As a lifelong reader of Tolkien and lover of Middle Earth, I am much more concerned with what story they choose to tell and how they tell it, and not at all with the skin tone or genetic features of the actors. I don't think there is any good reason for people to be upset about that. As a kid, I loved Bakshi's film- it did not bother me one tiny bit that Aragorn had darker skin and looked somewhat Native American (or Mediterranean?)- in fact, I barely registered it. It is about how he acted- John Hurt's performance was great (is he never not?), whatever many flaws are in that film. He was Aragorn from the book.

So let's see how this show is actually written and the story they choose to tell before we decide that it can't possibly be representative of Tolkien's work. Not that I have particularly high hopes, but we still don't know. Naturally, there will and should be more active roles for women in this story, particularly Galadriel, and I think that's fine. Tolkien's writing and people's enjoyment of it are not going to disappear. This is just looking at it through a new gem-facet. Honestly, living myths and stories do change with each generation's retelling. They incorporate anachronistic elements that reflect the time and society of the tellers, despite being set in a remote past. As a historian, you study and preserve what is written to understand the world of the writers, and want depictions to represent what was. But as a story teller, you must help relate the story to the world of the audience- myths are not history, they are stories. The show will be telling a tale from Middle Earth intended for today's audience. Don't see it as a historical documentary depicting myths of Middle Earth as they might have been told by the people of the Fourth Age (who, we must remember, never really existed), or even by the people of Tolkien's own early 20th century society. That telling is preserved in the writing itself.

Psyren

2022-07-26, 11:15 PM

Can you extrapolate?

I think he's referring to themes and subtext (or in some cases it's just plain text) present in other Amazon shows centered around corporate villainy, like The Boys and The Expanse. There's a bit of irony in one of the largest tech corporations on the planet (FAANG!) enthusiastically greenlighting shows whose underdog protagonists are fighting against corporate greed, a cause we implicitly support by paying to watch.

I'm having a bit more trouble drawing a line from that thought back to LotR though.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-27, 08:43 AM

yeah, it was about the ready player 1 stuff. From Matrix Resurrections to Cyberpunk to the new Resident Evil, giant corporations have no hesitation in selling anti corporation narratives, they sell, that's all that matters.

Back to ROP, it's fairly clear that they don't feel bound to book lore, at least insofar as timelines go (and, to a lesser extent, family trees.) Those two things make up a good chunk of the appendices, so from here it's probably best to view this as an independent work and judge its merits or demerits from there.

Whether the changes will work, we'll have to see.

Eldan

2022-07-27, 09:03 AM

"Capitalism has the ability to subsume all criticism into itself. Even those who would critique capital end up reinforcing it instead."

Being anti-establishment has been a hip, cool thing since at least the sixties, and you could buy anti-capitalist merch for about as long.

Peelee

2022-07-27, 09:09 AM

I think he's referring to themes and subtext (or in some cases it's just plain text) present in other Amazon shows centered around corporate villainy, like The Boys and The Expanse. There's a bit of irony in one of the largest tech corporations on the planet (FAANG!) enthusiastically greenlighting shows whose underdog protagonists are fighting against corporate greed, a cause we implicitly support by paying to watch.

I'm having a bit more trouble drawing a line from that thought back to LotR though.

yeah, it was about the ready player 1 stuff. From Matrix Resurrections to Cyberpunk to the new Resident Evil, giant corporations have no hesitation in selling anti corporation narratives, they sell, that's all that matters.

Back to ROP, it's fairly clear that they don't feel bound to book lore, at least insofar as timelines go (and, to a lesser extent, family trees.) Those two things make up a good chunk of the appendices, so from here it's probably best to view this as an independent work and judge its merits or demerits from there.

Whether the changes will work, we'll have to see.

Ahhh, gotcha. I thought it was about real-world narratives and was thinking "I'm like 90% sure my 'the Waltons have enough money' beliefs specifically do not help give them more money".

Also, mention of The Boys makes me sad at how much I love that show and how very little we'd be able to discuss it on this forum.

Psyren

2022-07-27, 09:55 AM

Ahhh, gotcha. I thought it was about real-world narratives and was thinking "I'm like 90% sure my 'the Waltons have enough money' beliefs specifically do not help give them more money".

Also, mention of The Boys makes me sad at how much I love that show and how very little we'd be able to discuss it on this forum.

Yeah every time I thought of making a Boys thread I was like "uhhhhh, nah" :smallbiggrin:

But hey, at least it's not the Boys comic :smalleek:

Trafalgar

2022-07-27, 10:31 AM

Yeah every time I thought of making a Boys thread I was like "uhhhhh, nah" :smallbiggrin:

But hey, at least it's not the Boys comic :smalleek:

I am not a fan of Amazon as a company but I find myself watching Prime Video more than Netflix or Disney+. Between "The Boys", "Invincible", "The Expanse", and "Kids in the Hall" Amazon Prime seems less risk averse. It also has more movies I am interested in watching like old Bruce Lee films.

I guess it comes down to which soulless corporate entity you are willing to get your entertainment from.

Psyren

2022-07-27, 10:35 AM

I am not a fan of Amazon as a company but I find myself watching Prime Video more than Netflix or Disney+. Between "The Boys", "Invincible", "The Expanse", and "Kids in the Hall" Amazon Prime seems less risk averse. It also has more movies I am interested in watching like old Bruce Lee films.

I guess it comes down to which soulless corporate entity you are willing to get your entertainment from.

"Which?" I have all three :smalltongue: This is a pretty good time to be into nerd culture I'd say. I also have Paramount+, WOW Presents, even Philo for the BBC stuff.

The only one I have zero interest in is Apple TV.

Peelee

2022-07-27, 10:53 AM

Yeah every time I thought of making a Boys thread I was like "uhhhhh, nah" :smallbiggrin:
Same. It usually fell apart when I tried to write the body of the text and had to stop somewhere around "So superheroes...."

But hey, at least it's not the Boys comic :smalleek:
Man, I just got the comics because I loved the series so much. Talk about culture shock. I think this series is the poster child for "the movie/show was better than the book".

"Which?" I have all three :smalltongue: This is a pretty good time to be into nerd culture I'd say. I also have Paramount+, WOW Presents, even Philo for the BBC stuff.

The only one I have zero interest in is Apple TV.
I can't get Philo, sadly. Not for lakc of trying. It's supposed to have a massive library for the original Law and Orderf.

Feel the same way about Apple TV.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-27, 11:00 AM

Don't have Amazon Prime and have no plans to get it, so like with WOT, post release I'll just be watching from here.

Psyren

2022-07-27, 11:32 AM

Man, I just got the comics because I loved the series so much. Talk about culture shock. I think this series is the poster child for "the movie/show was better than the book".

Garth Ennis is on record as absolutely despising superhero comics. The Boys (comic) was his massively cynical takedown of the entire industry, with gallons of excessively edgelord sensibility ladled on top for good measure.

Amazon smartly kept the core of that while trimming a lot of the fat. It's part of the reason I was (and remain) so optimistic for their Wheel of Time adaptation, especially now that a lot of the COVID headaches are done with.

I can't get Philo, sadly. Not for lack of trying. It's supposed to have a massive library for the original Law and Order.

Aren't those on Peacock too?

Feel the same way about Apple TV.

If they get a few more killer apps they might change my mind. Mythic Quest came VERY close (Always Sunny in Philadelphia meets The Office meets World of Warcraft sounds like an amazing pitch) but I just can't justify a whole subscription for one show.

Vinyadan

2022-07-27, 12:34 PM

I just thought that, if Arwen pops up, Kaya Scotelario could be a good substitute for Liv Tyler.

Peelee

2022-07-27, 01:41 PM

Garth Ennis is on record as absolutely despising superhero comics. The Boys (comic) was his massively cynical takedown of the entire industry, with gallons of excessively edgelord sensibility ladled on top for good measure.
Oh, I've noticed.

Amazon smartly kept the core of that while trimming a lot of the fat.
On top of adding in a good bit more allegory. Even if it's about as subtle as a freight train, it's still hugely enjoyable. Though with all the people I see ranting about season 3's finale, I think maybe the seasons theme was too subtle for many?

Aren't those on Peacock too?
Not seasons 3-12, which are what I'm missing at the moment. Logan/Briscoe/Schiff and Briscoe/McCoy/Schiff are some of the best of Law and Order. Plus Jamie Ross and Abbie Carmichael were fantastic ADAs. I'm missing all of those seasons.

On the bright side, I don't have Detective Curtis mucking up any episodes I have available, but still. The tradeoff is more than worth putting up with him.

DavidSh

2022-07-27, 02:19 PM

I just thought that, if Arwen pops up, Kaya Scotelario could be a good substitute for Liv Tyler.

It depends on how old the Arwen is. According to Tolkien, she was born in 241 of the Third Age, after all of the Second Age events we expect to see. If Amazon really warps time, we could see her as an infant. Or we could have a frame story, starting in the Fourth Age.

Divayth Fyr

2022-07-28, 08:22 AM

It depends on how old the Arwen is. According to Tolkien, she was born in 241 of the Third Age, after all of the Second Age events we expect to see. If Amazon really warps time, we could see her as an infant. Or we could have a frame story, starting in the Fourth Age.
Time warping is one issue, but unless I missed something, we haven't even seen a hint of Celeborn...

Corvus

2022-07-29, 05:27 PM

There is a lot of rumours he is either dead or just not in the show and that Galadriel gets it on with another character.

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-29, 06:52 PM

Eh, rumours.

The absence is certainly notable, though.

Weird how little we know, given how close we are to release. There's been a remarkable number of mishaps in the marketing so far, and we're almost there.

Berserk Mecha

2022-07-29, 09:17 PM

I'm trying to remember what role Celeborn actually has and I'm coming up with nothing. Aside from governing Lothlorian, isn't he just kind of there next to Galadriel?

Saintheart

2022-07-29, 10:05 PM

Weird how little we know, given how close we are to release.

Two possibilities:

(1) It's a legit good show and the showrunners really want to keep the whole thing under wraps as long as possible; or

(2) It's a show made with choices to make Tolkien fans, let alone Jackson fans, claw their own eyes out - but seeing as there's no more time to fix it and no more money to fix it, they're hoping to get enough silly people to watch it on opening day and then weather the screaming outrage, because it (a) gets more views and (b) they'll have already made their money by then. You know, the way most streaming shows are presented to audiences these days.

I can hope for a timeline where it's item (1), i.e. Reacher, but the preponderance of stuff flowing down the World's Longest River of Sewage tells me it's item (2).

Mechalich

2022-07-29, 10:35 PM

I'm trying to remember what role Celeborn actually has and I'm coming up with nothing. Aside from governing Lothlorian, isn't he just kind of there next to Galadriel?

Celeborn does a couple of important things:

As possibly the most important of the Sindar in Middle-Earth at this time, he acknowledges the suzerainty of High King Gil-Galad. This is hugely politically important since it cements peace between the Noldor and Sindar throughout the Second Age (and arguably the Third Age as well).
He led armies under Celebrimbor during the Sack of Eregion, and may have been the first elven commander to join battle in the overall war.
After Eregion fell, he led the survivors out of the realm and north to link up with Elrond, alongside he presumably continued to fight during the several years they were besieged in what would become Rivendell.
Galadriel came looking for him at the end of the war, and brought their daughter Celebrian with them when she did so. The family reunited at Rivendell and Celebrian met Elrond for the first time - a critical event since the two eventually married.

Canonically, Celeborn and Galadriel are spending time apart immediately prior to the forging of the rings of power because Celeborn is prejudiced against the dwarves and doesn't want to travel through Moria to visit Galadriel (or Celebrian, who is herself ~1000 years old by this point and residing with her mother's side of the family) in Lorian, so he remained in Eregion. That means he's one of the most important nobles in the court of Celebrimbor, which means he ought to be in the show even if there's no plans to have him actually say anything in Season One. Possibly he is, the Comic-Con trailer shows a shot of Celebrimbor dining with a bunch of dignitaries, which indicates at least some time will be spent in the court of Eregion.

Berserk Mecha

2022-07-29, 10:56 PM

Hmm... I'm thinking that I should re-read Akallabeth and Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age. ...Maybe the appendices for LotR, too.

Mechalich

2022-07-30, 03:20 AM

Hmm... I'm thinking that I should re-read Akallabeth and Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age. ...Maybe the appendices for LotR, too.

I was admittedly work off of the wikis. A lot of the information about the Second Age is scattered across a huge variety of sources, and is occasionally contradictory. This is in some ways good for Amazon because it provides flexibility with regards to things like locations and specific events. However, Tolkien tracked lineages very carefully, which means the question of who is related to who, and what that implies is answered more thoroughly than any other topic regarding the Second Age.

For instance, we can infer that Celeborn is extremely important among the Sindar because he's close kin to Thingol, being his grand-nephew by way of his younger brother Elmo (in the most detailed version of his backstory) and by the Second Age everyone else in that lineage is either dead or presumably gone into the west, therefore Celeborn stands alone as the closest remaining king of the all-important king of the Sindar. Which means he'd be important even if he never did anything of consequence himself.

In any case, I feel any intent to leave Celeborn out to somehow 'free up' Galadriel for romantic subplots is blatantly misguided and also totally unnecessary since Galadriel's own daughter Celebrian is around, single (she doesn't marry Elrond until >1800 years after first meeting him, which must be some kind of record), and completely unburdened by a cumbersome backstory, making her perfect to carry that aspect of the plot. She is the rare female character in Tolkien with a perfect opportunity for dramatic expansion into a fuller role. But if they cut Celeborn out there's no good way to include her.

Thrudd

2022-07-30, 08:49 AM

In any case, I feel any intent to leave Celeborn out to somehow 'free up' Galadriel for romantic subplots is blatantly misguided and also totally unnecessary since Galadriel's own daughter Celebrian is around, single (she doesn't marry Elrond until >1800 years after first meeting him, which must be some kind of record), and completely unburdened by a cumbersome backstory, making her perfect to carry that aspect of the plot. She is the rare female character in Tolkien with a perfect opportunity for dramatic expansion into a fuller role. But if they cut Celeborn out there's no good way to include her.

That's a great idea, I'd love if they did that (not a lot of hope for that). I'd love to see the love story of Celebrian and Elrond (in a compressed timeline lol). Maybe if they mess with the timeline a bit, it would be interesting to see Elrond's behavior and personality change following her tragic end. Or maybe they'll do a season 2 "The House of Elrond", where we get that whole story, and maybe see Elladan and Elrohir, too, and Elrond and Celebrian raising their children, fostering the Rangers of the North, and young Aragorn meeting Arwen for the first time? Not sure I'd want them to get that close to LotR timeline, but still...

Immortal beings would understandably take their time in the courting process, I suppose...no need to rush into marriage when nobody's going anywhere, and vowing to be exclusive to one person for eternity, literally, is a pretty big vow. lol
Obviously, Tolkien was Catholic, and his fiction is nothing but courtly love, but we know Elves spend a lot of their time relaxing, partying, drinking, and singing...I can imagine there's other stuff that goes on, too, it'd be a big ask to settle down, I'd think. lol

Sapphire Guard

2022-07-30, 11:59 AM

The idea that you need to 'free up' a female lead for a romance subplot in itself is problematic, though. Having her be in a long distance committed relationship is probably the most revolutionary thing they could do.

Zevox

2022-07-30, 12:35 PM

The idea that you need to 'free up' a female lead for a romance subplot in itself is problematic, though.
I'd have used the word "stupid" instead of "problematic," but yeah, agreed.

Especially since there's a much easier solution if they really want a romance subplot for Galadriel specifically (which they shouldn't, but still): just have her not have gotten together with Celeborn yet. Sure, it's a huge stretch from the canon, given they actually married in the First Age, but it's much less of one, and much less likely to piss off a lot of fans of the source material, than ignoring Celeborn entirely and having Galadriel have a romance subplot with someone else.

Though of course, this is all speculative at this point. Hopefully they're just not doing the latter at all, whatever they're doing, and that rumor is just so much internet nonsense.

Divayth Fyr

2022-08-03, 03:30 PM

Looks like Galadriel will outperform Legolas. (https://mobile.twitter.com/TolkienWonder/status/1554646503557173248)

Peelee

2022-08-03, 04:04 PM

Looks like Galadriel will outperform Legolas. (https://mobile.twitter.com/TolkienWonder/status/1554646503557173248)

Well, stupid fight scenes are a way to dampen my excitement.

Palanan

2022-08-03, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by Divayth Fyr
Looks like Galadriel will outperform Legolas.

I now have zero interest in watching this. Turning Galadriel into Taurolas is just idiotic.

Psyren

2022-08-03, 05:28 PM

Sapphire Guard

2022-08-03, 05:32 PM

Is that a leak?

Divayth Fyr

2022-08-03, 06:01 PM

Is that a leak?
The original uploader said it was (part of an) ad.

Dire_Flumph

2022-08-03, 06:11 PM

The original uploader said it was (part of an) ad.

3 cans of Red Bull were gifted to the Elf-Lords?

Corvus

2022-08-03, 06:40 PM

Eh, it just seems like regular elf wuxia to me. I don't find it particularly offensive.

(Hell, it might be good if this gets popular, we'll have more DMs willing to just let martials do this kind of stuff with a skill check.)

Elf wuxia was never a thing in the books, and was one of the worst things put in the movies, getting progressively worse with each movie.

But I won't be upset if players were allowed to do more stuff like that as martial characters.

Peelee

2022-08-03, 07:17 PM

Eh, it just seems like regular elf wuxia to me. I don't find it particularly offensive.

A.) if it is a wuxia work, then that is not a problem and will work well. As is, I think it works as well as Legolas running up the falling bricks in Battle of the Five Armies.
2.) the sword strike is not being sold at all. It looks like she's barely brushing him with it. If I described a players' sword strike as what is happening in that shot, it would be in the context of not breaking the AC.

Zevox

2022-08-03, 07:38 PM

A.) if it is a wuxia work, then that is not a problem and will work well. As is, I think it works as well as Legolas running up the falling bricks in Battle of the Five Armies.
2.) the sword strike is not being sold at all. It looks like she's barely brushing him with it. If I described a players' sword strike as what is happening in that shot, it would be in the context of not breaking the AC.
Yeah, I don't know if it's the quality of the video clip there keeping it down, but that shot just doesn't even look good, even if you ignore that kind of stunt seeming very out of place in LotR. Galadriel just looks like she's kind of flailing in the air once she makes the jump. It comes across as goofy, or a deliberate "oh crap this was a bad idea" moment, not cool, which is what it feels like it was going for.

Berserk Mecha

2022-08-03, 07:42 PM

I'm hoping that the stunts will look better in the show proper. Teasers and trailers are not always editing like they are in the final product. At least that is what I am telling myself.

Palanan

2022-08-03, 08:33 PM

Originally Posted by Berserk Mecha
I'm hoping that the stunts will look better in the show proper. Teasers and trailers are not always editing like they are in the final product. At least that is what I am telling myself.

The fact that the sword-running was filmed at all is a hard nope for me.

Psyren

2022-08-03, 08:41 PM

Elf wuxia was never a thing in the books,

It's been a while since I read LotR but I don't think they described the fight scenes to the level of detail that would allow for (or prohibit) that anyway. And even if they did, TV is a visual medium; it's not enough to simply say elves have inhuman agility, you have to show it.

A.) if it is a wuxia work, then that is not a problem and will work well. As is, I think it works as well as Legolas running up the falling bricks in Battle of the Five Armies.
2.) the sword strike is not being sold at all. It looks like she's barely brushing him with it. If I described a players' sword strike as what is happening in that shot, it would be in the context of not breaking the AC.

Eh, I'm not going to defend the Hobbit movies, but wuxia wasn't their problem anyway. The dwarves and Bilbo were breaking physics plenty too (the barrel scene comes to mind.)

Zevox

2022-08-03, 08:55 PM

It's been a while since I read LotR but I don't think they described the fight scenes to the level of detail that would allow for (or prohibit) that anyway. And even if they did, TV is a visual medium; it's not enough to simply say elves have inhuman agility, you have to show it.
That feat doesn't so much require inhuman agility, though, it requires inhuman strength. Specifically on the part of the elf holding the sword, to be able to actually lift it with another person's full weight on it, and fast enough to actually use it to help propel her jump like that. I guess Galadriel would need some good coordination to precisely step on the sword and be able to do the jump without losing her balance, but that's the easy part of that stunt by comparison.

Psyren

2022-08-03, 09:11 PM

That feat doesn't so much require inhuman agility, though, it requires inhuman strength. Specifically on the part of the elf holding the sword, to be able to actually lift it with another person's full weight on it, and fast enough to actually use it to help propel her jump like that. I guess Galadriel would need some good coordination to precisely step on the sword and be able to do the jump without losing her balance, but that's the easy part of that stunt by comparison.

"Full weight?" You're talking about beings that can run on top of snow.

Zevox

2022-08-03, 09:26 PM

"Full weight?" You're talking about beings that can run on top of snow.
You can't seriously be suggesting that you think that particular ability is because they actually weigh so little that their footsteps don't push the snow down, rather than it being one of the forms of subtle natural magic in Tolkien's writing, right?

Psyren

2022-08-03, 10:09 PM

You can't seriously be suggesting that you think that particular ability is because they actually weigh so little that their footsteps don't push the snow down, rather than it being one of the forms of subtle natural magic in Tolkien's writing, right?

You can't be seriously suggesting their "natural magic" can apply to snow but not metal right?

Zevox

2022-08-03, 10:24 PM

You can't be seriously suggesting their "natural magic" can apply to snow but not metal right?
Yes, I would fully expect that such a thing would help them run over snow but not make them easy to lift with a sword. I sincerely don't see how you get from the one to the other unless you think it's about weight.

Psyren

2022-08-03, 10:29 PM

Yes, I would fully expect that such a thing would help them run over snow but not make them easy to lift with a sword. I sincerely don't see how you get from the one to the other unless you think it's about weight.

If (natural) magic can apply to one, it can apply to the other. It's magic.

Berserk Mecha

2022-08-03, 11:04 PM

Zevox

2022-08-03, 11:05 PM

If (natural) magic can apply to one, it can apply to the other. It's magic.
Again, unless you think what it's doing is reducing their weight, I don't see how that makes any sense to you. An innate ability to interact with the natural world around them in ways other races can't doesn't equate to elves being lifted by swords easily.

Psyren

2022-08-03, 11:11 PM

Again, unless you think what it's doing is reducing their weight, I don't see how that makes any sense to you. An innate ability to interact with the natural world around them in ways other races can't doesn't equate to elves being lifted by swords easily.

Putting aside that these are elves in the 2nd age and therefore the swords themselves are probably magic too, where are you getting clear rules on what magic and elves can and can't do in ME?

Zevox

2022-08-03, 11:13 PM

Huh, I guess I thought that Legolas could walk on top of the snow because he was nimble enough and knew how to distribute his weight effectively. Like a super well-trained gymnast. I think it's implied that elf magic is really just advanced skills and technology. Kind of like Clark's third law.
Oh, it's certainly not that. Elf magic is definitely real - hence the Mirror of Galadriel, which was basically a scrying pool, to use the most obvious example from LotR itself. Heck, "technology" isn't really a term you could apply to anything Elves do in Tolkien's works. And I don't see how it would be at all possible to walk on top of snow just by distributing weight effectively alone.

Putting aside that these are elves in the 2nd age and therefore the swords themselves are probably magic too, where are you getting clear rules on what magic and elves can and can't do in ME?
Obviously there aren't any - Tolkien was writing stories, not game rules. I'm going off my impression of what's consistent with how Elves and their magic and abilities are portrayed in those stories.

Berserk Mecha

2022-08-03, 11:54 PM

The mirror of Galadriel is the example that I can think of that adds credence to my point about magic being technology. I dug out my copy of Fellowship and here is the excerpt from the chapter, 'Mirror of Galadriel' that I was thinking of:

"And you?" she said turning to Sam. "For this is what your folk would call magic, I believe; though I do not understand clearly what they mean; and they seem to use the same word of the deceits of the Enemy. But this, if you will, is the magic of Galadriel. Did you not say that you wished to see Elf-magic?"

Another excerpt from the next chapter when the cloaks are given to the fellowship sheds some light on the matter:

"Are these magic cloaks?" asked Pippin, looking at them with wonder.
"I do not know what you mean by that," answered the leader of the Elves. "They are fair garments, and the web is good, for it was made of this land. They are elvish robes certainly, if that is what you mean. Leaf and branch, water and stone: they have the hue and beauty of all these things under the twilight of Lorien that we love; for we put the thought of all that we love into all that we make."

The fact that the elves do not seem to have an equivalent for the word 'magic' is interesting. Yes, I suppose that you could say that pouring one's thought into crafting objects is magic. But to the elves, it's just simply one of their ways. Galadriel was the the one who created the scrying mirror so she must know how it works. It may be magic to us, but not to elves. Hell, I'm typing this post while looking at a glowing screen that shows me far away visions and I have an extremely rudimentary understanding of how it works. But the person who designed my monitor knows how it works.

I guess we could quibble about the exact definition of 'magic' and 'technology' but I don't know how productive that would be.

Psyren

2022-08-04, 12:41 AM

Obviously there aren't any - Tolkien was writing stories, not game rules. I'm going off my impression of what's consistent with how Elves and their magic and abilities are portrayed in those stories.

As am I. In both cases we see a Tolkien elf being supported by something that wouldn't be able to support a human. That seems perfectly consistent to me.

Divayth Fyr

2022-08-04, 01:21 AM

As am I. In both cases we see a Tolkien elf being supported by something that wouldn't be able to support a human. That seems perfectly consistent to me.
So, if we get a shot of an elf running on water, guess that would also be consistent? Legolas compared an elf running lightly over snow or grass to an otter in water - ie. both in a natural environment. Metal blades seem a bit off here.

Putting aside that these are elves in the 2nd age and therefore the swords themselves are probably magic too, where are you getting clear rules on what magic and elves can and can't do in ME?
Do you happen to remember any cases of magical blades in the legendarium that would make a stunt like this easier? Kinda drawing a blank...

It's been a while since I read LotR but I don't think they described the fight scenes to the level of detail that would allow for (or prohibit) that anyway.
Well, if you go with the idea that "if it isn't specifically written out, it can go in" (which is what the showrunners actually used when talking about things), that opens up a whole lot of new possibilities. Oliphaunts living in Rivendell? Hobbits being aliens that came to Middle-Earth on unicorns?Go wild.

And even if they did, TV is a visual medium; it's not enough to simply say elves have inhuman agility, you have to show it.
As mentioned, if anything, this would be showing the strength of the elf with the sword...

Eh, I'm not going to defend the Hobbit movies, but wuxia wasn't their problem anyway. The dwarves and Bilbo were breaking physics plenty too (the barrel scene comes to mind.)
A weird thing to bring up, since from what I remember, they got plenty of flak for those scenes (including the barrel ride).

Kareeah_Indaga

2022-08-04, 06:52 AM

And I don't see how it would be at all possible to walk on top of snow just by distributing weight effectively alone.

Tentatively: with a very thick crust on the snow.

Psyren

2022-08-04, 09:04 AM

So, if we get a shot of an elf running on water, guess that would also be consistent? Legolas compared an elf running lightly over snow or grass to an otter in water - ie. both in a natural environment. Metal blades seem a bit off here.

You're ascribing it to the environment rather than a property of the elves themselves. That doesn't make much sense to me, since other humanoids running in those environments can't do what they do, only they can.

Do you happen to remember any cases of magical blades in the legendarium that would make a stunt like this easier? Kinda drawing a blank...

None of the fight scenes are described in this level of detail in the text. "Legolas backflipped over the Uruks, raining arrows in a spread pattern before executing a three-point landing." Artistic license is a thing.

Well, if you go with the idea that "if it isn't specifically written out, it can go in" (which is what the showrunners actually used when talking about things), that opens up a whole lot of new possibilities. Oliphaunts living in Rivendell? Hobbits being aliens that came to Middle-Earth on unicorns?Go wild.

If it upsets purists, why not :smallamused:

Kidding aside, reductio ad absurdum.

As mentioned, if anything, this would be showing the strength of the elf with the sword...

If that helps you grok it better, sure.

A weird thing to bring up, since from what I remember, they got plenty of flak for those scenes (including the barrel ride).

I was saying I agreed with Peelee that the Hobbit took it too far (but they didn't do that only with elves, so it's moot for this scene.)

Altair_the_Vexed

2022-08-04, 09:23 AM

warty goblin

2022-08-04, 09:36 AM

You know, at this point, I'm hoping all the folk who seem to be angry with the show before it's even come out will just ignore it from here on, and the rest of the world can watch it in peace and judge it as a piece of stand alone fiction, inspired by the works of the Professor.

I mean, I'm a card carrying Tolkienist, read the whole History of Middle Earth and can translate elvish in my head (sometimes even correctly) - but I'm happy with the idea that Amazon will do their own thing, and maybe it'll be a good TV show.

This thread is putting me right there with you. I'm skeptical of the show, but I'm curious to see what it does; if it's awful I'll stop watching and continue with my life. But it might be just fine, or good. I don't know yet, and I'm not going to judge it yet just for the fun of being negative.

But the gleeful trashing of something of which nobody has seen more than like 5 minutes reminds me why I so rarely talk about things I actually like here. Or at least things that aren't so impossibly obscure that basically nobody else knows them.

Palanan

2022-08-04, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by warty goblin
I'm skeptical of the show, but I'm curious to see what it does….

I was right there with you until I saw the sword-running stunt, which convinced me they’re taking their cues from the Hobbit movies.

Originally Posted by warty goblin
I'm mostly concerned with whether this feels like Tolkien.

To me, the sword-running is where it crosses the line into not feeling like Tolkien.

Fyraltari

2022-08-04, 10:42 AM

You know, at this point, I'm hoping all the folk who seem to be angry with the show before it's even come out will just ignore it from here on, and the rest of the world can watch it in peace and judge it as a piece of stand alone fiction, inspired by the works of the Professor.
I wouldn't bet on it, this is the Internet.

I was right there with you until I saw the sword-running stunt, which convinced me they’re taking their cues from the Hobbit movies.
To me, the sword-running is where it crosses the line into not feeling like Tolkien.

What do you think of Legolas surfing down stairs on a shield? Because that's about the same level of impossible as an elf catapulting another with a sword.

At the end of the day, this stunt is of little matter and how much we'll find it bothersome or fun or how much we'll be willing to "forgive" it, will depends mostly on the overall quality of the show than it itself.

Peelee

2022-08-04, 10:51 AM

What do you think of Legolas surfing down stairs on a shield? Because that's about the same level of impossible as an elf catapulting another with a sword.

At the end of the day, this stunt is of little matter and how much we'll find it bothersome or fun or how much we'll be willing to "forgive" it, will depends mostly on the overall quality of the show than it itself.

That's an excellent view. Speaking as a non-card-carrying Tolkienian, who has only read The Hobbit and seen all the movies (though I forget most of the LOTR series, I should re-watch), the shield surfing was stupid and made me eye roll but didn't ruin my enjoyment. Similarly, the sword jumping looks stupid and will likely make me eye roll but won't ruin my enjoyment. If ym enjoyment is ruined, it'll be by a lot of other stuff.

Psyren

2022-08-04, 11:06 AM

If they overuse it I'll be eyerolling too. But the clip shown seems fine.

There are plenty of examples of wuxia-level stunts in non-wuxia properties, and it's just visual shorthand for "inhuman." Vampires wallrunning in Underworld, Amazonians in Wonder Woman catapulting off each others shields etc. Not only will LotR film audiences likely be expecting elves to do that stuff, it's also a handy and inexpensive way to separate the action in this from Game of Thrones, Witcher, Wheel of Time et al. for newcomers.

Fyraltari

2022-08-04, 11:19 AM

That's an excellent view.
Thank you.

Speaking as a non-card-carrying Tolkienian, who has only read The Hobbit and seen all the movies (though I forget most of the LOTR series, I should re-watch), the shield surfing was stupid and made me eye roll but didn't ruin my enjoyment. Similarly, the sword jumping looks stupid and will likely make me eye roll but won't ruin my enjoyment. If ym enjoyment is ruined, it'll be by a lot of other stuff.
Ultimately, I think how good/enjoyable a hiven piece of work is is a holistic property. You have to consider the thing as whole, just taking apart each bit, assesing them and then calculating an average just won't correlate to your experience.

It bothers me that, with the Internet, what I like to call the Cinemasins*-style of media analysis, where you just nitpick specific elements in isolation with a surface-level understanding of the story and no reflexion given towards theme, aesthetic choices or the ways various elements come together, has become more and more common to the detriment of actual analysis.

Edit: I should precise that I'm not accusing anyone on this thread of doing this, we're discussinf a trailer, of course everything is in isolation and these are bits that are supposed to be the best, or at least representative of the work as a whole, so criticizing them more is called for.

*They certainly didn't invent it, but they're probably the most visible (and quite possibly the worst) example of it.

Zevox

2022-08-04, 11:35 AM

The mirror of Galadriel is the example that I can think of that adds credence to my point about magic being technology.
[...]
The fact that the elves do not seem to have an equivalent for the word 'magic' is interesting.
That's just a matter of the Elves not viewing those things as "magical" in the same way other races do, because they're just a natural part of their abilities to them. That's how Tolkien tended to portray magic most of the time, more subtly and as part of the nature of those that do it. For a non-Elven example, the Ainur's ability to manifest different physical forms for themselves is described as being like putting on and taking off clothes to them. It is magic though, even ignoring the obvious "how else could you ever make a pool of water show visions of the future?" question, Elves possessing natural magic is referenced repeatedly throughout Tolkien, not just by non-Elves, but in narration as well.

Plus, as this very show's title should remind us, the most prominent example of magic in Tolkien, the Rings of Power, were Elven creations. Only the One Ring was forged by Sauron alone, and the Three Elven Rings were made without his influence.

As am I. In both cases we see a Tolkien elf being supported by something that wouldn't be able to support a human. That seems perfectly consistent to me.
Whereas I see one instance of an Elf displaying a light step and affinity for the natural world - things they commonly do in Tolkien - and another of an Elf displaying superhuman strength, something I'm not sure if any Elf was described as having in Tolkien, and it certainly wasn't common of so.

Palanan

2022-08-04, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by Fyraltari
I should precise that I'm not accusing anyone on this thread of doing this….

Sure felt like it.

Originally Posted by warty goblin
…reminds me why I so rarely talk about things I actually like here.

I very much know how this feels. See my thread on Ms. Marvel.

On wuxia in general, I have no problem with that approach in other properties. Speaking of something I love which I don’t talk about here, Into the Badlands has some moderate wuxia elements and they work perfectly there, because the show’s entire premise is “harsh post-apocalyptic wuxia world.”

But Tolkien’s Middle-Earth is about as far from natural wuxia habitat as I can imagine, and to me it simply grates. I really don’t expect elves to do that, nor any other inhabitants of the world, and I certainly don’t need it to convince me Middle-Earth is different from Westeros or any other fantasy realm. To me it reads as making this show’s version of Middle-Earth more generic and less distinguishable, exactly because they’re using the same overblown approach as everything else, and that’s not what Tolkien’s elves ever were.

Psyren

2022-08-04, 11:59 AM

Whereas I see one instance of an Elf displaying a light step and affinity for the natural world - things they commonly do in Tolkien - and another of an Elf displaying superhuman strength, something I'm not sure if any Elf was described as having in Tolkien, and it certainly wasn't common of so.

1) I still don't understand why having a "light step" (your words) has to be a terrain-specific thing. Presumably if an elf's step is light, it's light everywhere, unless they're swapping out their legs/body between scenes.

2) Even if it is truly just Glorfindel(?) displaying super-strength, I don't really see anything in the books to contradict that. The martial Tolkien elves tend to take on foes that humans, dwarves and hobbits can't match, and the major named ones most of all. (And again, this requires discounting that their presumably magic gear had anything to do with what we're seeing too.)

But Tolkien’s Middle-Earth is about as far from natural wuxia habitat as I can imagine, and to me it simply grates. I really don’t expect elves to do that, nor any other inhabitants of the world, and I certainly don’t need it to convince me Middle-Earth is different from Westeros or any other fantasy realm. To me it reads as making this show’s version of Middle-Earth more generic and less distinguishable, exactly because they’re using the same overblown approach as everything else, and that’s not what Tolkien’s elves ever were.

I can only presume you've been complaining about shield/oliphaunt-surfing for decades now then for consistency's sake - which is totally fine, but I'm fairly confident in believing that ship has sailed.

Fyraltari

2022-08-04, 12:21 PM

and another of an Elf displaying superhuman strength, something I'm not sure if any Elf was described as having in Tolkien, and it certainly wasn't common of so.
That's a good question actually. The narration and dialog of Lotr describes Boromir and Aragorn as the strongest in the fellowship a couple times and elves in the Third Age are decribed as being overall smaller than Men. However Elf-lords in the First Age were capable of some really impressive feats, like Fingolfin matching blows with Morgoth and only being beaten after being struck for the third time even though each of Morgoth strikes hard enough to crack the Earth producing fire, Maedhros hanging from his wrist for days (possibly even years) without suffocating. There's a general feeling that the greatest of Elves have abilities beyond what's possible for Men. So while it's very vague, I don't think it'd be aberrant for an Elf in the Second Age to be able to throw a whole person like that.

Then again, the Men heroes also do some impossible stuff, like Hurin single-handedly holding off an army and cutting the hands of the Orcs that grabbed him with his axe (how did he do that?) or Beren managing to tackle Celegorm off an horse that was galloping away from Beren (the Leap of Beren is even considered as one of his heroic deeds). So maybe being Heroic enough just sort of gives you superstrength.

Sure felt like it.
What I'm saying is that it's fair to see that stunt as a bad sign, but taking as proof that the shows will be bad or unfaithful to the source material is taking it a bit too far.

that's not what Tolkien’s elves ever were.
In The Fall of Gondolin Glorfindel duels a Balrog by leaping over a column of refugees and from and to several rocks above a huge drop on a mountain pass. I'd call that pretty wuxia.

Peelee

2022-08-04, 12:33 PM

What I'm saying is that it's fair to see that stunt as a bad sign, but taking as proof that the shows will be bad or unfaithful to the source material is taking it a bit too far.
Exactly. Releasing it as one of the teasers for the show was a poor decision, but that doesn't mean it's indicative of the show. It could just be ****ty marketing. The staggering difference between the marketing of In Bruges (eg the trailer) and the actual movie In Bruges is one of my go-to examples of something that could be marketed abysmally while the actual product is vastly different (and immensely better) than what was portrayed by the ad geniuses.

Also, on a wholly unrelated note, everyone who hasn't seen In Bruges should absolutely go watch In Bruges. Watch it, absolutely.

Psyren

2022-08-04, 01:09 PM

That's a good question actually. The narration and dialog of Lotr describes Boromir and Aragorn as the strongest in the fellowship a couple times and elves in the Third Age are decribed as being overall smaller than Men. However Elf-lords in the First Age were capable of some really impressive feats, like Fingolfin matching blows with Morgoth and only being beaten after being struck for the third time even though each of Morgoth strikes hard enough to crack the Earth producing fire, Maedhros hanging from his wrist for days (possibly even years) without suffocating. There's a general feeling that the greatest of Elves have abilities beyond what's possible for Men. So while it's very vague, I don't think it'd be aberrant for an Elf in the Second Age to be able to throw a whole person like that.

Then again, the Men heroes also do some impossible stuff, like Hurin single-handedly holding off an army and cutting the hands of the Orcs that grabbed him with his axe (how did he do that?) or Beren managing to tackle Celegorm off an horse that was galloping away from Beren (the Leap of Beren is even considered as one of his heroic deeds). So maybe being Heroic enough just sort of gives you superstrength.

What I'm saying is that it's fair to see that stunt as a bad sign, but taking as proof that the shows will be bad or unfaithful to the source material is taking it a bit too far.

In The Fall of Gondolin Glorfindel duels a Balrog by leaping over a column of refugees and from and to several rocks above a huge drop on a mountain pass. I'd call that pretty wuxia.

Thank you, I appreciate the citations and levelheadedness.

Mechalich

2022-08-04, 02:46 PM

With regard to 'wuxia' stunts and fight sequences in this series what worries me is not faithfulness to the source material, but the studio's ability to produce fight scenes in this way that actually look good. The combination of wire-techniques, highly choreographed balletic motion, and careful camera control needed to produce good shots in this style isn't exactly common in Hollywood. This isn't being directed by Zhang Yimou and they are not, to my knowledge, using a Hong Kong-based stunt crew - note the the most Wuxia show ever produced in the US was Into the Badlands, which used a Hong Kong crew. American-based stunt crews are used to action that is comparatively closer-up, sharper, and grittier. That approach also makes things easier to hide - wuxia tends to pull back to do if not wide shots, at least full body motion shots which can be a real problem if the actors haven't been trained up properly.

I'm far more worried about what this stunt says about the stuntwork than anything else.

JadedDM

2022-08-04, 03:52 PM

I think it's worth remembering, going into this, that this show was not made for hardcore Tolkien book fans. It was made for fans of the movies, the normies, who are a far larger audience. Anything that happens in the show is going to be catering to that audience's expectation. Hence why there are Hobbits in the show, despite the fact that Hobbits were largely unknown at that time, because this audience is going to expect Hobbits. And why Elves are going to be doing some wild, cool stunts, because that's what the audience is going to expect.

In other words, if you're the sort of person who raged at the original films for cutting all the Tom Bombadil scenes, you're probably going to want to skip this show. :smallwink:

Palanan

2022-08-04, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by Fyraltari
Then again, the Men heroes also do some impossible stuff, like Hurin single-handedly holding off an army….

I don’t know for certain, but this may have been based in part on the Battle of Stamford Bridge, so not entirely impossible. I’ll reserve comment on Glorfindel et al. until I’ve had a chance to read those books again.

Originally Posted by Mechalich
…note the the most Wuxia show ever produced in the US was Into the Badlands, which used a Hong Kong crew.

Also note that Badlands is actually fairly light on wuxia elements, compared with something like Jet Li’s Hero or Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. They leaned into it a little more in the third season, but there’s more parkour and acrobatics than people flying through bamboo or dancing on swords above mountain lakes.

Originally Posted by JadedDM
Hence why there are Hobbits in the show, despite the fact that Hobbits were largely unknown at that time, because this audience is going to expect Hobbits.

This doesn’t bother me, since they can still play a role in events regardless of whether later historians of the Tall Folk chose to remark upon it.

Originally Posted by JadedDM
And why Elves are going to be doing some wild, cool stunts, because that's what the audience is going to expect.

This, as noted, does. I dislike the video-game silliness that Legolas devolved into in the Hobbit movies, and there’s nothing wrong with going a different direction in a different production.

Originally Posted by JadedDM
In other words, if you're the sort of person who raged at the original films for cutting all the Tom Bombadil scenes….

No rage at this, since it’s perfectly understandable. Bombadil, Goldberry, Old Man Willow and the barrow-wight wouldn’t have fit easily into an already busy narrative.

There are a few elements that always seem a little cringey on re-watching the trilogy, the sorts of things I’d be embarrassed about if I was watching it with someone who was new to the movies. And I really dislike what they did with Legolas and Gimli, separately and together; but that's a story for another time.