Modernizing the Wheel of Time

[Liquor Box]

It was an even split actually. Not seeing why that matters in any case - what they all have in common is being made to our current understanding/sensibilities, rather than those of three decades ago.

Well why it matters is pretty obvious. This thread is about adapting an existing book series to a TV show. The question is whether to tinker with it further. That is a very different kettle of fish from creating a new story. The difference is that the very reason for choosing to adapt an existing story instead of writing a new story (even one using the existing settings and or characters) is because it is a proven formula that people like. Changing that story undermines that reason. With a new story you don't have the same constraints.

I am only familiar with She Ra which is a new story in an existing setting. Which of the other three is retelling an existing story?

Let's assume you're right about the quantity of people for and against being the driving factor. Since we have no data one way or the other on that, there's no reason I can't express my hopes.

Oh yes, of course you can express your preferences or hopes. Nothing wrong with that. I suppose I am just thinking it from the perspective of the studio.

We don't have any data about for or against or neutral (you forgot that one - it is probably the biggest) - although the people making the show probably do.

But, even without data we can make estimates based on our anecdotal observations. I think we can both agree on that basis that for more than half the population, the question of "How well does this story reflect the idea that gender is not binary?" would not be the first thing that comes to mind?

Well for starters, I personally think the success of shows like Steven Universe and She-Ra that purposefully include non-binary characters and queer representation means it won't hurt, provided they do it well.

Of course. It's a great endorsement of the market that it will produce things to cater for all people and all niches. I think it's great that there's a significant amount of content available for people who want to see trans characters. I am sure there is also a lot of media that caters to people who prefer that it not confront gender issues.

I suppose it depends what we are discussing in terms of a TV adaption. Are we talking about a cartoon adaption that is aimed at a niche audience? If so, then yes, a WoT adaption that changes the stories to meet the desires of certain target markets might well be successful. With something like She Ra, it might even make it more successful, because it generates interest from a queer audience for the very reason it has queer characters, whereas it might otherwise have not generated much interest.

But I had thought we were talking about a much more expensive live action adaption aimed at a mainstream audience? If so, I don't think it is at all comparable to lower cost products aimed at niche markets.

That of course leads to the other question, i.e. will leaving it out and doing a straight adaptation hurt. I genuinely don't know the answer to that. One indicator might be the reaction to JK Rowling as mentioned earlier (which again, I won't elaborate on here), but it's difficult to tell how that translates to viewership since her latest vehicle (the Fantastic Beasts series) is floundering for reasons completely unrelated to any representation issues in the work itself. So it's not really possible to answer this question in a vacuum - the shows that do well do so for a variety of reasons, as do the ones that do poorly.

I'm not sure what your point is here. Are you saying that the fact that Fantastic Beasts is failing does not relate to the fact it has queer characters? You may be right, but I'm not sure how that relates.

For one thing Fantastic Beasts is not an adaption of a popular book series. Harry Potter is. The Harry Potter movies were a pretty faithful retelling of the Harry Potter books and were successful. They did not suffer in any way from not adding queer characters. Nor did other recent examples of adaptions such as LotR/Hobbit. Game of Thrones is an especially good example, because it was very successful and well received for all the seasons which it remained relatively faithful to the books, and then when it departed from the books (because they had not yet been written) it is widely regarded as having gone downhill. For that GoT departing from the books was a risk, and that risk was realised.

When it needs to be extrapolated i start to get suspicious it in fact have anything to do with her books at all.
And isnt about Rowlings RL opinion on whatever mess she is poking.

What is the JK Rowling controversy that people are talking about? I'm afraid I missed it.