Brian Earl Spilner said:
It seems people have taken to calling head cult chick Feminem.
Fantastic.
Mom's spaghetti
*****The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power*****
145,070 Views |
1847 Replies |
Last: 8 days ago by maroon man
Mom's spaghetti
Sir Ian McKellen confirmed that the Stranger did have his abs.#1 said:
I thought the "follow your noise" line confirms it's Gandalf. It looks like a younger version of him and the delivery of his lines are very "Gandalf-y."
Just watched it. I thought it was very meh…will probably tune in for more seasons, but just thought there was more dumb than good.
There is no reason in the world for them to make the wizard Gandalf.
We don't know anything about the blue wizards so the show can do anything they like with him if he's one of the blues.
It's totally unnecessary to make him freaking Gandalf.
We don't know anything about the blue wizards so the show can do anything they like with him if he's one of the blues.
It's totally unnecessary to make him freaking Gandalf.
OnlyForNow said:
That's some serious RetCon if he ends up being Gandlaf.
That'd make him about 6,000 years old at the start of LOTR.
I think y'all really need to let go of the timeline from the books for the Second Age. They've said it's compressed so I think we're much closer to the Third Age in the show than events would suggest.
AgE2theBONE said:
There is no reason in the world for them to make the wizard Gandalf.
We don't know anything about the blue wizards so the show can do anything they like with him if he's one of the blues.
It's totally unnecessary to make him freaking Gandalf.
The Lord of the Rings movies had Gandalf and Hobbits. People love Gandalf and Hobbits so the show runners put in homeless Gandalf and Harfoots. There's really not much more to it than that.
In their minds they can't possibly do a show with out Gandalf and hobbits going on an adventure. They seem to believe that it is essential to any Tolkien story to draw in a wider audience. It's what people have seen and they liked it, so give them more of it.
that is poor storytelling, and fan-serving your audience instead of having confidence in your story,TV Casualty said:AgE2theBONE said:
There is no reason in the world for them to make the wizard Gandalf.
We don't know anything about the blue wizards so the show can do anything they like with him if he's one of the blues.
It's totally unnecessary to make him freaking Gandalf.
The Lord of the Rings movies had Gandalf and Hobbits. People love Gandalf and Hobbits so the show runners put in homeless Gandalf and Harfoots. There's really not much more to it than that.
In their minds they can't possibly do a show with out Gandalf and hobbits going on an adventure. They seem to believe that it is essential to any Tolkien story to draw in a wider audience. It's what people have seen and they liked it, so give them more of it.
C@LAg said:that is poor storytelling, and fan-serving your audience instead of having confidence in your story,TV Casualty said:AgE2theBONE said:
There is no reason in the world for them to make the wizard Gandalf.
We don't know anything about the blue wizards so the show can do anything they like with him if he's one of the blues.
It's totally unnecessary to make him freaking Gandalf.
The Lord of the Rings movies had Gandalf and Hobbits. People love Gandalf and Hobbits so the show runners put in homeless Gandalf and Harfoots. There's really not much more to it than that.
In their minds they can't possibly do a show with out Gandalf and hobbits going on an adventure. They seem to believe that it is essential to any Tolkien story to draw in a wider audience. It's what people have seen and they liked it, so give them more of it.
Eh, personally, I think the Gandalf idea is fun. That, and it's not about "confidence." It's about Amazon giving the majority of the audience exactly what they want. I don't care if it's "accurate" or not. I get that it pisses a number of people off, but at this point, as a casual fan, I'm rooting for a true LOTR prequel, with "baby" Galadriel, "baby" Sauron, "baby" Hobbits, and yes, even "baby" Gandalf. If anything, it's the smartest play to ensure the widest audience.
We don't know a ton about the Blue Wizards (and Tolkien didn't either; he had a couple of theories and changed his mind at least once), but they did go east and south to Rhun and possibly points beyond. There's contradicting evidence as to whether they came to Middle-Earth in the Second or Third Age. Saruman apparently spent some time in the east as well, but the legendarium is generally pretty firm that he came to Middle-Earth in the Third Age.Maximus_Meridius said:I think Meteor Man is going to be Gandalf, but I ALSO think we get Blue Wizards. I'm going to need one of you guys that are far more versed than me to check me, wasn't one of the popular theories that one (or both) of the Blue Wizards went waaaay east, like, to Rhun? I'm kinda wondering if they didn't just decide to set that up, Gandalf needs help remembering who he is (I'm not going to comment on what I think of this, btw), and so he goes and trains with the Blue Wizards in Rhun. I think this is supported by the fact that the cultists know of the Istari. Traditionally the blues are said to have come first, so it makes sense.powerbelly said:
His ability to control fire also points to gandalf. I just don't think we will get blue wizards
Alternatively, and maybe I'm way out in the weeds here, but didn't Saruman travel way east, too? Like, I think that's actually part of canon, right? So maybe we're all saying the wrong wizard?
Incidentally, I thought it was a pretty good finale, but I feel that the ring forging happened way too dang quick (and did Celebrimbor kinda dirty...he knows what an alloy is, guys...)
I get what you're saying, and I'm sure that's why they opted for making him Gandalf.
For me I would have enjoyed seeing a Blue Wizard traveling to the East and trying to subvert Sauron's plans there. Mostly because the Blue Wizards have always been a neat mystery in the lore, and also the East is never really talked about much. Would have been fun, to me anyway, to have a TV adaptation expand on that.
Could even throw in some kind of heroic sacrifice or something epic for the Blue Wizard to do towards the end, and somehow have that lead to the Valar sending Gandalf, Saruman and Radagast to Middle-earth.
For me I would have enjoyed seeing a Blue Wizard traveling to the East and trying to subvert Sauron's plans there. Mostly because the Blue Wizards have always been a neat mystery in the lore, and also the East is never really talked about much. Would have been fun, to me anyway, to have a TV adaptation expand on that.
Could even throw in some kind of heroic sacrifice or something epic for the Blue Wizard to do towards the end, and somehow have that lead to the Valar sending Gandalf, Saruman and Radagast to Middle-earth.
You don't have to play up this "I'm too cool for the history" bad boy persona with us. We accept you as you are.TCTTS said:
As someone whocould not care less about ancient canon, or how long it supposedly took in the books to ride from one location to another, can't read, that was an incredibly satisfying first season finale. To see how Sauron and the rings came to be was exactly what I didn't know I wanted from a show like this.
Life is better with a beagle
I disagree. Even with the license constraints on what they can use and where, there is/was still a VERY compelling story they could have told while still being much truer to the lore. It would have had to be much more Game of Thrones than LOTR, but they still could have thrown more LOTR humor and downlow moments into it to give it more of a mass appeal.TCTTS said:
Eh, personally, I think the Gandalf idea is fun. That, and it's not about "confidence." It's about Amazon giving the majority of the audience exactly what they want. I don't care if it's "accurate" or not. I get that it pisses a number of people off, but at this point, as a casual fan, I'm rooting for a true LOTR prequel, with "baby" Galadriel, "baby" Sauron, "baby" Hobbits, and yes, even "baby" Gandalf. If anything, it's the smartest play to ensure the widest audience.
I mean... this story is literally the Odyssey/Iliad of the Tolkien Universe, And like those stories, there are plenty of heroes trials/tribulations a competent/confident writing team could have utilized.
I am not faulting anyone who is truly enjoying it, but for me, it is still the fan-fiction I alluded to it being many months ago. Just really well done fan fiction.
The Porkchop Express said:You don't have to play up this "I'm too cool for the history" bad boy persona with us. We accept you as you are.TCTTS said:
As someone whocould not care less about ancient canon, or how long it supposedly took in the books to ride from one location to another, can't read, that was an incredibly satisfying first season finale. To see how Sauron and the rings came to be was exactly what I didn't know I wanted from a show like this.
I'm not "playing it up." I'm offering an alternative opinion each week to the staunch, book-reading majority who are convinced this show isn't good simply because it's different from what they've read.
I love that you take him seriously
C@LAg said:I disagree. Even with the license constraints on what they can use and where, there is/was still a VERY compelling story they could have told while still being much truer to the lore. It would have had to be much more Game of Thrones than LOTR, but they still could have thrown more LOTR humor and downlow moments into it to give it more of a mass appeal.TCTTS said:
Eh, personally, I think the Gandalf idea is fun. That, and it's not about "confidence." It's about Amazon giving the majority of the audience exactly what they want. I don't care if it's "accurate" or not. I get that it pisses a number of people off, but at this point, as a casual fan, I'm rooting for a true LOTR prequel, with "baby" Galadriel, "baby" Sauron, "baby" Hobbits, and yes, even "baby" Gandalf. If anything, it's the smartest play to ensure the widest audience.
I mean... this story is literally the Odyssey/Iliad of the Tolkien Universe, And like those stories, there are plenty of heroes trials/tribulations a competent/confident writing team could have utilized.
I am not faulting anyone who is truly enjoying it, but for me, it is still the fan-fiction I alluded to it being many months ago. Just really well done fan fiction.
I totally get what you're saying, and I'm not arguing that the show wouldn't/couldn't have been better if they would have stuck more closely to the lore, left Gandalf out, etc. My only argument is that form a corporate perspective it was *smarter* to lean into familiarity. If only because, in this particular instance, simpletons like me respond better to that familiarity and nostalgia.
redline248 said:
I love that you take him seriously
I can always tell when there's an ounce of truth to his otherwise joking posts.
Put me in the camp of those who think you don't have the wizard say "follow your nose" and not make him Gandalf. It's Gandalf.
Nori is going to meet some nice, young proto-hobbit boy from a family that was separated from the Harfoots 2 generations ago, and they will have babies that grow up to find rings while fishing in the river.
Nori is going to meet some nice, young proto-hobbit boy from a family that was separated from the Harfoots 2 generations ago, and they will have babies that grow up to find rings while fishing in the river.
The #RingsOfPower set was so secretive, the actor playing Sauron didn't even know he was Sauron for the first few episodes. Warning: SPOILERS AHEAD‼️ https://t.co/LXBevvmV0k
— Entertainment Weekly (@EW) October 14, 2022
TCTTS said:C@LAg said:I disagree. Even with the license constraints on what they can use and where, there is/was still a VERY compelling story they could have told while still being much truer to the lore. It would have had to be much more Game of Thrones than LOTR, but they still could have thrown more LOTR humor and downlow moments into it to give it more of a mass appeal.TCTTS said:
Eh, personally, I think the Gandalf idea is fun. That, and it's not about "confidence." It's about Amazon giving the majority of the audience exactly what they want. I don't care if it's "accurate" or not. I get that it pisses a number of people off, but at this point, as a casual fan, I'm rooting for a true LOTR prequel, with "baby" Galadriel, "baby" Sauron, "baby" Hobbits, and yes, even "baby" Gandalf. If anything, it's the smartest play to ensure the widest audience.
I mean... this story is literally the Odyssey/Iliad of the Tolkien Universe, And like those stories, there are plenty of heroes trials/tribulations a competent/confident writing team could have utilized.
I am not faulting anyone who is truly enjoying it, but for me, it is still the fan-fiction I alluded to it being many months ago. Just really well done fan fiction.
My only argument is that form a corporate perspective it was *smarter* to lean into familiarity. If only because, in this particular instance, simpletons like me respond better to that familiarity and nostalgia.
And that Ladies and Gentlemen is how you end up with Anakin building C-3PO.
i do not think we are arguing here.TCTTS said:C@LAg said:I disagree. Even with the license constraints on what they can use and where, there is/was still a VERY compelling story they could have told while still being much truer to the lore. It would have had to be much more Game of Thrones than LOTR, but they still could have thrown more LOTR humor and downlow moments into it to give it more of a mass appeal.TCTTS said:
Eh, personally, I think the Gandalf idea is fun. That, and it's not about "confidence." It's about Amazon giving the majority of the audience exactly what they want. I don't care if it's "accurate" or not. I get that it pisses a number of people off, but at this point, as a casual fan, I'm rooting for a true LOTR prequel, with "baby" Galadriel, "baby" Sauron, "baby" Hobbits, and yes, even "baby" Gandalf. If anything, it's the smartest play to ensure the widest audience.
I mean... this story is literally the Odyssey/Iliad of the Tolkien Universe, And like those stories, there are plenty of heroes trials/tribulations a competent/confident writing team could have utilized.
I am not faulting anyone who is truly enjoying it, but for me, it is still the fan-fiction I alluded to it being many months ago. Just really well done fan fiction.
I totally get what you're saying, and I'm not arguing that the show wouldn't/couldn't have been better if they would have stuck more closely to the lore, left Gandalf out, etc. My only argument is that form a corporate perspective it was *smarter* to lean into familiarity. If only because, in this particular instance, simpletons like me respond better to that familiarity and nostalgia.
Like I did with the SheHulk series after the first episode, I purposefully stayed out of all of the weekly discussions because I wanted to assess the full story as presented before rendering any opinion. This was just me rendering my opinion before moving on to the next show.
I can understand adapting a book for TV and having to make changes, but to me there were changes made from the lore in this show which are poorly written, poorly handled. Some things they changed and don't seem to have a good reason to have been changed.
I sometimes felt like this show wasn't written for fans like me, which bums me out. I get trying to change some things to make the show more appealing to non-book readers, but us book readers deserve some love, too.
And I don't think the show is the worst thing ever but there were some definite "WTF" moments for me that took me out of enjoying it. And some of those "WTF" moments weren't because they strayed from the lore, either. It was stuff that was just absurd or didn't make any sense. The show is very middling to me, I liked some stuff, and disliked some stuff (episode 7 in particular was a big WTF for me and really brought the show down a lot). I'm really hoping season 2 gets better.
I sometimes felt like this show wasn't written for fans like me, which bums me out. I get trying to change some things to make the show more appealing to non-book readers, but us book readers deserve some love, too.
And I don't think the show is the worst thing ever but there were some definite "WTF" moments for me that took me out of enjoying it. And some of those "WTF" moments weren't because they strayed from the lore, either. It was stuff that was just absurd or didn't make any sense. The show is very middling to me, I liked some stuff, and disliked some stuff (episode 7 in particular was a big WTF for me and really brought the show down a lot). I'm really hoping season 2 gets better.
Oh I completely understand why they would do it, what their reasons would be.TV Casualty said:AgE2theBONE said:
There is no reason in the world for them to make the wizard Gandalf.
We don't know anything about the blue wizards so the show can do anything they like with him if he's one of the blues.
It's totally unnecessary to make him freaking Gandalf.
The Lord of the Rings movies had Gandalf and Hobbits. People love Gandalf and Hobbits so the show runners put in homeless Gandalf and Harfoots. There's really not much more to it than that.
In their minds they can't possibly do a show with out Gandalf and hobbits going on an adventure. They seem to believe that it is essential to any Tolkien story to draw in a wider audience. It's what people have seen and they liked it, so give them more of it.
And I'd still contend it's a mistake because...
1) They're not gonna lose any viewers at this point just because he's not Gandalf (at least I wouldn't imagine they would), and
2) They'd have a ton of leeway in terms of creativity by making him one of the wizards that are alluded to in the films but never fleshed out in any way. They can make him very much *like* Gandalf in order to please the crowd, but can also build out his own character and adventures however they like.
It's also gonna be just one more thing the purists lose their minds over, because he's not supposed to be part of the narrative till so much later.
Like I said, it's just unnecessary.
TCTTS said:
LOL she looks like she's 15 years younger in the Rings of Power pic.
I think them ham-fisting so many Lord of the Rings symmetries hurt the story. #MemberBerries
Orome said:
I think them ham-fisting so many Lord of the Rings symmetries hurt the story. #MemberBerries
No, I just like saying you can't read.TCTTS said:redline248 said:
I love that you take him seriously
I can always tell when there's an ounce of truth to his otherwise joking posts.
Life is better with a beagle
You know Galadriel should probably send word to the Southlanders about their king being a bad guy.
Quote:
I sometimes felt like this show wasn't written for fans like me, which bums me out. I get trying to change some things to make the show more appealing to non-book readers, but us book readers deserve some love, too.
Well put me down as a book reader who very much enjoyed this season.
Brian Earl Spilner said:Quote:
I sometimes felt like this show wasn't written for fans like me, which bums me out. I get trying to change some things to make the show more appealing to non-book readers, but us book readers deserve some love, too.
Well put me down as a book reader who very much enjoyed this season.
+1
I am enjoying it for what it is and it doesn't change my enjoyment of the books
Hey, the men of Harad and Umbar have to have a reason to join him in the 3rd ageBrian Earl Spilner said:
You know Galadriel should probably send word to the Southlanders about their king being a bad guy.
I get that it's gonna be compressed. But I figured that meant time jumps, not starting in the early part of the second age that is also the end of the second age and actually 1,000 years into the 3rd age.
So, Sauron goes from wanting to heal middle earth under the light of the one to wanting to cover it all in darkness....b/c Galadriel broke his heart.
redline248 said:
So, Sauron goes from wanting to heal middle earth under the light of the one to wanting to cover it all in darkness....b/c Galadriel broke his heart.
There's always that one chick who breaks your heart worse than all the others
So remember back in episode…what, 6? When Halbrand was sitting there trying to decide whether or not to go along with Galadriel and Numenor to Middle Earth to save the Southlands? Are we supposed to believe that without her impassioned speech the night before he would have just stayed in Numenor?
I'm just having a hard time reconciling some of his actions with him being Sauron.
I'm just having a hard time reconciling some of his actions with him being Sauron.
Featured Stories
See All
47:40
4h ago
4.3k
Myopic Aggies focused on task at hand with South Carolina up next
by Olin Buchanan
9:13
9h ago
1.3k
Players to Watch: No. 10 Texas A&M at South Carolina
by Olin Buchanan
10:11
13h ago
3.8k