Spoilers Rings of Power is back!

[Paul Farquhar]

True. But there's only so many ways to do pointy ears.

Yeah, but it’s debatable whether Tolkien’s elves had pointy ears at all. It’s not mentioned in the core text.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah, but it’s debatable whether Tolkien’s elves had pointy ears at all. It’s not mentioned in the core text.

Ah just pop culture osmosis?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Ah just pop culture osmosis?

Exactly.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

You can add to that list The Fellowship of the Ring. Does anyone not think that cutting Glorfindel and giving his part to Arwen, rather than having her as someone who just sits around doing embroidery did not improve on the original text?

The original text deals with mythemes rooted in medieval sensibilities; the movies begin a move toward modernity which the TV series runs with even further.

But I can’t say that I think the Fellowship movie is better than the book based on a single casting choice, no.

INo, the dates really don't matter. They happened in the past, and that is all that matters for the PJ movies.

My frame of reference was the text, not the movies.

And I don’t think Tolkien’s elves had pointy ears either.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The original text deals with mythemes rooted in medieval sensibilities; the movies begin a move toward modernity which the TV series runs with even further.

But I can’t say that I think the Fellowship movie is better than the book based on a single casting choice, no.

It's not a "casting choice" issue that the movie fixed, it was the changing perception of gender roles. In this case, why would anyone be attracted to a women as a life partner whose only contribution is a bit of needlework? Art cannot exist independently of it's audience. And that's not "medievalism", a "woman's place was in the home" was still the prevailing attitude when LotR was published, and when I was a child. Tolkien thought he was being frightfully progressive when he wrote Eowyn. But now, attitudes have changed, and therefore so has how the audience views the characters. And they have continued to change in the 23 years since the PJ movie. It's not that the TV series "goes further", it's just that culture hasn't stopped changing.

And then there is the Creative Writing 101 mistake of not introducing a character (Glorfindel) and not do anything with them. But I'm willing to forgive the amateurishness as part of the book's charm. But amateurishness can never be seen as a plus in a movie version.

And, of course there are changes demanded by the medium, such as the removal of the episodic misadventures of the hobbits between Bag End and Bree. This material would work fine in a TV series, but it would have undoubtedly been a worse movie had PJ included it. A movie is an artform intended to be viewed in a single sitting!

My frame of reference was the text, not the movies.

Those dates don't matter to the story in the text either, and medieval literature never bothered with dating anything.

And I don’t think Tolkien’s elves had pointy ears either.

When The Hobbit was first read to us at primary school, I imagined the elves as the 4 foot tall skinny people dressed in green that are commonly depicted helping Santa. And there isn't much in the Hobbit to contradict that. Notably, with Bilbo as the viewpoint character there is no reference to anything elven being scaled for people who are significantly bigger than hobbits. Whereas we do see that in Beorn's house.

 

[Wolfram stout]

Not a trekkie haven't read Hobbit in 30 odd years.

Tor the most part what I see onscreen in the movies or RoP is my Middle Earth experience.

I use my wife as my guidepost for this show. She has read The Hobbit and the Trilogy once, long-ago, but the movies are IT for her. So during the show, when something that I know from either the Simillrillion or my listening to podcast starts to creep into my mind (like an evil shadow), I will pause and ask her "What do you think?" If she likes that allows me to relax and just enjoy it.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I use my wife as my guidepost for this show. She has read The Hobbit and the Trilogy once, long-ago, but the movies are IT for her. So during the show, when something that I know from either the Simillrillion or my listening to podcast starts to creep into my mind (like an evil shadow), I will pause and ask her "What do you think?" If she likes that allows me to relax and just enjoy it.

Yeah, my partner bounced of the books, but enjoyed the movie and is really enjoying the TV show.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah, my partner bounced of the books, but enjoyed the movie and is really enjoying the TV show.

Wife not paying a huge amount of attention but she's watching.

We're not really hardcore Tolkein fans. We will watch it or Trek but don't consider ourselves trekking.

They get judged vs other shows in the genre vs their setting.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

It's not a "casting choice" issue that the movie fixed, it was the changing perception of gender roles. In this case, why would anyone be attracted to a women as a life partner whose only contribution is a bit of needlework? Art cannot exist independently of it's audience. And that's not "medievalism", a "woman's place was in the home" was still the prevailing attitude when LotR was published, and when I was a child. Tolkien thought he was being frightfully progressive when he wrote Eowyn. But now, attitudes have changed, and therefore so has how the audience views the characters. And they have continued to change in the 23 years since the PJ movie. It's not that the TV series "goes further", it's just that culture hasn't stopped changing.

And then there is the Creative Writing 101 mistake of not introducing a character (Glorfindel) and not do anything with them. But I'm willing to forgive the amateurishness as part of the book's charm. But amateurishness can never be seen as a plus in a movie version.

And, of course there are changes demanded by the medium, such as the removal of the episodic misadventures of the hobbits between Bag End and Bree. This material would work fine in a TV series, but it would have undoubtedly been a worse movie had PJ included it. A movie is an artform intended to be viewed in a single sitting!

Those dates don't matter to the story in the text either, and medieval literature never bothered with dating anything.

When The Hobbit was first read to us at primary school, I imagined the elves as the 4 foot tall skinny people dressed in green that are commonly depicted helping Santa. And there isn't much in the Hobbit to contradict that. Notably, with Bilbo as the viewpoint character there is no reference to anything elven being scaled for people who are significantly bigger than hobbits. Whereas we do in Beorn's house.

I’m not really sure what point you’re trying to make, but I don’t disagree with many of your observations.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I’m not really sure what point you’re trying to make, but I don’t disagree with many of your observations.

Do observations need to have a point?