[+] The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power - SPOILERS ALLOWED

[Dausuul]

But I remain extremely disappointed by the decision to compress 1700+ years of Middle-earth history into a few years (maybe a decade) for the series.

I would of course love it if they managed to deliver an awesome show that stayed perfectly true to the original.

But the chronology problem is huge. I spent a lot of time trying to think of how to square that circle and I just don't see a good answer. If they stuck to the original timeline, they would either a) have to skip the forging of the Rings, b) skip Sauron's defeat by the Last Alliance, or c) focus exclusively on elf protagonists and swap out the rest of the cast each season. None of those leads to a compelling story.

The one solution I came up with was to skip the Rings entirely and devote the show to the last days of Numenor. But then you're left with only scraps of plot and characters to work with, and have to make up almost everything out of whole cloth. Compressing the timeline makes it possible to bring in so much more material, and maintains the Ring as a point of continuity with the trilogy.

(And let's be honest, Tolkien's chronologies could get pretty absurd. Much as I love LotR, it was a major culprit in inspiring fantasy timelines where basically nothing changes for thousands of years. I suspect that Tolkien himself would have done something similar if he'd ever set out to write a novel--not a Silmarillion-type collection of legends but a novel like the Hobbit or LotR--set in the Second Age.)

 

[Mannahnin]

I would of course love it if they managed to deliver an awesome show that stayed perfectly true to the original.

But the chronology problem is huge. I spent a lot of time trying to think of how to square that circle and I just don't see a good answer. If they stuck to the original timeline, they would either a) have to skip the forging of the Rings, b) skip Sauron's defeat by the Last Alliance, or c) focus exclusively on elf protagonists and swap out the rest of the cast each season. None of those leads to a compelling story.

The one solution I came up with was to skip the Rings entirely and devote the show to the last days of Numenor. But then you're left with only scraps of plot and characters to work with, and have to make up almost everything out of whole cloth. Compressing the timeline makes it possible to bring in so much more material, and maintains the Ring as a point of continuity with the trilogy.

(And let's be honest, Tolkien's chronologies could get pretty absurd. Much as I love LotR, it was a major culprit in inspiring fantasy timelines where basically nothing changes for thousands of years. I suspect that Tolkien himself would have done something similar if he'd ever set out to write a novel--not a Silmarillion-type collection of legends but a novel like the Hobbit or LotR--set in the Second Age.)

Fair points.

That being said, I think C could have worked and been compatible with a compelling story.

 

[trappedslider]

Amazon Fires Lord Of The Rings Scholar For Trying To Stop Them From Ruining Tolkien?

A self-styled Tolkien superfan thinks the Lord of the Rings Amazon series has done Tolkien dirty, and he'll say anything to convince you.

www.giantfreakinrobot.com

 

[Akrasia]

I would of course love it if they managed to deliver an awesome show that stayed perfectly true to the original.

But the chronology problem is huge. I spent a lot of time trying to think of how to square that circle and I just don't see a good answer. If they stuck to the original timeline, they would either a) have to skip the forging of the Rings, b) skip Sauron's defeat by the Last Alliance, or c) focus exclusively on elf protagonists and swap out the rest of the cast each season. None of those leads to a compelling story.

I disagree.
There are 5 seasons planned.
Amazon could've devoted 2 seasons to the 1500-1700 period (covering the forging of the rings and the War of the Elves and Sauron). Given the long lifespans of dwarves and Númenoreans, there would be no need to "swap out" (for the most part) the mortal characters during those two seasons.
They then could've devoted 2 or 3 seasons to the 3261-3441 period (covering the rise of Ar-Pharazôn, the downfall of Númenor, and the War of the Last Alliance against Sauron). Again, most of the mortal characters would be Númenoreans, Elendil and Isildur in particular, who would live throughout the entire period.

So the series could've remained reasonably faithful to the established history, "swapping out" mortal characters only once. The main elf characters -- Galadriel, Gil-Galad, and Elrond -- would provide narrative continuity (as would Annatar/Sauron).

(More on this here: More on The Rings of Power series)

 

[Rune]

Amazon Fires Lord Of The Rings Scholar For Trying To Stop Them From Ruining Tolkien?

A self-styled Tolkien superfan thinks the Lord of the Rings Amazon series has done Tolkien dirty, and he'll say anything to convince you.

www.giantfreakinrobot.com

Don’t know anything about the person that article was about, but the article itself was pure trash. What it lacked in reasoned exploration of differing viewpoints it made up for with misrepresentation and straw-man arguments.

I guess that makes it journalism nowadays.

 

[Mannahnin]

Amazon Fires Lord Of The Rings Scholar For Trying To Stop Them From Ruining Tolkien?

A self-styled Tolkien superfan thinks the Lord of the Rings Amazon series has done Tolkien dirty, and he'll say anything to convince you.

www.giantfreakinrobot.com

That's a hilarious example of editorial clickbait headlining. The entire article is making fun of YouTuber George Molho, who claims that Tom Shippey was fired for that reason, opining that Molho has zero credibility and that he repeatedly misrepresents facts. And then the title parrots Molho's claim with just a question mark as a fig leaf.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

It is just that the thing is a bit disappointing. I could eventually watch and even like it as its own thing, but right now I'm not interested anymore.

I think that giving the show a chance on its own terms - as its own thing - is key. There has been a lot of prejudgement of the series, and while some of the criticism may turn out to be well-founded, we simply haven't seen the final product yet; I'm not sure that Amazon has really done a good job in its own marketing, either.

There is a very vocal and - frankly obnoxious - cadre of self styled Tolkien purists who have set themselves up as proselytes in opposition to the corporate "Superfans," and who gleefully encourage their followers to ratio trailers and spread their toxicity. They were always going to whale on the show, as they're anxious to demonstrate how modern political and social sensibilities have sullied Tolkien; they are unanimous in their praise of Jackson's trilogy, however, and happy to overlook the numerous issues with the movies, and the extent to which they diverge from the books in the service of a cinematic experience. Don't get me wrong - I love the movies - but they are in no way faithful to Tolkien in theme and tone. There are moments - such as the arrival of Theoden at the Pelennor - which are spine-chilling, and for a moment evoke the books perfectly; there are others...well, not so much. But, to be fair to Jackson, what he really wanted was to faithfully present Middle-Earth itself as a visual tour de force - and in that, I think he succeeded admirably.

I'm happy to sit back with some popcorn (probably a plate of cheese, actually), and give the show a chance. I might be disappointed - Foundation was a bust after a few episodes; Westworld jumped the shark after 1 season; GoT dropped off after season 5; Stranger Things made a recovery in season 4 etc. So who knows where it will go? Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.

 

[trappedslider]

There is a very vocal and - frankly obnoxious - cadre of self styled Tolkien purists who have set themselves up as proselytes in opposition to the corporate "Superfans," and who gleefully encourage their followers to ratio trailers and spread their toxicity. They were always going to whale on the show, as they're anxious to demonstrate how modern political and social sensibilities have sullied Tolkien; they are unanimous in their praise of Jackson's trilogy, however, and happy to overlook the numerous issues with the movies, and the extent to which they diverge from the books in the service of a cinematic experience. Don't get me wrong - I love the movies - but they are in no way faithful to Tolkien in theme and tone.

Then there's the self-style Tolkien purist who are happy to point out any issues with the movies and how it differs from the book and they will more than likely also be the ones who will point out the missing material from the other books despite knowing that Amazon is limited to what's in The Hobbit's and LotR's appendices and footnotes.

 

[Zardnaar]

I don't care if it's not pure to the books. I'll probably watch it. Jackson's stuff wasn't pure either but they were fun movies. Kinda over it because 20+ years later they're still going on about it here (I was born in "Rohan").

 

[wicked cool]

Ok new trailer looks really really good. Way better than original ones

Up until today I thought house of dragon would be better but now I’m not sure.

Looks a lot better than wheel of time